PubCasts: Putting Voice in Scholarly Work and Science Communication

Abstract

This commentary explores the emergence and potential of PubCasts—abridged and annotated audiobook-style recordings of scholarly work. PubCasts aim to make scholarly work more accessible, engaging, and easily understood by broad audiences. We highlight our motivation for creating PubCasts and discuss our experiences in making and sharing them. We further reflect on the potential of PubCasts to combat misinformation by offering a more intimate and humanized form of science communication. To assist others in adopting PubCasting, we explain the process of creating PubCasts, including required components and hosting options, and conclude with encouragement to other science communicators.

Introduction

Podcasts are audio programming, often taking a form similar to traditional radio programming, but distributed in digital formats and available to audiences via the internet. Since the early 2000s, podcasts have emerged as a popular, accessible, and easy-to-produce audio medium for entertainment and information. The number of podcasts featuring scientific topics has dramatically risen in recent years, with an increasing number of scientists entering the podcasting space and the resulting content being directed at public audiences (Cox et al., 2023; MacKenzie, 2019). Podcasts are filling a niche for scholars whose time is limited, yet who face constant demands to keep up with emerging literature and to expand the reach and “impact” of their work in creative ways. In the face of these sometimes contradictory challenges, scholarly podcasting has played multiple roles including as a means to multitask; to make use of time not otherwise conducive to reading, such as during a commute or while performing monotonous work-related tasks (Quintana & Heathers, 2021); or as a means of sharing one’s own work more broadly.

While podcasts may be reaching a stage of maturity as an entertainment medium, the continued evolution of podcast formats, topics, and uses within scholarly communities suggests that podcasting is still an emergent trend within the academy. More recently, cultures of science—including how science is “done,” scientific careers, and efforts to democratize science by addressing financial and accessibility barriers—have taken root in scholarly podcasting spheres (Quintana & Heathers, 2021). In our own experience as scholarly podcast producers, ¹ podcasting offers a productive and engaging medium to perform and discuss science communication and knowledge mobilization, though convincing funding agencies of the value of these outputs remains an evolving challenge (Cox et al., 2023). To assist in managing these hurdles, several informative guides have been published offering direction for scholars interested in incorporating podcasting into their work (Copeland & McGregor, 2021; Harrison & Loring, 2021a). And, taking efforts of methodological development a step further, a small but growing body of researchers are experimenting with scholarly podcasting as both potential method and pedagogical practice (see examples Eringfeld, 2021; McGregor, 2019).

Although podcasts may provide a meaningful way to engage with new literature in spare time, the translation and production of scholarly material into audio formats requires a significant time investment from researchers. Career incentives and success metrics for researchers already juggling the many competing demands on their time, energy, funding, and existing skill sets are oriented primarily toward producing, and demonstrating impact of, peer-reviewed publications. At the same time, researchers are being called on by society to do more than merely deliver research findings; we are asked to help practitioners, policymakers, and the general public by mobilizing knowledge toward solving societal challenges (Cash et al., 2006). As such, the potential of the aural turn toward more accessible, legible, and engaging science communication to meet these needs should not be ignored. So, how can podcasting formats evolve to meet the existing needs (and constraints) of researchers while also incentivizing greater sharing of scholarly work with public audiences?

One response to this question may be an audio format that riffs off of podcasts. PubCasts, short for “publication podcasts,” ² are a low-barrier hybridization of scholarly podcasting and the traditional publication model. PubCasts are abridged and annotated audiobook-style recordings of scholarly work (most commonly peer-reviewed articles), read by the author(s). That is it no additional music, script writing, or hunting for guests, and very little post-production required. We co-created the PubCast format out of a desire to make our work more accessible and as a reflection of our own love of aural entertainment and information, but also with the practical needs and abilities of researchers in mind.

PubCasts, as their name suggests, can be thought of as a branch of the podcast family in that they are short audio recordings available in a digital format for download. We believe that PubCasts, given their format, audiences, and relative ease of producing when compared with longer-form podcasts, are well-positioned as effective science communication and knowledge mobilization tools that achieve several important outcomes.

First, PubCasts are highly accessible forms of scholarly work. Their “script” is an abridged version of the published research, allowing authors to refine their recordings to only the key messages and details of their publication. PubCasts focus on communicating the highlights of a study in lay language, therefore translating written content into more listener-friendly material. In our PubCasts, for example, we usually leave out in-text citations, briefly summarize literature reviews and methods sections, and highlight take-home messages from the discussion and/or conclusion sections. Like graphical abstracts, highlight lists, or plain language summaries that are increasingly requested by peer-reviewed journals, PubCasts can add value to a publication by offering more and diverse opportunities for readers to engage the work. This is especially true if the primary publication is published behind a paywall.

Second, PubCasts may also advantage people for whom concentrating on or deciphering text is challenging, who have low scientific literacy, or who experience visual impairment. Thinking in another way about accessibility, we have found PubCasts to, like podcasts (Quintana & Heathers, 2021), be especially useful for early-career scholars in that they contribute to making complex scholarship more easily understood through the annotating and abridging process, and are easily assigned in classes, lab reading groups, journal clubs, and similar formats. PubCasts may also offer scholars flexibility in sharing their work in languages other than those in which they publish. While foreign language abstracts are featured by a handful of journals, these are no doubt in the minority; we propose that making a PubCast in a second language requires less investment and expertise than precise (and often expensive) translation in a publication’s entirety.

Similarly, PubCasts offer a reprieve or alternative to reading in general. They allow listeners to engage with scholarly material when performing tasks where reading isn’t possible (e.g., lab bench work, driving during a commute, during exercise). For our team, PubCasts allowed us to respond to a frequent wish we hear among colleagues and scholars on social media: I wish there was a way to listen to my reading stack!

Finally, science is in the midst of a crisis of misinformation (Lazer et al., 2018), and the accessibility and intimate nature of PubCasts could offer a partial solution. Issues such as public mistrust and denialism are actively stymying the uptake of the best available science on social issues, albeit in uneven ways depending on the issue at hand (Funk, 2017). Some research suggests that at least part of the problem comes from members of the general public finding academic writing esoteric or difficult to understand. Another challenge is that some partisan actors have been effective at using disinformation and propaganda to alienate or “other” scientists (Iyengar & Massey, 2019). PubCasts may help with both challenges; the accessibility and more intimate, humanizing nature of PubCasts can help scientists dispense with, in Alan Alda’s words, the “guru on the hill” model of science communication (Alda, n.d., quoted in Thorp, 2022). PubCasts are the product of scientists going out of their way to meet people where they are, which follows Contessa’s (2022) argument that the problem is not in the content, per se, but in how scientists socialize it.

PubCasts: The Basics

How do interested scholars get started with creating PubCasts? PubCasts require four basic components:

1. A piece of written scholarly work;

2. Recording equipment, often as simple as the built-in microphone on a laptop or headphones;

3. Simple editing software (such as Audacity, which is open source and free to download);

4. A means of hosting and distribution (such as ResearchEquals or Soundcloud).

Rather than requiring entirely new discussion or content, PubCasts draw from existing published material and require little to no additional material or equipment. Importantly, PubCasts are abridged and annotated, therefore avoiding copyright infringement on original published articles. In our view, they act as a sort of post-publication “preprint”-adjacent output.

We have found that PubCasts are best recorded during the proofing stage of a peer-reviewed article, or just prior to publication with other scholarly material. Because reading aloud is an effective proofreading strategy, this approach allows researchers to minimize additional effort by checking the proof for errors while simultaneously recording the PubCast. Scholars can follow our team’s PubCast recording protocol (Harrison & Loring, 2023) or experiment with their own approaches.

After a PubCast is recorded, how should a scholar publish them? While some publishers have shown interest in moving toward hosting PubCast audio themselves (Harrison & Loring, 2021b), currently the onus for hosting and distributing PubCast audio still lies with the PubCast author. This requirement may present barriers due to cost or lack of digital infrastructure, though some free or low-cost options do exist. Regardless of where a PubCast is hosted, we have found that publishers have, broadly speaking and to date, been receptive to finding creative ways to at least link PubCasts to published articles. As such, scholars can offer a PubCast option to the publisher upon receiving proofs or submitting final drafts of work. Ideally, the publisher will embed the recording link directly into the manuscript (see example Harrison & Gould, 2022).

PubCasts, Open Science, and Ways Forward

If the research community finds PubCasts to be a valuable format, we hope to see this reflected in the form of meaningful uptake by scholarly publishers in terms of hosting and recording guidance and tools. At the same time, many researchers and scientific associations are increasingly questioning the business models and ethics of large publishing houses. As such, PubCasts may offer a disruptive potential for the open science community to rapidly adapt toward new models of publication.

For example, our team has recently partnered with ResearchEquals (Liberate Science 2023), an open access platform that offers free PubCast hosting and DOI assignment to recordings published on their platform (see example for this article: www.doi.org/10.53962/jcvk-9f4b). This publishing model allows scholars to easily cite and share their PubCasts at no cost while also linking them to original articles. We see this platform as an important step forward for the medium, as it makes apparent the sometimes “invisible” work of academics (particularly early-career scholars) investing in knowledge mobilization efforts. However, ResearchEquals does not distribute PubCasts (i.e., to streaming services) and thus each recording is offered as a one-off. This is a trade-off from self-hosting where PubCasts can be held (and distributed to streaming services) in playlists and may generate organic engagement as a listeners listen to multiple PubCasts in a row. Regardless, we are excited to see platforms like ResearchEquals take up PubCasts in their open science model and provide scholars, particularly early-career scholars, an opportunity to have their contributions recognized.

PubCasts are well-suited to the popularity of aural mediums and desire in scholarly communities to share their work more broadly. We field regular requests from other scholars about how we make them, and how other labs or student groups might replicate the format for their own papers or papers within their field. We have also received positive feedback on the value of PubCasts for courses and other instructional models. While quantitative data about the effectiveness of this approach are sparse beyond the download statistics of our own productions, our impression is that demand for creative, accessible, and open-source formats for knowledge sharing is high.We encourage knowledge producers of all kinds to consider PubCasts as ground-level entry into the world of aural knowledge mobilization.

Ultimately, we are sharing these experiences here because we believe that PubCasts present a promising avenue for scholars to enhance the accessibility of their work and engage with broader and more varied audiences. PubCasts may be particularly accessible as a novel format for early-career and underrecognized scholars, as they offer a low barrier-to-entry model for making visible the often invisible or undercounted work of scholarship and knowledge mobilization efforts. As a fusion of scholarly podcasting, traditional publication models, and knowledge mobilization, PubCasts create a new space for engagement between scholars and diverse audiences, and provide another way to bring the voices of collaborators into the telling of co-produced science. In essence, we hope PubCasts provide a way for scholars to meet people where they are as a creative, open-source format that complements existing publishing models and the many demands on scholar’s time. We look forward to seeing other scholars experiment with the PubCast model and give science communication efforts new voice.