A discussion with a panel of experts in science journalism and editorial ethics to explore issues related to peer review, research integrity, and the public’s understanding of–and trust in–science.
Key discussion points included: How do we know when scientific research is reliable?
The role of journalists in communicating new discoveries Methods of handling suspected misconduct Communicating the scientific editorial and peer review process itself
What happens when concerns arise after an article is published Interpreting research for the public in a way that balances accessibility with the mutability and nuance inherent in discovery
The pandemic highlighted how science can serve society and deliver needed outcomes fast. Sadly, it also highlighted the flaws that see charlatans, cheats and kooks publish nonsense and junk. This one-hour panel discussion reflects on matters such as questionable publishers, paper mills, research misconduct, retractions and public trust. It also looked at the role of journalists in maintaining public trust. This is another item, which probably isn’t right for your institution’s research integrity library, but it could be a useful prompt for internal discussion about policy settings, research culture and responsible research.
