research findings videos

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER COLUMN
• 07 January 2022

Broaden your scientific audience with video animation

• Alvina Lai 0

Alvina Lai is an associate professor at University College London. Her research involves genetics, statistics, modelling and informatics.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Scientists often struggle to explain their research in lay terms — whether to funding agencies and tenure and promotion committees, or to friends and family.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00045-2

This is an article from the Nature Careers Community, a place for Nature readers to share their professional experiences and advice. Guest posts are encouraged .

Competing Interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Related Articles

• Communication

How to win funding to talk about your science

Career Feature 15 AUG 24

Friends or foes? An academic job search risked damaging our friendship

Career Column 14 AUG 24

‘Who will protect us from seeing the world’s largest rainforest burn?’ The mental exhaustion faced by climate scientists

Career Feature 12 AUG 24

‘All things that wander in the heavens’: how I swapped my ivory tower for the world of science fiction

Career Q&A 04 JUL 24

How researchers and their managers can build an actionable career-development plan

Career Column 17 JUN 24

Futures 14 AUG 24

How much would you pay for free shipping?

Futures 09 AUG 24

Day tripper

Futures 07 AUG 24

Faculty Positions in Center of Bioelectronic Medicine, School of Life Sciences, Westlake University

SLS invites applications for multiple tenure-track/tenured faculty positions at all academic ranks.

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

School of Life Sciences, Westlake University

Faculty Positions, Aging and Neurodegeneration, Westlake Laboratory of Life Sciences and Biomedicine

Applicants with expertise in aging and neurodegeneration and related areas are particularly encouraged to apply.

Westlake Laboratory of Life Sciences and Biomedicine (WLLSB)

Faculty Positions in Chemical Biology, Westlake University

We are seeking outstanding scientists to lead vigorous independent research programs focusing on all aspects of chemical biology including...

Assistant Professor Position in Genomics

The Lewis-Sigler Institute at Princeton University invites applications for a tenure-track faculty position in Genomics.

Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, US

The Lewis-Sigler Institute for Integrative Genomics at Princeton University

Associate or Senior Editor, BMC Medical Education

Job Title: Associate or Senior Editor, BMC Medical Education Locations: New York or Heidelberg (Hybrid Working Model) Application Deadline: August ...

New York City, New York (US)

Springer Nature Ltd

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

The Ultimate Guide to Qualitative Research - Part 2: Handling Qualitative Data

• Handling qualitative data
• Transcripts
• Field notes
• Survey data and responses
• Introduction

Non-textual data in qualitative research

Images as qualitative data, audio data in qualitative research.

• Data organization
• Data coding
• Coding frame
• Auto and smart coding
• Organizing codes
• Qualitative data analysis
• Content analysis
• Thematic analysis
• Thematic analysis vs. content analysis
• Narrative research
• Phenomenological research
• Discourse analysis
• Grounded theory
• Deductive reasoning
• Inductive reasoning
• Inductive vs. deductive reasoning
• Qualitative data interpretation
• Qualitative data analysis software

Images, audio, and video in qualitative research

If you think about qualitative and social science research, you probably have text data in mind. As research projects have evolved, however, researchers have found a need to conduct analysis on video data, audio files, images, and so much more.

Let's look at how video, images, and audio are used in qualitative data analysis in this section.

In the realm of qualitative data analysis , there has traditionally been a strong focus on text such as interviews , focus groups, documents, and diaries. However, the role of non-textual data - specifically images, audio, and video - is increasingly being recognized for its ability to offer rich, complex, and nuanced insights that complement and extend our understanding derived from textual data. Non-textual data provide a unique vantage point from which researchers can delve deeper into participants' lived experiences, cultural practices, social interactions, and personal narratives.

Understanding lived experiences

One of the key strengths of non-textual data is the capacity to capture the richness and complexity of lived experiences. Videos can record participant actions and interactions in their natural settings, providing an unfiltered lens into their world. Images, whether photographs or drawings, can encapsulate emotions, cultural nuances, and personal meanings that may be difficult to articulate in words. Audio recordings, with their attention to voice inflections, pauses, and tonality, can reveal underlying feelings or attitudes that textual data might miss. These forms of data capture the world as directly experienced by the participants, providing the researcher with a more comprehensive understanding of their perspectives.

Non-verbal and contextual data

Non-textual data can also capture non-verbal and contextual information. For instance, video data can record body language, facial expressions, gestures, and spatial arrangements, offering additional layers of meaning. Image data can represent complex ideas, connections, or feelings in a condensed and immediate way that text cannot always achieve. Audio data can reveal elements such as tone, pitch, volume, rhythm, or silences, adding depth to our understanding of verbal communication. This non-verbal and contextual information often provides crucial insights into social dynamics, power relations, cultural practices, or personal experiences.

Participatory research

Non-textual data also open up new possibilities for participatory research. Participants can be involved in creating videos, images, or audio recordings, giving them greater control over what and how their experiences are represented. Techniques such as photovoice, video diaries, or audio elicitation engage participants creatively, potentially empowering them and facilitating deeper self-reflection. These methods can generate data that are personally meaningful to the participants and offer unique insights into their lived realities.

Reporting research findings

Lastly, non-textual data can enhance the communication of research findings. Videos, images, and audio clips can be incorporated into presentations, reports, or publications, making the findings more accessible, engaging, and impactful. They can help to "show" rather than "tell", allowing audiences to see, hear, and feel the research context and participants' experiences. This can be particularly effective in conveying complex or emotive issues, fostering empathy, and facilitating dialogue.

With all of this in mind, let's look at the various forms of non-textual data that a qualitative researcher will likely encounter.

Gestures, body language, and facial expressions are important components of analysis of social interaction. Observing everyday movements in public places requires an understanding of spatial relations between objects and people. Joint social action in cultural rituals like religious ceremonies and ballet performances have considerations of temporality as interactants move in tandem with each other. These examples and more illustrate the collection and presentation of video data in research.

How are videos used in qualitative research?

If you are using videos in a research project gathering data from interviews or focus groups , you may be recording these interactions to get perspectives from your research participants. In most cases, simply transcribing the utterances in videos into text form is sufficient for data analysis .

However, you may also be interested in recording how people interact with each other. Their gestures, facial expressions, body posture, proximity to others, and a whole host of other factors can be visually analyzed through video analysis.

An example of this kind of research involving the study of video data includes the analysis of user-generated content on platforms like YouTube and Vimeo to understand how creators try to get their message across to their audience. Analysis of online video recordings can contrast with the analysis of television programs to provide a sense of how the development of presentation practices has evolved from medium to medium.

In other contexts, video content analysis in health care situations can look at not only the messages that doctors convey to patients and colleagues but also how they stand and act in relation to those around them. Perhaps they adopt a caring touch, which might be represented by standing in closer proximity to patients who require emotional support. In contrast, they might be more standoffish with nurses and other doctors by standing far apart or standing while others are sitting in meetings or casual conversations.

These sorts of examples highlight the limitations of a purely text-based approach to qualitative data analysis. As such, analyzing video and presenting the right video segment when sharing novel theory can be important skills in social science research.

What is video data analysis?

Researchers engage in the systematic examination and interpretation of video recordings to generate insights and understand phenomena under investigation. Video data analysis is a valuable method for capturing and analyzing rich, complex data that goes beyond what can be obtained through exclusively text-based research methods.

Video data is typically transcribed into text format to facilitate analysis. However, transcripts do not merely record the words uttered between speakers in a video. Transcription also involves creating a written record of the non-verbal aspects of the video, including gestures, facial expressions, and environmental cues. This more inclusive approach to transcription allows for easier coding and analysis of the data. On the other hand, qualitative data analysis software such as ATLAS.ti also makes it convenient to code video data directly, permitting a more nuanced examination of your data.

Researchers then organize the video or text data into manageable units such as video segments, episodes, or events. These units are often defined based on the research questions, objectives, or relevant themes emerging from the data. For example, suppose the research project deals with identifying the basic facial expressions in a given situation. In that case, the unit of analysis may be reduced to mere moments in interaction represented by segments of video data. On the other hand, if a researcher is looking at how people's facial expressions change over time, the video data analysis may look at larger episodes of interaction (e.g., a single interview or an entire classroom observation).

The researcher then tags or labels segments of the video or text data with descriptive or interpretive labels called codes . Researchers identify patterns, themes, or categories in the data and assign appropriate codes to capture the meaning or significance of those segments. Using qualitative data analysis software, coding can be done manually or, in the case of ATLAS.ti, with the use of automated tools to identify useful segments of text data.

Once the data is sufficiently coded, researchers analyze the coded data to identify relationships, patterns, and themes within the video recordings. They explore the data to gain a deeper understanding of the research question or objective and draw meaningful conclusions. This analysis often involves iterative processes of comparing, contrasting, and refining codes and themes.

Ready to try out ATLAS.ti?

Download a free trial to see how you can analyze all types of qualitative data.

In qualitative research , images can serve as a potent tool for understanding human experiences, behaviors, social dynamics, and cultural phenomena. They provide an alternative lens through which to view the world, offering a rich, nuanced perspective that textual data may sometimes fail to capture. The use of images in research can include photographs, drawings, diagrams, maps, or any other visual materials that can help researchers gain insight into their subject of interest.

Collecting images

Collecting image data involves either creating images as part of the research process or using pre-existing images. In the former approach, researchers or participants may take photographs, make drawings, or generate other visual materials during the study. This method can offer a particularly rich source of data because the act of creating an image can bring forth subconscious thoughts, emotions, and perspectives.

Pre-existing images, on the other hand, can include anything from historical photographs to social media images, advertisements, and artworks. The key here is to ensure that these images are relevant to the research question and can contribute meaningful insights.

While collecting image data, it's critical to maintain an ethical stance. If you're taking photographs or using others' images, consider privacy issues , obtain necessary permissions, and maintain the anonymity of individuals if required.

Image analysis

Analyzing images in qualitative research involves the careful examination and interpretation of visual data to discern patterns, themes, and meanings. Researchers generally employ a two-step process: description and interpretation .

In the description phase, researchers meticulously document the physical details of the image, such as its color, size, form, and the subjects or objects it contains. This stage is purely observational, with researchers providing a factual account of what is present in the image. These descriptive details can be jotted down in memos , and qualitative data analysis software such as ATLAS.ti makes it even easier to analyze images as the images can be viewed and any segment of the image can be selected and coded.

During the interpretation phase, researchers delve deeper, attempting to understand the meaning behind the visual elements in the image. They may analyze the relationship between different parts of the image, consider the use of symbols, study the context in which the image was created or is viewed, and reflect on their own responses to the image. Here, researchers often draw on existing theories or frameworks to guide their interpretation, which can be developed through memo-writing and coding .

Two common analytical frameworks used for images include semiotics, which looks at the signs and symbols within the image, and discourse analysis , which examines the image in the context of social and cultural narratives.

Considerations for image analysis

Incorporating images into qualitative research can have numerous benefits. They can provide a wealth of detail and convey aspects of reality that are difficult to capture in words alone, including emotions, moods, atmospheres, and tacit knowledge. Images can facilitate participants' expression and engagement, particularly when dealing with sensitive topics, complex concepts, or with populations who might struggle with verbal communication.

However, the use of images also presents several challenges. Analysis can be time-consuming and requires a certain level of expertise in visual literacy. The interpretation of images is inherently subjective, and images can sometimes be ambiguous or open to multiple interpretations. Moreover, cultural differences can impact how images are perceived and interpreted, which researchers must carefully consider in multicultural studies.

How do varieties of a language sound different from each other? Do passengers on a train or an airplane respond differently when the announcement is spoken by a man or a woman? At what decibel level does random noise become a problem and disrupt people's work or conversations? To answer these questions, audio data offer a unique and valuable source of information. Audio recordings provide access to elements such as tone, pace, volume, and pauses, which may be lost in written transcriptions . Audio data can come from interviews , focus groups , and naturalistic recordings. You can also take audio data from non-traditional data sources like voice notes, podcasts, music, and more. Let's delve into the collection , analysis , and interpretation of audio data in qualitative research .

Audio data collection

Audio data are typically collected through recording devices or applications. Often, researchers record in-person or remote interviews and focus groups. However, audio data can also be collected by recording naturalistic settings, such as meetings, public spaces, or events, to understand social dynamics, communication patterns, or ambient soundscape. In certain research projects, participants may be invited to contribute audio diaries or voice notes, offering personal narratives and reflections in their own time and space.

Consideration of ethics and consent is pivotal in audio data collection. Participants must be fully informed about the recording process, how the data will be used, stored, and who will have access to it. In naturalistic recordings, additional consent may be required from all individuals present or the custodian of the space, depending on the context and local regulations.

Approaches to audio analysis

Unlike images or text, audio data are time-based and sequential, which poses unique challenges and opportunities for analysis. Researchers can choose between verbatim transcription, where the audio is converted into text for analysis, or direct analysis of the audio data, where the focus is more on the sonic and aural aspects.

In transcriptions , the audio data are transformed into text, which can then be coded and analyzed using traditional qualitative analysis methods. The transcription should be as detailed as possible, capturing not only what is said but also how it is said, including nuances such as hesitations, laughs, emphasis, or overlaps in conversation. However, transcription inevitably loses certain elements of the original audio, such as tone, accent, or background noises.

Direct analysis of audio data focuses on the auditory experience. Researchers listen for patterns in sounds, silences, tones, accents, pace, or rhythm. This type of analysis can be especially valuable in sociolinguistic studies, conversation analysis , or research focusing on soundscapes or musical elements. Listening and re-listening to the audio are crucial steps in this process.

Use of software tools

Various software tools can assist in the organization, transcription, and analysis of audio data. Transcription software, such as Express Scribe or Trint, can facilitate the conversion of speech into text. Qualitative data analysis software programs like ATLAS.ti can import and analyze audio files directly, allowing researchers to code and annotate within the audio file, thus preserving the sonic richness of the data.

Moreover, audio editing software, such as Audacity or Adobe Audition, can be useful for manipulating audio data, isolating specific sound elements, or analyzing sound waves. Sonographic representation can offer a visual dimension to the audio data, aiding in pattern recognition or comparative analysis.

Triangulation and validation

Just as with other types of data, triangulation can be employed to cross-check findings from audio data. For example, the results from audio analysis could be compared with text, visual, or observational data. It can also involve using different theoretical frameworks to interpret the data or having multiple researchers independently analyze the data.

Validation in audio analysis can be quite challenging due to the subjective nature of interpreting sounds and spoken language. Member checking or respondent validation, where the researcher's interpretation is verified with the participants, and peer debriefing can help to enhance the trustworthiness and credibility of the findings.

Analyze all data, any data with ATLAS.ti

Powerful tools for textual data, video, images, and audio, available now with a free trial.

7 creative ways to use video in research findings

It’s no secret that videos add an extra dimension to research. They’re most popular as an engaging alternative to the speech bubble in presentations.

It’s no secret that videos add an extra dimension to research. They’re most popular as an engaging alternative to the speech bubble in presentations; who wants to read a quote when you can watch the person it has come from saying it?

Suddenly you don’t have to imagine what Sandra, 45 from Birmingham looks like because you can see her in the flesh – which is not only a powerful way to take in consumer views but also means you are more likely to remember the point she makes weeks or months down the line.

But video goes beyond this. There are other ways in which video can bring value to the research process, before, during, and after the delivery of findings.

1) Analysis

When watching respondents on video we use more of our senses to decipher the message conveyed. This means that as well as hearing the words we hear the tone in which they are being said and any hesitations; we also see facial expressions and hand gestures, which might be supporting or contradicting the words that go with them. Interpretation of raw material is enriched as a result.

Video is particularly valuable when we need to witness a respondent’s behaviour. They might be undertaking a certain task or activity, demonstrating how they use something or reacting to stimulus. Analysing a visual record certainly beats trying to work out what they are doing or referring to in a written transcript or audio recording.

2) Homework

Giving colleagues or clients tasks to do before workshops is always an interesting way to get ideas flowing. Consider asking participants to watch a selection of videos and make a note of their thoughts. Here are some ways you could structure this:

• provide videos of respondents who are similar in some way (demographically, attitudinally, characteristically) and ask people to pull out commonalities
• ask them to note what surprises them/what doesn’t surprise them
• get them to prepare a summary of the clips they have seen to present to the rest of the workshop participants
• ask them to make a list of questions they have after watching the videos – e.g. what else they would like to know about these consumers, or what the findings might mean for their business

As well as acting as a good icebreaker or discussion starter, this activity allows participants to form their own reactions without being influenced by other workshop attendees.

3) Setting the scene

Videos make for a fantastic introduction to a presentation, workshop or conference. Use Plotto’s showreel tool to choose, edit and assemble footage from your video surveys. Choose attention-grabbing clips: those that represent key findings, make people laugh, or provoke strong reactions.

Single clips at the beginning of each section of a debrief can also work well. A carefully chosen one that communicates the main point of the section will give a flavour of what is coming up next as well as act as a bookmark for clients when they revisit the debrief later; watching the clip will remind them what the section is about.

4) Video portraits

Another great way to use Plotto’s showreel tool is for putting together videos illustrating different consumer groups – a particularly engaging method in segmentation studies where key points of difference need to be clearly demonstrated. This used to be done using pen portraits in presentations – bullet points, perhaps with photos attached – but it is so much easier to understand different consumer groups when you see them in action.

Videos don’t need to be long – their exact length will be dictated by how complex the segment is and how many other segments exist.

5) Challenging perceptions

One issue researchers can encounter is persuading clients that their target market feels a certain way (usually when the client would rather they didn’t feel that way). Often in business there are entrenched perceptions that are out-dated or unsubstantiated – assumptions about the identity or motivations of the audience, or assumptions about the product or service being offered. Nobody wants to hear that the shade of puce they spent days choosing for their new range of bubble bath does not in fact represent luxury and pampering but instead reminds their consumers of toxic waste. But if you play footage proving respondents’ reactions, you’re more likely to convince clients of the strength and nature of people’s views, and to get fruitful discussion underway.

6) Illustrating changes over time

We’re all familiar with video evidence of politicians saying one thing and then changing their minds months down the line, and it’s always a striking way to show how apparently firm views can be anything but. If you are doing longitudinal research, videos contrasting the views ‘then and now’ are a hard-hitting method of demonstrating how we’re all prone to a change of heart now and again.

7)   Creating a lasting record

Videos are compelling when they are first watched and they can retain their power long afterwards. If they contain a lot of detail – such as video portraits showing the intricacies of cooking, shopping, hairstyling or make-up application – clients find it helpful to revisit the footage while devising their strategy or marketing tactics.

Have a look at quantilope's video survey tool inColor that helps you to gather, edit and share impactful videos to add a new dimension to your findings and client conversations.

Get in touch with an expert

Latest articles.

Strengthening Our Approach to Data Quality With Pre-Survey Defense

quantilope's Pre-Survey Defense module detects suspicious/fraudulent respondents before they enter a survey - complementing existing data q...

August 13, 2024

Better Brand Health Tracking in the Body Wash Category

Dive into quantilope's Better Brand Health Tracking approach with this body wash category study, including brands like Dove, Nivea, Axe, an...

August 06, 2024

quantilope & TMRE Event: Defend, Grow, or Maintain? Strengthen Your Brand with Mental Advantage Analysis

See how you can grow market share through meaningful customer connections by understanding buyers’ needs and motivations.

August 05, 2024

How to Share Research Findings from Interview Videos

December 2021

11 min read

The general concept of sharing research findings is that you need to extract the key takeaways from the deep, granular details, and present those insights in a way that makes sense for your audience. This typically includes:

• Understanding your audience's interest, your research goals, and how those align
• Adjusting your information for your audience's knowledge level
• Choosing the appropriate time and place to share those findings

But what researchers typically do — whether it be natural science or social science researchers — is they give too much information, or they present their information in a really boring way. (Think those long documents with walls of text.) This isn't engaging, and it won't drive the results you're hoping for; so you have to figure out how to relay those takeaways in a more compelling way to make an impact and get buy-in.

For a certain class of researchers — social scientists, market researchers, UI/UX researchers, customer researchers, user researchers, or anybody who conducts long-form interviews with real research participants — the best way to share findings that actually make an impact is by extracting the most important clips from your interviews and sharing that footage.

Video is the best way to genuinely capture your interactions with your study participants and their truest feelings on the subject because it allows you to relay participants' opinions in their own words, and it's much more influential than text on a screen.

But editing interview videos and creating polished presentations from your library of footage is a challenging and time-consuming task, even more so for researchers who don't have a video editing background.

As a result, researchers have to:

• Learn the ins and outs of video editing to do this more efficiently.
• Find the budget for professional video editing and wait around for an editor to assist.
• Forego video altogether, and instead, pull audio snippets or include quotes in a Powerpoint or infographic.

So we made Reduct to help researchers utilize their research footage more efficiently: Our online, word-based video editor lets you securely store all of their footage in the cloud, collaborate with other researchers, create engaging presentations from your research, and share those presentations directly from our platform.

This article walks you through how to share research findings in a more compelling way with Reduct. At the end, we'll also give you some general tips on making valuable research presentations ( skip to that section here ) and advice to sell the value of your research and normalize those conversations in your organization ( skip to that section here ).

Reduct helps you share research findings that have an impact by letting you make engaging, memorable highlight reels from your research footage. To demo our features and see how simple it is to share research findings with Reduct.

A Video Editor Built for Sharing Research: Reduct.Video

Reduct is not just an online video editor , it"s an all-in-one video transcription, analysis, and editing software ( that"s actually built by researchers ) designed specifically to help researchers easily and quickly share key parts of their work through relevant video clips. You can use our platform to:

• Transcribe all of your interview videos and research footage
• Review transcripts for important takeaways
• Create video clips or highlight reels extremely easily just by editing your video's transcript

Then, all sharing from our platform is completely free: You can share video presentations with other team members or stakeholders and get your information in the appropriate hands without worrying about share limits or extra fees.

Let's walk through the process of synthesizing and sharing research findings in Reduct so you can see exactly how it's done.

1. Store All of Your Related Footage & Findings In One Place

First things first, you can upload all of your interview videos and research footage to Reduct by importing files from your computer or connecting Reduct with a cloud storage drive (e.g., Dropbox, Box, GDrive). We also have a one-click import option for Zoom if you conduct your research remotely and have a lot of Zoom recordings to edit.

We allow unlimited storage space, so our platform is ideal for researchers who have hundreds of recordings and hours of footage to keep track of, and you can keep your library organized by grouping all of your recordings in Project-Based Folders. As the name suggests, these are individual folders for each of your research projects; they hold not only your research footage, but also the corresponding transcript and associated video clips/Reduct Reels, so all of your research work is housed in one spot.

Project-Based Folders not only improve organization, but they simplify sharing because they allow you to add other team members to whole projects instead of individual recordings. More on that in the next section.

2. Loop In Other Team Members

If you work with other researchers, you can add them to your projects and control exactly how they can contribute with User Permissions . The four user roles include:

Then, our Presence feature lets teams work on data analysis and edits together by displaying what other users are doing in the transcript in real-time.

Now to talk transcripts.

3. Transcribe Your Footage for Easier Analysis

Once you upload your recordings to Reduct, our AI software automatically begins transcribing your videos to text .

We offer computer transcription by default — it's about 85% accurate and on par with the industry standard for quality — but you can also opt for our human transcription service if you need a really high-quality transcript (99% accurate) or you're working with unclear audio (i.e., audio with background noise, multiple speakers, speakers with accents, or speakers who use a lot of jargon words).

We offer the most affordable overnight human transcription service available — $1 per minute of audio — and guarantee transcripts within 24 hours (although many are ready much sooner than that). And our human transcription service is completely secure because we make sure that no single transcriber has access to your entire audio file.

Here's how our human transcription works:

• We break your audio up into 5-minute chunks and send each chunk off to a professional human transcriptionist.
• Each transcriber listens to their chunk of audio and transcribes the audio to text , assigning speaker names where possible.
• Senior transcribers do a round of quality control to ensure all chunks are error-free.
• Next, we piece the transcript back together and use AI software to double-check the transcript text for accuracy and assign appropriate speaker names throughout.
• Then we send the transcript back to you!

Not to mention, all of our transcripts are editable, so if you want to make changes or remove speaker names to keep participants' info confidential, you can do that with a few keystrokes.

You can also read our other post to learn more about transcribing interviews for qualitative research .

4. Pinpoint the Most Important Moments (That You'll Share Via Video In the Next Step)

After your transcript is ready, you can review your video footage with the accompanying transcript and highlight all of the moments that stick out to you. When you make a highlight within the transcript, Reduct will automatically pull and save that video clip as a Highlight .

This is so much easier than reviewing footage and pulling clips manually: In traditional video editors, you have to do the cumbersome paper edit and deal with the tedious clip-and-play process of finding the most precise moments to cut your footage and playing it back to make sure it flows well for viewers. But in Reduct you can watch your video as you review the transcript and simply extract clips like you'd highlight words in a text document — we do the hard work for you.

Then, you can add tags to Highlights to categorize findings, detect patterns between recordings, and improve video searchability — our platform also lets you create a codebook to standardize tagging habits so everybody's using the same language to categorize clips.

Once you've reviewed your transcript, you can:

• Share individual Highlights if you want to send off a quick snippet
• Download Highlights if you want clips from your research for social media or other online platforms
• Combine Highlights into a Reduct Reel if you want to make a longer presentation to convey research results

Note: One of our most useful features for researchers is Fuzzy Search . Although it's standard practice for researchers to do a careful analysis of their video transcripts before putting together a research presentation and sharing findings, Fuzzy Search makes it easy to search back through footage after that initial review.

If you have multiple recordings and dozens of research participants to remember, it can be hard to recall exact quotes and phrasing of important moments. But you can use Fuzzy Search to scan back through your videos/transcripts by theme. For example, if you were to type "sports" into Fuzzy Search, we'd bring you everything related to baseball, football, lacrosse, soccer (the list goes on) so you can find everything relevant to your research on sports.

Fuzzy Search is also helpful because it aids cross-transcript analysis: Instead of opening up each transcript and searching one by one, you can utilize Fuzzy Search to scan through all of your recordings in a particular folder in one fell swoop. This makes it a lot easier to pinpoint patterns between recordings and catch details you might have overlooked.

5. Put Together an Engaging Highlight Reel with Your Findings

As we mentioned in the section above, you can use Highlights to create longer video stories (a.k.a. Reduct Reels ).

This process is as easy as dragging and dropping your video clips into sequence. You can combine Highlights from one video source or multiple different videos, our side-bar search lets you filter down through your library of Highlights and pull what you need.

This is also vastly different than working in a traditional video editor — as we mentioned above, clipping video footage can be an extremely tedious process when you're tasked with trimming footage at the exact precise second to create a seamless snippet. And combining those clips can get even more difficult: You have to trim footage in a way that it flows from clip to clip and find a way to string together your clips in a way that makes sense for viewers. Reduct simplifies this entire process by letting you work with the clips you pull during analysis and use them for one video story, and our platform creates transitions between clips for you.

You can arrange and re-arrange clips as much as you want, and use our Strikethrough feature to edit out the portions of video you don't need. This is helpful for clips that have a valuable piece of information that's cluttered by unrelated details or filler words — you can simply "delete" the extra content the same way you would in a word doc. (But don't worry, all edits in Reduct are non-destructive, so you can un-do Strikethrough changes at any time and make new tweaks.)

When putting together your research presentation, you can also insert slides if you want to provide more detail for viewers or add visual aids such as images or graphs. We've seen researchers use text slides to introduce their research question, the goal of their research, and their research methods. But you can also use text slides to introduce or transition between topics, or include more background on participants.

Our platform automatically enables captions for you by pulling transcript text into your Reduct Reel. This improves accessibility, especially if you intend on publishing your presentation across the web, and the overall user experience because it allows viewers to read along as they play your presentation.

Read More: How to Edit an Interview Video in 5 Simple Steps

6. Send Your Presentation Off for Feedback

Once your presentation is ready to be shared, you can send it off to whoever you need by copying and pasting the unique share link — this makes dissemination quick and saves you from the tedious task of emailing large zip files or sending thumb drives via snail mail*.* And remember, we allow for unlimited sharing, so you can send this share link one or one hundred times and never get charged extra.

Note: You can also customize the thumbnail image and Reel name when sharing video presentations.

Our share links work across email platforms like Gmail, messenger apps like Slack, and workspace collaboration tools like Trello. When end users open this link, they can view your Reduct Reel with the interactive transcript in the Reduct portal. They can also change the playback speed if they want to review the presentation more quickly.

Sending the transcript with the video allows end-users to review on their own terms: They can search through the transcript for the info they're most interested in, skip around, or play the presentation without audio. This makes it far more likely that end-users will actually watch (and stay interested in) your research presentation, as they can skim the transcript to understand what's covered and know they're not buckling in for an hour-long TED talk with no option to fast forward.

It's important to note that you can still make edits to Reduct Reels after sending share links. All edits are automatically reflected across live share links so you don't have to re-send your presentation every time you make a tweak.

If you want to publish your video presentation online, you can download it from the platform and host it across the web — we offer 1080p exports using the .mp4 format. When downloading, you can choose to download the video file, audio file, or transcript, or all three.

Want to walk through the Reduct platform and try out word-based editing tools for yourself? Get started on your first research project and start leveraging your interview footage.

Other Tips for Sharing Research Findings & Driving Change

Before sitting down to create your research presentation, you should have a plan. Consider some of these tips to make the process smoother:

• Understand your research goals — What are you trying to accomplish with your research? What action are you trying to elicit from viewers?
• Take note of your target audience(s) — Are you sharing this information with peers or policymakers or disseminating research findings across a wider audience?
• Write for that audience(s) and their knowledge level — Utilize plain language when writing to stakeholders or other non-researchers. If you're too jargon-heavy, viewers can get lost in the lingo.
• Put together a "storyline" for your presentation — What info do you want to include? In what order are you going to present findings?
• Keep research findings neat and organized — If including slides in your presentation, keep them concise and clear: One idea per slide with minimal amounts of information. Showcase the main highlights and leave smaller details for later.
• Include clear study results and recommendations for change — This is arguably the most important because if viewers are unclear of what they should do with research findings, the entire process of creating and sharing your presentation is a flop. Tell viewers exactly why the findings of your research are important, and spell out the actions you want viewers to take to work towards the desired goal.
• Follow up — Don't just send research presentations off into the interweb and hope for a response. Chances are, the parties you share your research with — CEO, managers, and other stakeholders — have a lot on their plate, so sending a gentle reminder never hurts.
• Use feedback to your advantage — Even if sharing research findings doesn't go exactly as you planned, you can use feedback to improve future research efforts. Take notes on how and where you can improve, and next time around, your presentation may pack more of a punch.

Check out our other post if you're looking for tips on recording and transcribing interviews for optimal quality.

How to Sell the Value of Your Research

If research efforts/research findings aren't regularly talked about in your organization and you want to open up that conversation, we recommend doing some "research PR." This essentially involves putting together a research presentation on the value of research: It's an opportunity to explain what research you want to conduct, why it's valuable, and how you can leverage it to improve business. Once you get buy-in from others in your organization on the value of research, it's a lot easier to pitch new research studies and talk about findings.

Another way you can open up the conversation to discuss research findings is by sharing "research snacks," or little snippets from your research, to pique others' interest — and as interest builds, the conversation opens. Sharing research snacks makes it easier for people to learn more about your research in small doses, so they don't have to prepare for a whole rundown every time they ask for an update.

Making a habit of sending research snacks encourages a more research-centric culture and can open the doors for more opportunities. You can also learn more about "research PR" and normalizing research conversations in BlinkUX"s case study .

Try Reduct for Free

Reduct is an online video editing tool designed by researchers to support the research process: We offer fast and accurate video transcription, intuitive analysis tools, collaborative options, and a super easy video editing platform that lets you work with all of your research footage and create compelling presentations with your findings. To learn more about our platform and see if our software is a viable tool for your needs, contact us to get started with a free trial .

Recommended Articles:

• Prof. Mark Reed
• Nov 15, 2015

How to turn your research findings into a video that people actually want to watch

It seems that everyone is making videos about their research these days, but if you look at the number of views, not many of these films are actually getting their message across to large audiences. So how to you make a video about your research that people will actually want to watch?

If you want to turn your research findings into a video that people will actually want to watch, I think there are two crucial things you need to get right, which most researchers overlook:

Come up with a powerful idea that can act as a vehicle for your research findings, for example, a real-life story or a striking, humorous or thought-provoking metaphor. Make your idea personal, unexpected, visually striking and visceral

Have a strategy in place to drive traffic to your video. Just having a great video isn't enough - people have to know that it is there. For online video, social media is a powerful means of driving traffic, so make sure you have a social media strategy in place to make sure that you're harnessing its power to get your film noticed. Find out how to make a social media strategy for your video here.

If you have sufficient budget, hiring a professional film company to make a short video about your key findings can be a powerful and highly professional way to communicate messages to policy audiences, as well as to other key stakeholder groups. If you’re working on a much smaller budget and cannot afford to pay for a professional video to be made, you may be surprised at how effective it can be to create your own videos, with just a few tips to help make it come across effectively.

I've got no budget - can I make the film myself?

With the low cost of digital video equipment (and integration of video recorders of sufficient quality for online streaming on most mobile phones nowadays), combined with the ready availability of free and easy-to-use video-editing software (such as Windows Moviemaker or Apple's iMovie), producing your own video content is now within reach of even the most ardent technophobe. Some pointers to make the process easier:

Plan thoroughly and write a script – this will ensure you get the shots you want and you don’t video more than you need, thus making editing much easier

Spend time thinking about your story, and tell it like a story with a clear beginning, middle and end

Think about how you can make that story personal in some way to the people who will watch your film, that will make them apply your research in some way to their own lives

Try and think of something that will take people by surprise - this is one of the elements of a video that is most likely to make someone share the film with their social network

Try and come up with some memorable visuals e.g. some sort of visual metaphor that sums up your research findings, a spectacular location or something entertaining that will help the key ideas stick in people’s heads

Think about how you might be able to engage with peoples emotions on some level (ideally positive rather than negative emotions)

Turn your script into a “story board” - little sketches that convey what will happen visually for each section of your script

Pay attention to the sound – if possible use an external microphone for interviews, or make sure the speaker is near enough to the camera’s built-in microphone, and watch out for background noise

Always use a tripod for filming static shots and avoid zooming or moving the camera around unless it is absolutely necessary

Make the editing software work for you – use titles, transitions and effects to convey meaning and make your video look more polished, but beware: over-using effects can be distracting and may look unprofessional

Get clearance – getting signed consent forms from participants and using only copyright-cleared materials for things like images and soundtracks could save you massive potential headaches later on

Make videos available in as many formats as you have time to create in order to improve accessibility (e.g. You Tube, Vimeo, podcast, embedded in your project website, links to download files in .mp4 and .wmv formats)

The optimum length of a video on You Tube is said to be between 2-3 minutes - if you want to keep your audience to the end, try and keep your film within 5 minutes

Keep viewer interest by making videos entertaining where possible, and using a variety of styles, e.g. expert interviews, site visits/tours, documentary, biographical, profiles etc.

Attempt to make videos look as professional as possible, eg. by adding introductory and end titles/credits

Promote your video – just putting a video online won’t necessarily get you any views. You need to integrate your video into your project's pathway to impact and think of ways to drive traffic to it. Just embedding it in your project website won’t help if you’re not getting much traffic to your website. It can be particularly useful to invest in social media to drive traffic to online videos

Have a go! Learn by doing it and get constructive feedback from your colleagues, but don’t be too ambitious on your first attempt

How do I get the most out of a professional film-maker?

Most of the points above apply when commissioning video, except the professionals will take care of much of this for you. Here are a few key pointers that can help you get the most out of working with film-makers:

Although many film-makers will be able to help you refine your story, you will still need to provide them with the source material. Given that you understand your research best, you can often get much better results if you come to a film-maker with a few different ideas about how you might tell your story, that they can then work with, rather than just sending them your latest paper or policy brief and hoping that they’ll be able to come up with the story on their own

Think about who you’ll need to interview and what locations you’d like to film – every extra day of filming on location adds to your budget, so if you can get everyone in the same place on your key location, you may be able to get filming days down to a minimum and save on costs

Once you know what you want from the film, you can negotiate a price – there will be an element of give and take, and you may have to scale back your ambitions depending on your budget

Ask the film-maker if they can provide a cut-down “promotional” version of your film within the price or for a small additional fee – this can be an effective way of creating an additional version of your film that may be more relevant for a more generalist audience, to help expand who accesses your material

Make sure you check the draft version of your film carefully and provide detailed comments re: things that need to be changed. Take time at this point and consult with the rest of your team, rather than going back and forth with lots of edits, or colleagues objecting to content after the film is finished

Get copies of your film in a few different formats – lower resolution for putting online and higher resolution for showing on the big screen

So now its over to you - try these tips out and let us know how you get on! We'd love to help you promote your latest research video via this blog and our social media, so get in touch if these tips have helped you!

#research #researchimpact #video #film #scicomm

• Research Impact Guides

Related Posts

Tips and tools for making your online meetings and workshops more interactive

How to integrate impact into a UKRI case for support

Presenting with Impact

  UK: (01482) 738656

  Made in the UK

How to Turn Your Research into an Engaging Explainer Video

So, you’ve spent years collating and analysing compelling research, so how do you make sure it’s seen and heard through video, of course.

Here are our 5 top tips for turning your research into a successful explainer video:

1. create a synopsis.

When creating your video, keep it short and sweet. The longer a video is, the higher the drop off rate is. Let’s face it, you have to be really interested in a topic to watch a 20 minute video about it.

Pick out main points to keep your audience engaged.

This could be:

• The reason for the research
• How it was conducted
• Discoveries & benefits

The synopsis of your research can be perfectly built into your animated explainer video script. The script is the main body of any video and is what the voiceover artist speaks throughout. We’ll talk more about script writing a little later on. 

2. Use Metaphors

If the topic is complex, it may help to conceptualise your research. Use a metaphor like an animal or cartoon character to help explain a subject people aren’t familiar with. This could be a mathematical rule, representation of a gas or even to portray an emotion.

Personification has been used in education for years. The act of giving an animal or object a human personality not only helps viewers to understand a concept, but evokes empathy in the viewer, which could in-turn increase the retention rate of the video due to a high emotional engagement.

This opens the door for a wider audience to understan d why and how your research topic is important. 

3. Use a Friendly Tone

When we’re taught to read and write, it was always in a formal tone, but in the real world, society prefers to address one-another in a more formal and friendly manner. If you’re in the education sector, you may have fallen into the trap of maintaining a high formality when producing and writing content, however, it’s been found that videos in a more conversational and friendly tone have a higher engagement rate.

It also helps to use a personal and conversational style when explaining a complex subject. When creating your video think about your target audience. Would you address them formally or would you completely skip the jargon? Make sure the video script is written to appeal to the viewer. 

4. Have a strategy to get video views

So, you’ve created your video, but how are you going to make sure its seen? Whether you promote your video via email, YouTube, Social Media, on blogs, at conferences or during presentations you need a strategy to ensure the video is seen, or its not worthwhile. 

• If its for a conference can the video still be understood without sound?
• If it’s for social media, does it capture attention in the first 5 minutes?
• If its going on YouTube does it have the correct keyword focused title and description so people can find it?

It’s a good idea to decide where the video is going to be placed before you create it, so you can ensure its built for purpose. 

5. Write a compelling video script

When you approach any animated explainer video company, no doubt they will have one or more professional copywriters who are highly experienced in creating video scripts. Ideally, if you’re a business, you’ll want to make sure you make the most of the copy writer, so your video stands out, conveys all key points well and convinces the viewer to take an action, all in a condensed word count.

However, if you’re creating a video to present your research findings, it’s probably a good idea to produce the script yourself. Many research findings videos include an in-depth, specialised topic, which the copywriter won’t understand as well as you.

For specialised subjects, we recommend a first, rough draft is sent to us for our copywriter to proofread. They can ensure the script is built for video, is understandable and can provide a great structure to keep readers engaged. 

Research Findings Video Example:

Created by the team at Squideo!

If you'd like to speak to a member of the Squideo team about turning your research findings into an animated explainer video, get in touch today!

Not sure where to start?

Let us take care of it! 

Creative Ways to Use Video For Marketing

Utilising Video in Digital Marketing for Investing Start-ups

World Cartoonist Day

Why Animated Whiteboard Explainer Videos Might Not Be Your Best Bet in 2024

Impactful Storytelling: How Charity Marketing Videos Inspire

Health in Motion: Mastering Healthcare Animation Videos

The Best Animated Christmas Adverts of All Time

Guide to Interactive Marketing Videos for Your Business

Squideo’s Favourites: WALL·E

Educational Animation: Bringing Lessons to Life

(01482) 738656

Mon - Thurs:  9am - 5pm  Friday: 9am - 4pm (GMT)

Squideo Ltd, 2 Exeter St,

New Village Road, Cottingham, East Riding of Yorkshire, HU16 4LU,  UNITED KINGDOM

© 2024 Squideo Ltd.

Website by Squideo

Video Editing

• Animation Tips
• Website Tips

How to Create Research Summary Videos Online

Renderforest Staff

13 Apr 2020

8 min read  

Sitting down at your computer and trying to write a professional research summary on your topic? Sure, but before starting, it is important to have a clear understanding of what you’re required to do.

A research summary is a professional piece of academic writing and requires your own opinion and approach to your work. Thus, in writing a research summary, you need to pay attention to its content, style, and the way you present it.

Nowadays, there are a number of techniques and tools with which you can present your research summary. One of the most professional ones is using video to present your work.

First, prepare the script that includes all the key points of your research in a simple and comprehensive way. Keep your audience in mind to make your video more engaging. Get the content ready and create a captivating research summary video with minimum effort.

With the right tool, creating a research summary video will not only be easy but also fun.

Below you can watch a research summary video created with one of our ready-made presets.

Follow the instructions below and present the key takeaways of your research through an animated video.

Select the template you need and click “Create now” to start. We’ve used the “Modern Infographics Pack” template to create our video.

Our video editor provides two options for creating videos. You can create a new project by choosing the scenes manually or choose from the ready-made videos created by our team.

The “Load a Preset” option offers a variety of presets, from where you can choose the one most suitable for your project and start customizing the scenes. Pick the preset and click “Use ready story” to start your project.

We’ve used the “Research Summary Video” preset for our project.

And to create your video project from scratch, click on “Add scene” and start selecting all the necessary scenes manually. This template offers 22 categories with more than 500 scenes. Select the ones you need and click on “Insert” .

After you’ve finished selecting all the necessary scenes, start customizing them. On your timeline, you are free to edit the sequence of your scenes, as well as duplicate, replace, or delete them. Each scene has a Snapshot feature, so you can see how it looks like without previewing the whole video.

You can upload your media files in several ways: via image or video URL, upload them from your device, or pick an already uploaded file from your “Media library”.

If you don’t have a certain video or image file for your recipe video, click on “Stock footage” and enter a keyword or a phrase to find relevant media files. Once you select a file, click “ Insert ” to confirm it.

The images can be cropped, rotated, or zoomed in right in the editor. This way you’ll be able to match the image with its frame size perfectly.

Mute or trim the added video and keep the parts you want to use in your research summary video.

Click on the text holders to type in your text. The text holders have different character limits, so be careful not to exceed them.

Choose the transition of your scenes in the “Style” section, to make your video more active and enjoyable.

In the “Color” section you customize the colors of your video. Select one of the ready-made color palettes suggested by our design team, or edit the colors of the video components by adding your custom colors.

Want to add background music or a voice-over? Go to the “Music” section and pick one of the music tracks available in our library. If you want to use your own music or voiceover, no problem, upload it and add it to your project.

When you fully customize your video, go to the “Preview” section and click on “Free preview” to see the result. We highly recommend previewing your video before you export it in high quality. This way, if you want to edit some parts of your project, you can go back and make all the necessary changes.

There are two ways for you to download your video: The “Free” and the “HD export” versions. The free option comes with a watermark and 360p quality. Meanwhile, with the other “HD export” option, you can choose one of our paid subscriptions and download your video in high quality and no watermark. All the details about our pricing are available here .

Your research summary deserves to be presented in the best possible way. Want to leave an unforgettable impression on people? Share your data through an interactive video and enjoy your success.

Start creating your video now by clicking the button below:

Dive into our Forestblog of exclusive interviews, handy tutorials and interesting articles published every week!

Create Professional

Videos with 1000s of Templates

in Minutes without Technical Skills.

How to make a YouTube Short in 3 steps

15 min read

09 Aug 2024

How to create training videos in 3 steps

13 min read

How to start a podcast: a complete 2024 guide 

02 Aug 2024

Communicating and Disseminating Research Findings

• First Online: 23 September 2017

Cite this chapter

• Amber E. Budden 3 &
• William K. Michener 3  

2175 Accesses

1 Citations

This chapter provides guidance on approaches and best practices for communicating and disseminating research findings to technical audiences via scholarly publications such as peer-reviewed journal articles, abstracts, technical reports, books and book chapters. We also discuss approaches for communicating findings to more general audiences via newspaper and magazine articles and highlight best practices for designing effective figures that explain and support the research findings that are presented in scientific and general audience publications. Research findings may also be presented verbally to educate, change perceptions and attitudes, or influence policy and resource management. Key topics include simple steps for giving effective presentations and best practices for designing slide text and graphics, posters and handouts. Websites and social media are increasingly important mechanisms for communicating science. We discuss forms of commonly used social media, identify simple steps for effectively using social media, and highlight ways to track and understand your social media and overall research impact using various metrics and altmetrics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Communicating Scientific Research Through the Web and Social Media: Experience of the United Nations University with the Our World 2.0 Web Magazine

How to Write and Publish an Empirical Report

Alred GJ, Brusaw CT, Oliu WE (2011) Handbook of technical writing, 10th edn. St. Martin’s Press, Bedford

Google Scholar  

Altmetric (2016) Altmetric. https://www.altmetric.com . Accessed 18 Aug 2016

Bale R, Neveln ID, Bhalla APS et al (2015) Convergent evolution of mechanically optimal locomotion in aquatic invertebrates and vertebrates. PLoS Biol 13(4):e1002123. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002123

Article   Google Scholar  

Bergou AJ, Swartz SM, Vejdani H et al (2015) Falling with style: bats perform complex aerial rotations by adjusting wing inertia. PLoS Biol 13(11):e1002297. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002297

Bornmann L, Mutz R (2015) Growth rates of modern science: a bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. J Assn Inf Sci Technol 66:2215–2222. doi: 10.1002/asi.23329

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bourne PE (2005) Ten simple rules for getting published. PLoS Comput Biol 1(5):e57. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0010057

Bourne PE (2007) Ten simple rules for making good oral presentations. PLoS Comput Biol 3(4):e77. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030077

Brody T, Harnad S, Carr L (2006) Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 57:1060–1072. doi: 10.1002/asi.20373

Chaves ÓM, Bicca-Marques JC (2016) Feeding strategies of brown howler monkeys in response to variations in food availability. PLoS One 11(2):e0145819. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145819

Cho M (2013) The science behind fonts (and how they make you feel). http://thenextweb.com/dd/2013/12/23/science-behind-fonts-make-feel/ . Accessed 1 Aug 2016

Cleveland WS, McGill R (1985) Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science 229(4716):828–833

Cook RB, Wie Y, Hook LA et al (2017) Preserve: protecting data for long-term use, Chapter 6. In: Recknagel F, Michener W (eds) Ecological informatics. Data management and knowledge discovery. Springer, Heidelberg

Cornell University (2016) The Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://www.birds.cornell.edu/ . Accessed 18 Aug 2016

Croxall B (2014) Ten tips for tweeting at conferences. http://chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/ten-tips-for-tweeting-at-conferences/54281 . Accessed 15 June 2016

CTAN (2016) CTAN: Package tufte-latex. http://www.ctan.org/pkg/tufte-latex . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

DataONE (2016) DataONE. https://www.facebook.com/DataONEorg/ . Accessed 25 Nov 2016

Duarte N (2008) slide:ology: the art and science of creating great presentations. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, CA

Duarte N (2010) Resonate: present visual stories that transform audiences. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

Duckett J (2011) HTML and CSS: design and build websites, 1st edn. Wiley, Indianapolis

Ekins S, Perlstein EO (2014) Ten simple rules of live tweeting at scientific conferences. PLoS Comput Biol 10(8):e1003789. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003789

Erren TC, Bourne PE (2007) Ten simple rules for a good poster presentation. PLoS Comput Biol 3(5):e102. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030102

Eysenbach G (2011) Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. J Med Internet Res 13(4):e123

Faulkes Z (2016) Better posters. http://betterposters.blogspot.com/ . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Few S (2009) Now you see it: simple visualization techniques for quantitative analysis. Analytics Press, Oakland, CA

Few S (2012) Show me the numbers: designing tables and graphs to enlighten, 2nd edn. Analytics Press, Burlingame, CA

Few S (2016) Perceptual edge – examples. http://www.perceptualedge.com/examples.php . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Forant T (2013) 10 social media best practices for brand engagement. https://www.marketingcloud.com/blog/social-media-best-practices-for-brand-engagement/ . Accessed 16 May 2016

GLEON (2016) GLEON: global lake ecological observatory network. http://gleon.org . Accessed 18 Aug 2016

Hampton SE, Anderson SS, Bagby SC et al (2015) The Tao of open science for ecology. Ecosphere 6(7):1–13. doi: 10.1890/ES14-00402.1

Hines K (2015) All of the social media metrics that matter. http://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-metrics-that-matter/ . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:16569–16572

Impactstory (2016) Impactstory. https://impactstory.org . Accessed 18 Aug 2016

Klout Inc. (2015) Klout. https://klout.com . Accessed 10 Aug 2016

Kronick DA (1976) A history of scientific & technical periodicals: the origins and development of the scientific and technical press, 1665-1790. Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ

Krug S (2014) Don’t make me think, revisited: a common sense approach to web usability, 3rd edn. New Riders, San Francisco

Leek J (2016) How to be a modern scientist. Lean Publishing, Victoria, BC

Lin J, Fenner M (2013) Altmetrics in evolution: defining and redefining the ontology of article-level metrics. Inf Stand Q 25:20–26

Lister AL, Datta RS, Hofmann O et al (2010) Live coverage of scientific conferences using web technologies. PLoS Comput Biol 6(1). doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000563

LTER (2016) The long term ecological research network. http://www.lternet.edu . Accessed 18 Aug 2016

Malson G (2015) Preparing a research poster for a conference. Clin Pharm 7(3). doi: 10.1211/CP.2015.20068193

Michener WK (2017) Data discovery, Chapter 7. In: Recknagel F, Michener W (eds) Ecological informatics. Data management and knowledge discovery. Springer, Heidelberg

NEON (2016) National Ecological Observatory Network. https://www.facebook.com/NEONScienceData/ . Accessed 25 Nov 2016

NSF (2016) National Science Foundation. https://www.facebook.com/US.NSF/ . Accessed 25 Nov 2016

NutNet (2016) Nutrient network: a global research cooperative. http://www.nutnet.umn.edu . Accessed 18 Aug 2016

Piwowar H (2013) Altmetrics: value all research products. Nature 493:159. doi: 10.1038/493159a

CAS   Google Scholar  

Piwowar H, Priem J (2013) The power of altmetrics on a CV. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 39:10–13

Plunkett S (2016) Tips on poster presentations at professional conference. http://www.csun.edu/plunk/documents/poster_presentation.pdf . Accessed 1 Jun 2016

Priem J, Piwowar HA, Hemminger BM (2012) Altmetrics in the wild: using social media to explore scholarly impact. ArXiv.org . http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745 . Accessed 5 Feb 2016

Purrington CB (2016) Designing conference posters. http://colinpurrington.com/tips/poster-design . Accessed 24 May 2016

R Markdown (2016) Tufte handouts. http://rmarkdown.rstudio.com/tufte_handout_format.html . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Robbins JN (2012) Learning web design: a beginner’s guide to HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and web graphics, 4th edn. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, CA

Robbins NB (2013) Creating more effective graphs. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

Robbins NB (2016) http://www.nbr-graphs.com/examples/ . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Rose PM, Kennard MJ, Moffatt DB et al (2016) Testing three species distribution modelling strategies to define fish assemblage reference conditions for stream bioassessment and related applications. PLoS One 11(1):e0146728. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146728

Rougier NP, Droettboom M, Bourne PE (2014) Ten simple rules for better figures. PLoS Comput Biol 10(9):e1003833. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003833

Statista (2016) Leading social networks worldwide as of April 2016, ranked by number of active users (in millions). http://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/ . Accessed 05 May 2016

Strunk W Jr, White EB (1999) The elements of style, 4th edn. Longman, New York

Sullivan C (2011) Strata 2011 [day 1]: communicating data clearly. http://infosthetics.com/archives/2011/02/strata_2011_communicating_data_clearly.html Accessed 10 Aug 2016

Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V et al (2013) Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLoS ONE 8(5):e64841. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064841

Tufte EG (1983) The visual display of quantitative information. Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT

Tufte ER (1990) Envisioning information. Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT

Tufte ER (1997) Visual explanations: images and quantities, evidence and narrative. Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT

Tufte ER (2003) The cognitive style of Powerpoint. Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT

Tufte ER (2006) Beautiful evidence. Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT

Tufte E (2016) The work of Edward Tufte and Graphics Press. https://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/ . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

University of Chicago Press Staff (2010) The Chicago manual of style, 16th edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Weinberger CJ, Evans JA, Allesina S (2015) Ten simple (empirical) rules for writing science. PLoS Comput Biol 11(4):e1004205. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004205

Widrich L (2013) 5 essential social media metrics to track and how to improve them. https://blog.bufferapp.com/social-media-metrics-improve . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Witt C (2016) Effective handouts. http://wittcom.com/effective-handouts/ . Accessed 26 Jul 2016

Wong DM (2013) The Wall Street Journal guide to information graphics: the dos and don'ts of presenting data, facts, and figures. Norton, New York

Zhang W (2014) Ten simple rules for writing research papers. PLoS Comput Biol 10(1):e1003453. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003453

Zinsser W (2006) On writing well: the classic guide to writing nonfiction, 30th edn. Harper Perennial, New York

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA

Amber E. Budden & William K. Michener

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amber E. Budden .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Biological Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

Friedrich Recknagel

College of University Libraries, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA

William K. Michener

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Budden, A.E., Michener, W.K. (2018). Communicating and Disseminating Research Findings. In: Recknagel, F., Michener, W. (eds) Ecological Informatics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59928-1_14

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59928-1_14

Published : 23 September 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-59926-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-59928-1

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science Earth and Environmental Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing Guide

Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Findings

Definition:

Research findings refer to the results obtained from a study or investigation conducted through a systematic and scientific approach. These findings are the outcomes of the data analysis, interpretation, and evaluation carried out during the research process.

Types of Research Findings

There are two main types of research findings:

Qualitative Findings

Qualitative research is an exploratory research method used to understand the complexities of human behavior and experiences. Qualitative findings are non-numerical and descriptive data that describe the meaning and interpretation of the data collected. Examples of qualitative findings include quotes from participants, themes that emerge from the data, and descriptions of experiences and phenomena.

Quantitative Findings

Quantitative research is a research method that uses numerical data and statistical analysis to measure and quantify a phenomenon or behavior. Quantitative findings include numerical data such as mean, median, and mode, as well as statistical analyses such as t-tests, ANOVA, and regression analysis. These findings are often presented in tables, graphs, or charts.

Both qualitative and quantitative findings are important in research and can provide different insights into a research question or problem. Combining both types of findings can provide a more comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon and improve the validity and reliability of research results.

Parts of Research Findings

Research findings typically consist of several parts, including:

• Introduction: This section provides an overview of the research topic and the purpose of the study.
• Literature Review: This section summarizes previous research studies and findings that are relevant to the current study.
• Methodology : This section describes the research design, methods, and procedures used in the study, including details on the sample, data collection, and data analysis.
• Results : This section presents the findings of the study, including statistical analyses and data visualizations.
• Discussion : This section interprets the results and explains what they mean in relation to the research question(s) and hypotheses. It may also compare and contrast the current findings with previous research studies and explore any implications or limitations of the study.
• Conclusion : This section provides a summary of the key findings and the main conclusions of the study.
• Recommendations: This section suggests areas for further research and potential applications or implications of the study’s findings.

How to Write Research Findings

Writing research findings requires careful planning and attention to detail. Here are some general steps to follow when writing research findings:

• Organize your findings: Before you begin writing, it’s essential to organize your findings logically. Consider creating an outline or a flowchart that outlines the main points you want to make and how they relate to one another.
• Use clear and concise language : When presenting your findings, be sure to use clear and concise language that is easy to understand. Avoid using jargon or technical terms unless they are necessary to convey your meaning.
• Use visual aids : Visual aids such as tables, charts, and graphs can be helpful in presenting your findings. Be sure to label and title your visual aids clearly, and make sure they are easy to read.
• Use headings and subheadings: Using headings and subheadings can help organize your findings and make them easier to read. Make sure your headings and subheadings are clear and descriptive.
• Interpret your findings : When presenting your findings, it’s important to provide some interpretation of what the results mean. This can include discussing how your findings relate to the existing literature, identifying any limitations of your study, and suggesting areas for future research.
• Be precise and accurate : When presenting your findings, be sure to use precise and accurate language. Avoid making generalizations or overstatements and be careful not to misrepresent your data.
• Edit and revise: Once you have written your research findings, be sure to edit and revise them carefully. Check for grammar and spelling errors, make sure your formatting is consistent, and ensure that your writing is clear and concise.

Research Findings Example

Following is a Research Findings Example sample for students:

Title: The Effects of Exercise on Mental Health

Sample : 500 participants, both men and women, between the ages of 18-45.

Methodology : Participants were divided into two groups. The first group engaged in 30 minutes of moderate intensity exercise five times a week for eight weeks. The second group did not exercise during the study period. Participants in both groups completed a questionnaire that assessed their mental health before and after the study period.

Findings : The group that engaged in regular exercise reported a significant improvement in mental health compared to the control group. Specifically, they reported lower levels of anxiety and depression, improved mood, and increased self-esteem.

Conclusion : Regular exercise can have a positive impact on mental health and may be an effective intervention for individuals experiencing symptoms of anxiety or depression.

Applications of Research Findings

Research findings can be applied in various fields to improve processes, products, services, and outcomes. Here are some examples:

• Healthcare : Research findings in medicine and healthcare can be applied to improve patient outcomes, reduce morbidity and mortality rates, and develop new treatments for various diseases.
• Education : Research findings in education can be used to develop effective teaching methods, improve learning outcomes, and design new educational programs.
• Technology : Research findings in technology can be applied to develop new products, improve existing products, and enhance user experiences.
• Business : Research findings in business can be applied to develop new strategies, improve operations, and increase profitability.
• Public Policy: Research findings can be used to inform public policy decisions on issues such as environmental protection, social welfare, and economic development.
• Social Sciences: Research findings in social sciences can be used to improve understanding of human behavior and social phenomena, inform public policy decisions, and develop interventions to address social issues.
• Agriculture: Research findings in agriculture can be applied to improve crop yields, develop new farming techniques, and enhance food security.
• Sports : Research findings in sports can be applied to improve athlete performance, reduce injuries, and develop new training programs.

When to use Research Findings

Research findings can be used in a variety of situations, depending on the context and the purpose. Here are some examples of when research findings may be useful:

• Decision-making : Research findings can be used to inform decisions in various fields, such as business, education, healthcare, and public policy. For example, a business may use market research findings to make decisions about new product development or marketing strategies.
• Problem-solving : Research findings can be used to solve problems or challenges in various fields, such as healthcare, engineering, and social sciences. For example, medical researchers may use findings from clinical trials to develop new treatments for diseases.
• Policy development : Research findings can be used to inform the development of policies in various fields, such as environmental protection, social welfare, and economic development. For example, policymakers may use research findings to develop policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• Program evaluation: Research findings can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs or interventions in various fields, such as education, healthcare, and social services. For example, educational researchers may use findings from evaluations of educational programs to improve teaching and learning outcomes.
• Innovation: Research findings can be used to inspire or guide innovation in various fields, such as technology and engineering. For example, engineers may use research findings on materials science to develop new and innovative products.

Purpose of Research Findings

The purpose of research findings is to contribute to the knowledge and understanding of a particular topic or issue. Research findings are the result of a systematic and rigorous investigation of a research question or hypothesis, using appropriate research methods and techniques.

The main purposes of research findings are:

• To generate new knowledge : Research findings contribute to the body of knowledge on a particular topic, by adding new information, insights, and understanding to the existing knowledge base.
• To test hypotheses or theories : Research findings can be used to test hypotheses or theories that have been proposed in a particular field or discipline. This helps to determine the validity and reliability of the hypotheses or theories, and to refine or develop new ones.
• To inform practice: Research findings can be used to inform practice in various fields, such as healthcare, education, and business. By identifying best practices and evidence-based interventions, research findings can help practitioners to make informed decisions and improve outcomes.
• To identify gaps in knowledge: Research findings can help to identify gaps in knowledge and understanding of a particular topic, which can then be addressed by further research.
• To contribute to policy development: Research findings can be used to inform policy development in various fields, such as environmental protection, social welfare, and economic development. By providing evidence-based recommendations, research findings can help policymakers to develop effective policies that address societal challenges.

Characteristics of Research Findings

Research findings have several key characteristics that distinguish them from other types of information or knowledge. Here are some of the main characteristics of research findings:

• Objective : Research findings are based on a systematic and rigorous investigation of a research question or hypothesis, using appropriate research methods and techniques. As such, they are generally considered to be more objective and reliable than other types of information.
• Empirical : Research findings are based on empirical evidence, which means that they are derived from observations or measurements of the real world. This gives them a high degree of credibility and validity.
• Generalizable : Research findings are often intended to be generalizable to a larger population or context beyond the specific study. This means that the findings can be applied to other situations or populations with similar characteristics.
• Transparent : Research findings are typically reported in a transparent manner, with a clear description of the research methods and data analysis techniques used. This allows others to assess the credibility and reliability of the findings.
• Peer-reviewed: Research findings are often subject to a rigorous peer-review process, in which experts in the field review the research methods, data analysis, and conclusions of the study. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Reproducible : Research findings are often designed to be reproducible, meaning that other researchers can replicate the study using the same methods and obtain similar results. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.

Advantages of Research Findings

Research findings have many advantages, which make them valuable sources of knowledge and information. Here are some of the main advantages of research findings:

• Evidence-based: Research findings are based on empirical evidence, which means that they are grounded in data and observations from the real world. This makes them a reliable and credible source of information.
• Inform decision-making: Research findings can be used to inform decision-making in various fields, such as healthcare, education, and business. By identifying best practices and evidence-based interventions, research findings can help practitioners and policymakers to make informed decisions and improve outcomes.
• Identify gaps in knowledge: Research findings can help to identify gaps in knowledge and understanding of a particular topic, which can then be addressed by further research. This contributes to the ongoing development of knowledge in various fields.
• Improve outcomes : Research findings can be used to develop and implement evidence-based practices and interventions, which have been shown to improve outcomes in various fields, such as healthcare, education, and social services.
• Foster innovation: Research findings can inspire or guide innovation in various fields, such as technology and engineering. By providing new information and understanding of a particular topic, research findings can stimulate new ideas and approaches to problem-solving.
• Enhance credibility: Research findings are generally considered to be more credible and reliable than other types of information, as they are based on rigorous research methods and are subject to peer-review processes.

Limitations of Research Findings

While research findings have many advantages, they also have some limitations. Here are some of the main limitations of research findings:

• Limited scope: Research findings are typically based on a particular study or set of studies, which may have a limited scope or focus. This means that they may not be applicable to other contexts or populations.
• Potential for bias : Research findings can be influenced by various sources of bias, such as researcher bias, selection bias, or measurement bias. This can affect the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Ethical considerations: Research findings can raise ethical considerations, particularly in studies involving human subjects. Researchers must ensure that their studies are conducted in an ethical and responsible manner, with appropriate measures to protect the welfare and privacy of participants.
• Time and resource constraints : Research studies can be time-consuming and require significant resources, which can limit the number and scope of studies that are conducted. This can lead to gaps in knowledge or a lack of research on certain topics.
• Complexity: Some research findings can be complex and difficult to interpret, particularly in fields such as science or medicine. This can make it challenging for practitioners and policymakers to apply the findings to their work.
• Lack of generalizability : While research findings are intended to be generalizable to larger populations or contexts, there may be factors that limit their generalizability. For example, cultural or environmental factors may influence how a particular intervention or treatment works in different populations or contexts.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

APA Table of Contents – Format and Example

Research Objectives – Types, Examples and...

Problem Statement – Writing Guide, Examples and...

Research Approach – Types Methods and Examples

Assignment – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and...

• Methodology
• Open access
• Published: 28 July 2018

Research as storytelling: the use of video for mixed methods research

• Erica B. Walker   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9258-3036 1 &
• D. Matthew Boyer 2  

Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy volume  3 , Article number:  8 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

18k Accesses

5 Citations

4 Altmetric

Metrics details

Mixed methods research commonly uses video as a tool for collecting data and capturing reflections from participants, but it is less common to use video as a means for disseminating results. However, video can be a powerful way to share research findings with a broad audience especially when combining the traditions of ethnography, documentary filmmaking, and storytelling.

Our literature review focused on aspects relating to video within mixed methods research that applied to the perspective presented within this paper: the history, affordances and constraints of using video in research, the application of video within mixed methods design, and the traditions of research as storytelling. We constructed a Mind Map of the current literature to reveal convergent and divergent themes and found that current research focuses on four main properties in regards to video: video as a tool for storytelling/research, properties of the camera/video itself, how video impacts the person/researcher, and methods by which the researcher/viewer consumes video. Through this process, we found that little has been written about how video could be used as a vehicle to present findings of a study.

From this contextual framework and through examples from our own research, we present current and potential roles of video storytelling in mixed methods research. With digital technologies, video can be used within the context of research not only as data and a tool for analysis, but also to present findings and results in an engaging way.

Conclusions

In conclusion, previous research has focused on using video as a tool for data collection and analysis, but there are emerging opportunities for video to play an increased role in mixed methods research as a tool for the presentation of findings. By leveraging storytelling techniques used in documentary film, while staying true to the analytical methods of the research design, researchers can use video to effectively communicate implications of their work to an audience beyond academics and use video storytelling to disseminate findings to the public.

Using motion pictures to support ethnographic research began in the late nineteenth century when both fields were early in their development (Henley, 2010 ; “Using Film in Ethnographic Field Research, - The University of Manchester,” n.d ). While technologies have changed dramatically since the 1890s, researchers are still employing visual media to support social science research. Photographic imagery and video footage can be integral aspects of data collection, analysis, and reporting research studies. As digital cameras have improved in quality, size, and affordability, digital video has become an increasingly useful tool for researchers to gather data, aid in analysis, and present results.

Storytelling, however, has been around much longer than either video or ethnographic research. Using narrative devices to convey a message visually was a staple in the theater of early civilizations and remains an effective tool for engaging an audience today. Within the medium of video, storytelling techniques are an essential part of a documentary filmmaker’s craft. Storytelling can also be a means for researchers to document and present their findings. In addition, multimedia outputs allow for interactions beyond traditional, static text (R. Goldman, 2007 ; Tobin & Hsueh, 2007 ). Digital video as a vehicle to share research findings builds on the affordances of film, ethnography, and storytelling to create new avenues for communicating research (Heath, Hindmarsh, & Luff, 2010 ).

In this study, we look at the current literature regarding the use of video in research and explore how digital video affordances can be applied in the collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative human subject data. We also investigate how video storytelling can be used for presenting research results. This creates a frame for how data collection and analysis can be crafted to maximize the potential use of video data to create an audiovisual narrative as part of the final deliverables from a study. As researchers we ask the question: have we leveraged the use of video to communicate our work to its fullest potential? By understanding the role of video storytelling, we consider additional ways that video can be used to not only collect and analyze data, but also to present research findings to a broader audience through engaging video storytelling. The intent of this study is to develop a frame that improves our understanding of the theoretical foundations and practical applications of using video in data collection, analysis, and the presentation of research findings.

Literature review

The review of relevant literature includes important aspects for situating this exploration of video research methods: the history, affordances and constraints of using video in research, the use of video in mixed methods design, and the traditions of research as storytelling. Although this overview provides an extensive foundation for understanding video research methods, this is not intended to serve as a meta-analysis of all publications related to video and research methods. Examples of prior work provide a conceptual and operational context for the role of video in mixed methods research and present theoretical and practical insights for engaging in similar studies. Within this context, we examine ethical and logistical/procedural concerns that arise in the design and application of video research methods, as well as the affordances and constraints of integrating video. In the following sections, the frame provided by the literature is used to view practical examples of research using video.

The history of using video in research is founded first in photography and next in film followed more recently, by digital video. All three tools provide the ability to create instant artifacts of a moment or period of time. These artifacts become data that can be analyzed at a later date, perhaps in a different place and by a different audience, giving researchers the chance to intricately and repeatedly examine the archive of information contained within. These records “enable access to the fine details of conduct and interaction that are unavailable to more traditional social science methods” (Heath et al., 2010 , p. 2).

In social science research, video has been used for a range of purposes and accompanies research observation in many situations. For example, in classroom research, video is used to record a teacher in practice and then used as a guide and prompt to interview the teacher as they reflect upon their practice (e.g. Tobin & Hsueh, 2007 ). Video captures events from a situated perspective, providing a record that “resists, at least in the first instance, reduction to categories or codes, and thus preserves the original record for repeated scrutiny” (Heath et al., 2010 , p. 6). In analysis, these audio-visual recordings allow the social science researcher the chance to reflect on their subjectivities throughout analysis and use the video as a microscope that “allow(s) actions to be observed in a detail not even accessible to the actors themselves” (Knoblauch & Tuma, 2011 , p. 417).

Examining the affordances and constraints of video in research provides a researcher the opportunity to examine the value of including video within a study . An affordance of video, when used in research, is that it allows the researcher to see an event through the camera lens either actively or passively and later share what they have seen, or more specifically, the way they saw it (Chalfen, 2011 ). Cameras can be used to capture an event in three different modes: Responsive, Interactive, and Constructive. Responsive mode is reactive. In this mode, the researcher captures and shows the viewer what is going on in front of the lens but does not directly interfere with the participants or events. Interactive mode puts the filmmaker into the storyline as a participant and allows the viewer to observe the interactions between the researcher and participant. One example of video captured in Interactive mode is an interview. In Constructive mode, the researcher reprocesses the recorded events to create an explicitly interpretive final product through the process of editing the video (MacDougall, 2011 ). All of these modes, in some way, frame or constrain what is captured and consequently shared with the audience.

Due to the complexity of the classroom-research setting, everything that happens during a study cannot be captured using video, observation, or any other medium. Video footage, like observation, is necessarily selective and has been stripped of the full context of the events, but it does provide a more stable tool for reflection than the ever-changing memories of the researcher and participants (Roth, 2007 ). Decisions regarding inclusion and exclusion are made by the researcher throughout the entire research process from the initial framing of the footage to the final edit of the video. Members of the research team should acknowledge how personal bias impacts these decisions and make their choices clear in the research protocol to ensure inclusivity (Miller & Zhou, 2007 ).

One affordance of video research is that analysis of footage can actually disrupt the initial assumptions of a study. Analysis of video can be standardized or even mechanized by seeking out predetermined codes, but it can also disclose the subjective by revealing the meaning behind actions and not just the actions themselves (S. Goldman & McDermott, 2007 ; Knoblauch & Tuma, 2011 ). However, when using subjective analysis the researcher needs to keep in mind that the footage only reveals parts of an event. Ideally, a research team has a member who acts as both a researcher and a filmmaker. That team member can provide an important link between the full context of the event and the narrower viewpoint revealed through the captured footage during the analysis phase.

Although many participants are initially camera-shy, they often find enjoyment from participating in a study that includes video (Tobin & Hsueh, 2007 ). Video research provides an opportunity for participants to observe themselves and even share their experience with others through viewing and sharing the videos. With increased accessibility of video content online and the ease of sharing videos digitally, it is vital from an ethical and moral perspective that participants understand the study release forms and how their image and words might continue to be used and disseminated for years after the study is completed.

Including video in a research study creates both affordances and constraints regarding the dissemination of results. Finding a journal for a video-based study can be difficult. Traditional journals rely heavily on static text and graphics, but newly-created media journals include rich and engaging data such as video and interactive, web-based visualizations (Heath et al., 2010 ). In addition, videos can provide opportunities for research results to reach a broader audience outside of the traditional research audience through online channels such as YouTube and Vimeo.

Use of mixed methods with video data collection and analysis can complement the design-based, iterative nature of research that includes human participants. Design-based video research allows for both qualitative and quantitative collection and analysis of data throughout the project, as various events are encapsulated for specific examination as well as analyzed comparatively for changes over time. Design research, in general, provides the structure for implementing work in practice and iterative refinement of design towards achieving research goals (Collins, Joseph, & Bielaczyc, 2004 ). Using an integrated mixed method design that cycles through qualitative and quantitative analyses as the project progresses gives researchers the opportunity to observe trends and patterns in qualitative data and quantitative frequencies as each round of analysis informs additional insights (Gliner et al., 2009 ). This integrated use also provides a structure for evaluating project fidelity in an ongoing basis through a range of data points and findings from analyses that are consistent across the project. The ability to revise procedures for data collection, systematic analysis, and presenting work does not change the data being collected, but gives researchers the opportunity to optimize procedural aspects throughout the process.

Research as storytelling refers to the narrative traditions that underpin the use of video methods to analyze in a chronological context and present findings in a story-like timeline. These traditions are evident in ethnographic research methods that journal lived experiences through a period of time and in portraiture methods that use both aesthetic and scientific language to construct a portrait (Barone & Eisner, 2012 ; Heider, 2009 ; Lawrence-Lightfoot, 2005 ; Lenette, Cox & Brough, 2013 ).

In existing research, there is also attention given to the use of film and video documentaries as sources of data (e.g. Chattoo & Das, 2014 ; Warmington, van Gorp & Grosvenor, 2011 ), however, our discussion here focuses on using media to capture information and communicate resulting narratives for research purposes. In our work, we promote a perspective on emergent storytelling that develops from data collection and analysis, allowing the research to drive the narrative, and situating it in the context from where data was collected. We rely on theories and practices of research and storytelling that leverage the affordances of participant observation and interview for the construction of narratives (Bailey & Tilley, 2002 ; de Carteret, 2008 ; de Jager, Fogarty & Tewson, 2017 ; Gallagher, 2011 ; Hancox, 2017 ; LeBaron, Jarzabkowski, Pratt & Fetzer, 2017 ; Lewis, 2011 ; Meadows, 2003 ).

The type of storytelling used with research is distinctly different from methods used with documentaries, primarily with the distinction that, while documentary filmmakers can edit their film to a predetermined narrative, research storytelling requires that the data be analyzed and reported within a different set of ethical standards (Dahlstrom, 2014 ; Koehler, 2012 ; Nichols, 2010 ). Although documentary and research storytelling use a similar audiovisual medium, creating a story for research purposes is ethically-bounded by expectations in social science communities for being trustworthy in reporting and analyzing data, especially related to human subjects. Given that researchers using video may not know what footage will be useful for future storytelling, they may need to design their data collection methods to allow for an abundance of video data, which can impact analysis timelines as well. We believe it important to note these differences in the construction of related types of stories to make overt the essential need for research to consider not only analysis but also creation of the reporting narrative when designing and implementing data collection methods.

This study uses existing literature as a frame for understanding and implementing video research methods, then employs this frame as perspective on our own work, illuminating issues related to the use of video in research. In particular, we focus on using video research storytelling techniques to design, implement, and communicate the findings of a research study, providing examples from Dr. Erica Walker’s professional experience as a documentary filmmaker as well as evidence from current and former academic studies. The intent is to improve understanding of the theoretical foundations and practical applications for video research methods and better define how those apply to the construction of story-based video output of research findings.

The study began with a systematic analysis of theories and practices, using interpretive analytic methods, with thematic coding of evidence for conceptual and operational aspects of designing and implementing video research methods. From this information, a frame was constructed that includes foundational aspects of using digital video in research as well as the practical aspects of using video to create narratives with the intent of presenting research findings. We used this frame to interpret aspects of our own video research, identifying evidence that exemplifies aspects of the frame we used.

A primary goal for the analysis of existing literature was to focus on evidentiary data that could provide examples that illuminate the concepts that underpin the understanding of how, when, and why video research methods are useful for a range of publishing and dissemination of transferable knowledge from research. This emphasis on communicating results in both theoretical and practical ways highlighted areas within the analysis for potential contextual similarities between our work and other projects. A central reason for interpreting findings and connecting them with evidence was the need to provide examples that could serve as potentially transferable findings for others using video with their research. Given the need for a fertile environment (Zhao & Frank, 2003 ) and attention to contextual differences to avoid lethal mutations (Brown & Campione, 1996 ), understand that these examples may not work for every situation, but the intent is to provide clear evidence of how video research methods can leverage storytelling to report research findings in a way that is consumable by a broader audience.

In the following section, we present findings from the review of research and practice, along with evidence from our work with video research, connecting the conceptual and operational frame to examples and teasing out aspects from existing literature.

Results and findings

When looking at the current literature regarding the use of video in research, we developed a Mind Map to categorize convergent and divergent themes in the current literature, see Fig.  1 . Although this is far from a complete meta-analysis on video research (notably absent is a comprehensive discussion of ethical concerns regarding video research), the Mind Map focuses on four main properties in regards to video: video as a tool for storytelling/research, properties of the camera/video itself, how video impacts the person/researcher, and methods by which the researcher/viewer consumes video.

Mind Map of current literature regarding the use of video in mixed methods research. Link to the fully interactive Mind Map- http://clemsongc.com/ebwalker/mindmap/

Video, when used as a tool for research, can document and share ethnographic, epistemic, and storytelling data to participants and to the research team (R. Goldman, 2007 ; Heath et al., 2010 ; Miller & Zhou, 2007 ; Tobin & Hsueh, 2007 ). Much of the research in this area focuses on the properties (both positive and negative) inherent in the camera itself such as how video footage can increase the ability to see and experience the world, but can also act as a selective lens that separates an event from its natural context (S. Goldman & McDermott, 2007 ; Jewitt, n.d .; Knoblauch & Tuma, 2011 ; MacDougall, 2011 ; Miller & Zhou, 2007 ; Roth, 2007 ; Sossi, 2013 ).

Some research speaks to the role of the video-researcher within the context of the study, likening a video researcher to a participant-observer in ethnographic research (Derry, 2007 ; Roth, 2007 ; Sossi, 2013 ). The final category of research within the Mind Map focuses on the process of converting the video from an observation to records to artifact to dataset to pattern (Barron, 2007 ; R. Goldman, 2007 ; Knoblauch & Tuma, 2011 ; Newbury, 2011 ). Through this process of conversion, the video footage itself becomes an integral part of both the data and findings.

The focus throughout current literature was on video as data and the role it plays in collection and analysis during a study, but little has been written about how video could be used as a vehicle to present findings of a study. Current literature also did not address whether video-data could be used as a tool to communicate the findings of the research to a broader audience.

In a recent two-year study, the research team led by Dr. Erica Walker collected several types of video footage with the embedded intent to use video as both data and for telling the story of the study and findings once concluded (Walker, 2016 ). The study focused on a multidisciplinary team that converted a higher education Engineering course from lecture-based to game-based learning using the Cognitive Apprenticeship educational framework. The research questions examined the impact that the intervention had on student learning of domain content and twenty-first Century Skills. Utilizing video as both a data source and a delivery method was built into the methodology from the beginning. Therefore, interviews were conducted with the researchers and instructors before, during, and after the study to document consistency and changes in thoughts and observations as the study progressed. At the conclusion of the study, student participants reflected on their experience directly through individual video interviews. In addition, every class was documented using two static cameras, placed at different angles and framing, and a mobile camera unit to capture closeup shots of student-instructor, student-student, and student-content interactions. This resulted in more than six-hundred minutes of interview footage and over five-thousand minutes of classroom footage collected for the study.

Video data can be analyzed through quantitative methods (frequencies and word maps) as well as qualitative methods (emergent coding and commonalities versus outliers). Ideally, both methods are used in tandem so that preliminary results can continue to inform the overall analysis as it progresses. In order to capitalize on both methods, each interview was transcribed. The researchers leveraged digital and analog methods of coding such as digital word-search alongside hand coding the printed transcripts. Transcriptions contained timecode notations throughout, so coded segments could quickly be located in the footage and added to a timeline creating preliminary edits.

There are many software workflows that allow researchers to code, notate timecode for analysis, and pre-edit footage. In the study, Opportunities for Innovation: Game-based Learning in an Engineering Senior Design Course, NVivo qualitative analysis software was used together with paper-based analog coding. In a current study, also based on a higher education curriculum intervention, we are digitally coding and pre-trimming the footage in Adobe Prelude in addition to analog coding on the printed transcripts. Both workflows offer advantages. NVivo has built-in tools to create frequency maps and export graphs and charts relevant to qualitative analysis whereas Adobe Prelude adds coding notes directly into the footage metadata and connects directly with Adobe Premiere video editing software, which streamlines the editing process.

From our experience with both workflows, Prelude works better for a research team that has multiple team members with more video experience because it aligns with video industry workflows, implements tools that filmmakers already use, and Adobe Team Projects allows for co-editing and coding from multiple off-site locations. On the other hand, NVivo works better for research teams where members have more separate roles. NVivo is a common qualitative-analysis software so team members more familiar with traditional qualitative research can focus on coding and those more familiar with video editing can edit based on those codes allowing each team member to work within more familiar software workflows.

In both of these studies, assessments regarding storytelling occurred in conjunction with data processing and analysis. As findings were revealed, appropriate clips were grouped into timelines and edited to produce a library of short, topic-driven videos posted online , see Fig.  2 . A collection of story-based, topic-driven videos can provide other practitioners and researchers a first-hand account of how a study was designed and conducted, what worked well, recommendations of what to do differently, participant perspectives, study findings, and suggestions for further research. In fact, the videos cover many of the same topics traditionally found in publications, but in a collection of short videos accessible to a broad audience online.

The YouTube channel created for Opportunities for Innovation: Game-based Learning in an Engineering Senior Design Course containing twenty-four short topical videos. Direct link- https://goo.gl/p8CBGG

By sharing the results of the study publicly online, conversations between practitioners and researchers can develop on a public stage. Research videos are easy to share across social media channels which can broaden the academic audience and potentially open doors for future research collaborations. As more journals move to accept multi-media studies, publicly posted videos provide additional ways to expose both academics and the general public to important study results and create easy access to related resources.

Video research as storytelling: The intersection and divergence of documentary filmmaking and video research

“Film and writing are such different modes of communication, filmmaking is not just a way of communicating the same kinds of knowledge that can be conveyed by an anthropological text. It is a way of creating different knowledge” (MacDougall, 2011 ).

When presenting research, choosing either mode of communication comes with affordances and constraints for the researcher, the participants, and the potential audience.

Many elements of documentary filmmaking, but not all, are relevant and appropriate when applied to gathering data and presenting results in video research. Documentary filmmakers have a specific angle on a story that they want to share with a broad audience. In many cases, they hope to incite action in viewers as a response to the story that unfolds on screen. In order to further their message, documentarians carefully consider the camera shots and interview clips that will convey the story clearly in a similar way to filmmakers in narrative genres. Decisions regarding what to capture and how to use the footage happen throughout the entire filmmaking process: prior to shooting footage (pre-production), while capturing footage (production), and during the editing phase (post-production).

Video researchers can employ many of the same technical skills from documentary filmmaking including interview techniques such as pre-written questions; camera skills such as framing, exposure, and lighting; and editing techniques that help draw a viewer through the storyline (Erickson, 2007 ; Tobin & Hsueh, 2007 ). In both documentary filmmaking and in video research, informed decisions are made about what footage to capture and how to employ editing techniques to produce a compelling final video.

Where video research diverges from documentary filmmaking is in how the researcher thinks about, captures, and processes the footage. Video researchers collect video as data in a more exploratory way whereas documentary filmmakers often look to capture preconceived video that will enable them to tell a specific story. For a documentary filmmaker, certain shots and interview responses are immediately discarded as they do not fit the intended narrative. For video researchers, all the video that is captured throughout a study is data and potentially part of the final research narrative. It is during the editing process (post-production) where the distinction between data and narrative becomes clear.

During post-production, video researchers are looking for clips that clearly reflect the emergent storylines seen in the collective data pool rather than the footage necessary to tell a predetermined story. Emergent storylines can be identified in several ways. Researchers look for divergent statements (where an interview subject makes unique observation different from other interviewees), convergent statements (where many different interviewees respond similarly), and unexpected statements (where something different from what was expected is revealed) (Knoblauch & Tuma, 2011 ).

When used thoughtfully, video research provides many sources of rich data. Examples include reflections of the experience, in the direct words of participants, that contain insights provided by body language and tone, an immersive glimpse into the research world as it unfolds, and the potential to capture footage throughout the entire research process rather than just during prescribed times. Video research becomes especially powerful when combined with qualitative and quantitative data from other sources because it can help reveal the context surrounding insights discovered during analysis.

We are not suggesting that video researchers should become documentary filmmakers, but researchers can learn from the stylistic approaches employed in documentary filmmaking. Video researchers implementing these tools can leverage the strengths of short-format video as a storytelling device to share findings with a more diverse audience, increase audience understanding and consumption of findings, and encourage a broader conversation around the research findings.

Implications for future work

As the development of digital media technologies continues to progress, we can expect new functionalities far exceeding current tools. These advancements will continue to expand opportunities for creating and sharing stories through video. By considering the role of video from the first stages of designing a study, researchers can employ methods that capitalize on these emerging technologies. Although they are still rapidly advancing, researchers can look for ways that augmented reality and virtual reality could change data analysis and reporting of research findings. Another emergent area is the use of machine learning and artificial intelligence to rapidly process video footage based on automated thematic coding. Continued advancements in this area could enable researchers to quickly quantify data points in large quantities of footage.

In addition to exploring new functionalities, researchers can still use current tools more effectively for capturing data, supporting analysis, and reporting findings. Mobile devices provide ready access to collect periodic video reflections from study participants and even create research vlogs (video blogs) to document and share ongoing studies as they progress. In addition, participant-created videos are rich artifacts for evaluating technical and conceptual knowledge as well as affective responses. Most importantly, as a community, researchers, designers, and documentarians can continue to take strengths from each field to further the reach of important research findings into the public sphere.

In conclusion, current research is focused on using video as a tool for data collection and analysis, but there are new, emerging opportunities for video to play an increased and diversified role in mixed methods research, especially as a tool for the presentation and consumption of findings. By leveraging the storytelling techniques used in documentary filmmaking, while staying true to the analytical methods of research design, researchers can use video to effectively communicate implications of their work to an audience beyond academia and leverage video storytelling to disseminate findings to the public.

Bailey, P. H., & Tilley, S. (2002). Storytelling and the interpretation of meaning in qualitative research. J Adv Nurs, 38(6), 574–583. http://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.02224.x

Barone, T., & Eisner, E. W. (2012). Arts based research (pp. 1–183). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230627

Barron B (2007) Video as a tool to advance understanding of learning and development in peer, family, and other informal learning contexts. Video Research in the Learning Sciences:159–187

Brown AL, Campione JC (1996) Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: on procedures, principles and systems. In: Schauble L, Glaser R (eds) Innovations in learning: new environments for education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 234–265

Google Scholar  

Chalfen, R. (2011). Looking Two Ways: Mapping the Social Scientific Study of Visual Culture. In E. Margolis & L. Pauwels (Eds.), The Sage handbook of visual research methods . books.google.com

Chattoo, C. B., & Das, A. (2014). Assessing the Social Impact of Issues-Focused Documentaries: Research Methods and Future Considerations Center for Media & Social Impact, 24. Retrieved from https://www.namac.org/wpcontent/uploads/2015/01/assessing_impact_social_issue_documentaries_cmsi.pdf

Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_2

Dahlstrom, M. F. (2014). Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proc Natl Acad Sci, 111(Supplement_4), 13614–13620. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320645111

de Carteret, P. (2008). Storytelling as research praxis, and conversations that enabled it to emerge. Int J Qual Stud Educ, 21(3), 235–249. http://doi.org/10.1080/09518390801998296

de Jager A, Fogarty A, Tewson A (2017) Digital storytelling in research: a systematic review. Qual Rep 22(10):2548–2582

Derry SJ (2007) Video research in classroom and teacher learning (Standardize that!). Video Research in the Learning Sciences:305–320

Erickson F (2007) Ways of seeing video: toward a phenomenology of viewing minimally edited footage. Video Research in the Learning Sciences:145–155

Gallagher, K. M. (2011). In search of a theoretical basis for storytelling in education research: story as method. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 34(1), 49–61. http://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2011.552308

Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Leech, N. L. (2009). Research Methods in Applied Settings: An Integrated Approach to Design and Analysis, Second Edition . Taylor & Francis

Goldman R (2007) Video representations and the perspectivity framework: epistemology, ethnography, evaluation, and ethics. Video Research in the Learning Sciences 37:3–37

Goldman S, McDermott R (2007) Staying the course with video analysis Video Research in the Learning Sciences:101–113

Hancox, D. (2017). From subject to collaborator: transmedia storytelling and social research. Convergence, 23(1), 49–60. http://doi.org/10.1177/1354856516675252

Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P.(2010). Video in Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications. Retrieved from https://market.android.com/details?id=book-MtmViguNi4UC

Heider KG (2009) Ethnographic film: revised edition. University of Texas Press

Henley P (2010) The Adventure of the Real: Jean Rouch and the Craft of Ethnographic Cinema. University of Chicago Press

Jewitt, C. (n.d). An introduction to using video for research - NCRM EPrints Repository. National Centre for Research Methods. Institute for Education, London. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2259/4/NCRM_workingpaper_0312.pdf

Knoblauch H, Tuma R (2011) Videography: An interpretative approach to video-recorded micro-social interaction. The SAGE Handbook of Visual Research Methods :414–430

Koehler D (2012) Documentary and ethnography: exploring ethical fieldwork models. Elon Journal Undergraduate Research in Communications 3(1):53–59 Retrieved from https://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/academics/communications/research/vol3no1/EJSpring12_Full.pdf#page=53i

Lawrence-Lightfoot, S. (2005). Reflections on portraiture: a dialogue between art and science. Qualitative Inquiry: QI, 11(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800404270955

LeBaron, C., Jarzabkowski, P., Pratt, M. G., & Fetzer, G. (2017). An introduction to video methods in organizational research. Organ Res Methods, 21(2), 109442811774564. http://doi.org/10.1177/1094428117745649

Lenette, C., Cox, L., & Brough, M. (2013). Digital storytelling as a social work tool: learning from ethnographic research with women from refugee backgrounds. Br J Soc Work, 45(3), 988–1005. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bct184

Lewis, P. J. (2011). Storytelling as research/research as storytelling. Qual Inq, 17(6), 505–510. http://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411409883

(2011) Anthropological filmmaking: An empirical art. In: The sage handbook of visual research methods. MacDougall, D, pp 99–113

Meadows D (2003) Digital storytelling: research-based practice in new media. Visual Com(2):189–193

Miller K, Zhou X (2007) Learning from classroom video: what makes it compelling and what makes it hard. Video Research in the Learning Sciences:321–334

Newbury, D. (2011). Making arguments with images: Visual scholarship and academic publishing. In Eric Margolis & (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Visual Research Methods . na

Nichols B (2010) Why are ethical issues central to documentary filmmaking? Introduction to Documentary , Second Edition . In: 42–66

Roth W-M (2007) Epistemic mediation: video data as filters for the objectification of teaching by teachers. In: Goldman R, Pea R, Barron B, Derry SJ (eds) Video research in the learning sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Ass Mahwah, NJ, pp 367–382

Sossi, D. (2013). Digital Icarus? Academic Knowledge Construction and Multimodal Curriculum Development, 339

Tobin J, Hsueh Y (2007) The poetics and pleasures of video ethnography of education. Video Research in the Learning Sciences:77–92

Using Film in Ethnographic Field Research - Methods@Manchester - The University of Manchester. (n.d.). Retrieved March 12, 2018, from https://www.methods.manchester.ac.uk/themes/ethnographic-methods/ethnographic-field-research/

Walker, E. B. (2016). Opportunities for Innovation: Game-based Learning in an Engineering Senior Design Course (PhD). Clemson University. Retrieved from http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/1805/

Warmington, P., van Gorp, A., & Grosvenor, I. (2011). Education in motion: uses of documentary film in educational research. Paedagog Hist, 47(4), 457–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2011.588239

Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: an ecological perspective. Am Educ Res J , 40(4), 807–840. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040004807

Download references

There was no external or internal funding for this study.

Availability of data and materials

Data is available in the Mind Map online which visually combines and interprets the full reference section available at the end of the full document.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Graphic Communication, Clemson University, 207 Godfrey Hall, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA

Erica B. Walker

College of Education, Clemson University, 207 Tillman Hall, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA

D. Matthew Boyer

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Article was co-written by both authors and based on previous work by Dr. Walker where Dr. Boyer served in the role of dissertation Committee Chair. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erica B. Walker .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

Neither of the authors have any competing interest regarding this study or publication.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Walker, E.B., Boyer, D.M. Research as storytelling: the use of video for mixed methods research. Video J. of Educ. and Pedagogy 3 , 8 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40990-018-0020-4

Download citation

Received : 10 May 2018

Accepted : 04 July 2018

Published : 28 July 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40990-018-0020-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Mixed methods
• Storytelling
• Video research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.16(4); 2020 Apr

Ten simple rules for innovative dissemination of research

Tony ross-hellauer.

1 Open and Reproducible Research Group, Institute of Interactive Systems and Data Science, Graz University of Technology and Know-Center GmbH, Graz, Austria

Jonathan P. Tennant

2 Center for Research and Interdisciplinarity, University of Paris, Paris, France

Viltė Banelytė

3 Freelance Researcher, Vilnius, Lithuania

Edit Gorogh

4 University and National Library, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

Daniela Luzi

5 Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, National Research Council, Rome, Italy

Peter Kraker

6 Open Knowledge Maps, Vienna, Austria

Lucio Pisacane

Roberta ruggieri, electra sifacaki.

7 National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece

Michela Vignoli

8 Center for Digital Safety and Security, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Vienna, Austria

Author summary

How we communicate research is changing because of new (especially digital) possibilities. This article sets out 10 easy steps researchers can take to disseminate their work in novel and engaging ways, and hence increase the impact of their research on science and society.

Introduction

As with virtually all areas of life, research dissemination has been disrupted by the internet and digitally networked technologies. The last two decades have seen the majority of scholarly journals move online, and scholarly books are increasingly found online as well as in print. However, these traditional communication vehicles have largely retained similar functions and formats during this transition. But digital dissemination can happen in a variety of ways beyond the traditional modes: social media have become more widely used among researchers [ 1 , 2 , 3 ], and the use of blogs and wikis as a specific form of ‘open notebook science’ has been popular for more than a decade [ 4 ].

Professional academic social networks such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu boast millions of users. New online formats for interaction with the wider public, such as TED talks broadcast via YouTube, often receive millions of views. Some researchers have even decided to make all of their research findings public in real time by keeping open notebooks [ 5 , 6 ]. In particular, digital technologies invoke new ways of reaching and involving audiences beyond their usual primary dissemination targets (i.e., other scholars) to actively involve peers or citizens who would otherwise remain out of reach for traditional methods of communication [ 7 ]. Adoption of these outlets and methods can also lead to new cross-disciplinary collaborations, helping to create new research, publication, and funding opportunities [ 8 ].

Beyond the increase in the use of web-based and computational technologies, other trends in research cultures have had a profound effect on dissemination. The push towards greater public understanding of science and research since the 1980s, and an emphasis on engagement and participation of non-research audiences have brought about new forms of dissemination [ 9 ]. These approaches include popular science magazines and science shows on television and the radio. In recent years, new types of events have emerged that aim at involving the general public within the research process itself, including science slams and open lab days. With science cafés and hackerspaces, novel, participatory spaces for research production and dissemination are emerging—both online and offline. Powerful trends towards responsible research and innovation, the increasing globalisation of research, and the emergence and inclusion of new or previously excluded stakeholders or communities are also reshaping the purposes of dissemination as well as the scope and nature of its audiences.

Many now view wider dissemination and public engagement with science to be a fundamental element of open science [ 10 ]. However, there is a paradox at play here, for while there have never been more avenues for the widespread dissemination of research, researchers tend nonetheless to value and focus upon just a few traditional outputs: journal articles, books, and conference presentations [ 11 ].

Following Wilson and colleagues [ 12 ], we here define research dissemination as a planned process that involves consideration of target audiences, consideration of the settings in which research findings are to be received, and communicating and interacting with wider audiences in ways that will facilitate research uptake and understanding. Innovative dissemination, then, means dissemination that goes beyond traditional academic publishing (e.g., academic journals, books, or monographs) and meetings (conferences and workshops) to achieve more widespread research uptake and understanding. Hence, a citizen science project, which involves citizens in data collection but does not otherwise educate them about the research, is not here considered innovative dissemination.

We here present 10 steps researchers can take to embrace innovative dissemination practices in their research, either as individuals or groups ( Fig 1 ). They represent the synthesis of multidimensional research activities undertaken within the OpenUP project ( https://www.openuphub.eu/ ). This European Coordination and Support Action grant award addressed key aspects and challenges of the currently transforming science landscape and proposed recommendations and solutions addressing the needs of researchers, innovators, the public, and funding bodies. The goal is to provide stakeholders (primarily researchers but also intermediaries) with an entry point to innovative dissemination, so that they can choose methods and tools based on their audience, their skills, and their requirements. The advice is directed towards both individual researchers and research teams or projects. It is similar to other entries in the Ten Simple Rules series (e.g., [ 13 , 14 ]). Ultimately, the benefit here for researchers is increased recognition and social impact of their work.

Rule 1: Get the basics right

Despite changes in communication technologies and models, there are some basic organisational aspects of dissemination that remain important: to define objectives, map potential target audience(s), target messages, define mode of communication/engagement, and create a dissemination plan. These might seem a bit obvious or laborious but are critical first steps towards strategically planning a project.

Define objectives

The motivation to disseminate research can come in many forms. You might want to share your findings with wider nonacademic audiences to raise awareness of particular issues or invite audience engagement, participation, and feedback. Start by asking yourself what you want to achieve with your dissemination. This first strategic step will make all other subsequent steps much simpler, as well as guide how you define the success of your activities.

Map your audience

Specify who exactly you want your research results to reach, for which purposes, and what their general characteristics might be (e.g., policy makers, patient groups, non-governmental organisations). Individuals are not just ‘empty vessels’ to be filled with new knowledge, and having a deeper contextual understanding of your audience can make a real difference to the success of your engagement practices. Who is most affected by your research? Who might find it most valuable? What is it that you want them to take away? Get to know your target audiences, their needs and expectations of the research outcomes, as well as their preferred communication channels to develop a detailed understanding of their interests and align your messages and media with their needs and priorities. Keep in mind, too, that intermediaries such as journalists or science communication organisations can support or mediate the dissemination process.

Target/frame your messages

Target and frame the key messages that you want to communicate to specific groups. Think first from the perspective of what they might want or need to hear from you, rather than what you want to tell them. Choosing media and format of your communication strongly depends on your communication objectives, i.e., what you want to achieve. There are many ways to communicate your research; for example, direct messages, blog/vlog posts, tweeting about it, or putting your research on Instagram. Form and content go hand in hand. Engage intermediaries and leverage any relevant existing networks to help amplify messages.

Create a dissemination plan

Many funded research projects require a dissemination plan. However, even if not, the formal exercise of creating a plan at the outset that organises dissemination around distinct milestones in the research life cycle will help you to assign roles, structure activities, as well as plan funds to be allocated in your dissemination. This will ultimately save you time and make future work easier. If working in groups, distribute tasks and effort to ensure regular updates of content targeted to different communities. Engage those with special specific skills in the use and/or development of appropriate communication tools, to help you in using the right language and support you in finding the suitable occasions to reach your identified audience. Research is not linear, however, and so you might find it best to treat the plan as a living document to be flexibly adapted as the direction of research changes.

Rule 2: Keep the right profile

Whether communicating as an individual researcher, a research project, or a research organisation, establishing a prominent and unique identity online and offline is essential for communicating. Use personal websites, social media accounts, researcher identifiers, and academic social networks to help make you and your research visible. When doing this, try to avoid any explicit self-promotion—your personal profile naturally will develop based on your ability to be an effective and impactful communicator.

Academia is a prestige economy, where individual researchers are often evaluated based on their perceived esteem or standing within their communities [ 15 ]. Remaining visible is an essential part of accumulating esteem. An online presence maintained via personal websites, social media accounts (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn), researcher identifiers (e.g., ORCID), and academic social networks (e.g., ResearchGate, institutional researcher profiles) can be a personal calling card, where you can highlight experience and demonstrate your expertise in certain topics. Being active on important mailing lists, forums, and social media is not only a good chance to disseminate your findings to those communities but also offers you the chance to engage with your community and potentially spark new ideas and collaborations.

Using researcher identifiers like ORCID when disseminating outputs will ensure that those outputs will be unambiguously linked back to the individual researcher (and even automatically updated to their ORCID profile). The OpenUP survey showed that nearly half of the respondents (41%) use academic social networks as a medium to disseminate their research, and a quarter of respondents (26%) said that these networks informed their professional work [ 16 ].

Create a brand by giving your project a unique name, ideally with some intuitive relation to the issue you are investigating. Create a striking visual identity, with a compelling logo, core colours, and a project slogan. Create a website that leverages this visual identity and is as simple and intuitive as possible, both in its layout and in the way content is formulated (limit insider jargon). Create associated appropriate social media accounts (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, SlideShare, YouTube) and link to this from the project website. Aim for a sustained presence with new and engaging content to reinforce project messaging, and this can help to establish a core following group or user base within different platforms. Include links to other project online presences such as social media accounts, or a rolling feed of updates if possible. Consider including a blog to disseminate core findings or give important project updates. A periodical newsletter could be released in order to provide project updates and other news, to keep the community informed and activated regarding project issues. Depending on the size of your project and budget, you might want to produce hard copy material such as leaflets or fact sheets, as well as branded giveaways to increase awareness of your project. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, try not to come across as a ‘scientific robot’, and make sure to communicate the more human personality side of research.

Rule 3: Encourage participation

In the age of open research, don’t just broadcast. Invite and engage others to foster participation and collaboration with research audiences. Scholarship is a collective endeavour, and so we should not expect its dissemination to be unidirectional, especially not in the digital age. Dissemination is increasingly done at earlier stages of the research life cycle, and such wider and more interactive engagement is becoming an integral part of the whole research workflow.

Such participative activities can be as creative as you wish; for example, through games, such as Foldit for protein folding ( https://fold.it/portal/ ). You might even find it useful to actively engage ‘citizen scientists’ in research projects; for example, to collect data or analyse findings. Initiatives such as Zooniverse ( https://www.zooniverse.org/ ) serve as great examples of allowing anyone to freely participate in cutting-edge ‘people-powered research’.

Disseminating early and often showcases the progress of your work and demonstrates productivity and engagement as part of an agile development workflow. People like to see progress and react positively to narrative, so give regular updates to followers on social media, for example, blogging or tweeting early research findings for early feedback. Alternatively, involving businesses early on can align research to industry requirements and expectations, thus potentially increasing commercial impact. In any case, active involvement of citizens and other target audiences beyond academia can help increase the societal impact of your research [ 17 ].

Rule 4: Open science for impact

Open science is ‘transparent and accessible knowledge that is shared and developed through collaborative networks’, as defined by one systematic review [ 18 ]. It encompasses a variety of practices covering a range of research processes and outputs, including areas like open access (OA) to publications, open research data, open source software/tools, open workflows, citizen science, open educational resources, and alternative methods for research evaluation including open peer review [ 19 ]. Open science is rooted in principles of equitable participation and transparency, enabling others to collaborate in, contribute to, scrutinise and reuse research, and spread knowledge as widely as possible [ 20 ]. As such, innovative dissemination is a core element of open science.

Embracing open science principles can boost the impact of research. Firstly, OA publications seem to accrue more citations than their closed counterparts, as well as having a variety of possible wider economic and societal benefits [ 21 ]. There are a number of ways to make research papers OA, including at the journal site itself, or self-archiving an accepted manuscript in a repository or personal website.

Disseminating publications as preprints in advance of or parallel to journal submission can increase impact, as measured by relative citation counts [ 22 ]. Very often, traditional publishing takes a long time, with the waiting time between submission and acceptance of a paper being in excess of 100 days [ 23 ]. Preprinting speeds up dissemination, meaning that findings are available sooner for sharing and reuse. Potential platforms for disseminating preprints include the Open Science Framework, biorXiv, or arXiv.

Dissemination of other open science outputs that would usually remain hidden also not only helps to ensure the transparency and increased reproducibility of research [ 24 ], but also means that more research elements are released that can potentially impact upon others by creating network effects through reuse. Making FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) research data and code available enables reuse and remixing of core research outputs, which can also lead to further citations for projects [ 25 , 26 , 27 ]. Published research proposals, protocols, and open notebooks act as advertisements for ongoing research and enable others to reuse methods, exposing the continuous and collaborative nature of scholarship.

To enable reuse, embrace open licenses. When it comes to innovative dissemination, the goal is usually that the materials are accessible to as large an audience as possible. If appropriate open licenses are not used, while materials may be free to access, they cannot be widely used, modified, or shared. The best in this case is the widely adopted Creative Commons licenses, CC BY or CC 0. Variations of these licenses are less permissive and can constrain reuse for commercial or derivative purposes. This limitation, however, prevents the use of materials in many forms of (open) educational resources and other open projects, including Wikipedia. Careful consideration should be given to licensing of materials, depending on what your intended outcomes from the project are (see Rule 1). Research institutes and funding bodies typically have a variety of policies and guidance about the use and licensing of such materials, and should be consulted prior to releasing any materials.

Rule 5: Remix traditional outputs

Traditional research outputs like research articles and books can be complemented with innovative dissemination to boost impact; for example, by preparing accompanying nonspecialist summaries, press releases, blog posts, and visual/video abstracts to better reach your target audiences. Free media coverage can be an easy way to get results out to as many people as possible. There are countless media outlets interested in science-related stories. Most universities and large research organisations have an office for public affairs or communication: liaise with these experts to disseminate research findings widely through public media. Consider writing a press release for manuscripts that have been accepted for publication in journals or books and use sample forms and tools available online to assist you in the process. Some journals also have dedicated press teams that might be able to help you with this.

Another useful tool to disseminate traditional research outputs is to release a research summary document. This one- or two-page document clearly and concisely summarises the key conclusions from a research initiative. It can combine several studies by the same investigator or by a research group and should integrate two main components: key findings and fact sheets (preferably with graphical images to illustrate your point). This can be published on your institutional website as well as on research blogs, thematic hubs, or simply posted on your social media profiles. Other platforms such as ScienceOpen and Kudos allow authors to attach nonspecialist summaries to each of their research papers.

To maximise the impact of your conference presentations or posters, there are several steps that can be taken. For instance, you can upload your slides to a general-purpose repository such as Figshare or Zenodo and add a digital object identifier (DOI) to your presentation. This also makes it easier to integrate such outputs with other services like ORCID. You can also schedule tweets before and during any conferences, and use the conference hashtag to publicise your talk or poster. Finally, you can also add information about your contributions to email signatures or out-of-office messages [ 28 ].

Rule 6: Go live

In-person dissemination does not just have to be at stuffy conferences. With research moving beyond the walls of universities, there are several types of places for more participatory events. Next to classic scientific conferences, different types of events addressing wider audiences have emerged. It is possible to hit the road and take part in science festivals, science slams, TEDx talks, or road shows.

Science slams are short talks in which researchers explain a scientific topic to a typically nonexpert audience. Similar to other short talk formats like TED talks, they lend themselves to being spread over YouTube and other video channels. A prominent example from the German-speaking area is Giulia Enders, who won the first prize in a science slam that took place in 2012 in Berlin. The YouTube video of her fascinating talk about the gut has received over 1 million views. After this success, she got an offer to write a book about the gut and the digestive system, which has since been published and translated into many languages. You never know how these small steps might end up having a wider impact on your research and career.

Another example is Science Shops, small entities which provide independent, participatory research support to civil society. While they are usually linked to universities, hacker and maker spaces tend to be community-run locations, where people with an interest in science, engineering, and art meet and collaborate on projects. Science festivals are community-based showcases of science and technology that take place over large areas for several days or weeks and directly involve researchers and practitioners in public outreach. Less formally, Science Cafés or similar events like Pint of Science are public engagement events in casual settings like pubs and coffeehouses.

Alternatively, for a more personal approach, consider reaching out to key stakeholders who might be affected by your research and requesting a meeting, or participating in relevant calls for policy consultations. Such an approach can be especially powerful in getting the message across to decision-makers and thought-leaders, although the resources required to schedule and potentially travel to such meetings means you should target such activities very carefully. And don’t forget the value of serendipity—who knows who you’ll meet in the course of your everyday meetings and travels. Always be prepared with a 30 second ‘elevator pitch’ that sums up your project in a confident and concise manner—such encounters may be the gateways to greater engagement or opportunities.

Rule 7: Think visual

Dissemination of research is still largely ruled by the written or spoken word. However, there are many ways to introduce visual elements that can act as attractive means to help your audience understand and interpret your research. Disseminate findings through art or multimedia interpretations. Let your artistic side loose or use new visualisation techniques to produce intuitive, attractive data displays. Of course, not everyone is a trained artist, and this will be dependent on your personal skills.

Most obviously, this could take the form of data visualisation. Graphic representation of quantitative information reaches back to ‘earliest map-making and visual depiction’ [ 29 ]. As technologies have advanced, so have our means of visually representing data.

If your data visualisations could be considered too technical and not easily understandable by a nonexpert reader, consider creating an ad hoc image for this document; sometimes this can also take the form of a graphical abstract or infographic. Use online tools to upload a sample of your data and develop smart graphs and infographics (e.g., Infogr.am, Datawrapper, Easel.ly, or Venngage).

Science comics can be used, in the words of McDermott, Partridge, and Bromberg [ 30 ], to ‘communicate difficult ideas efficiently, illuminate obscure concepts, and create a metaphor that can be much more memorable than a straightforward description of the concept itself’. McDermott and colleagues continue that comics can be used to punctuate or introduce papers or presentations and to capture and share the content of conference talks, and that some journals even have a ‘cartoon’ publication category. They advise that such content has a high chance of being ‘virally’ spread via social media.

As previously discussed, you may also consider creating a video abstract for a paper or project. However, as with all possible methods, it is worth considering the relative costs versus benefits of such an approach. Creating a high-quality video might have more impact than, say, a blog post but could be more costly to produce.

Projects have even successfully disseminated scientific findings through art. For example, The Civilians—a New York–based investigative theatre company—received a three-year grant to develop The Great Immensity , a play addressing the complexity of climate change. AstroDance tells the story of the search for gravitational waves through a combination of dance, multimedia, sound, and computer simulations. The annual Dance Your PhD contest, which began in 2007 and is sponsored by Science magazine, even asks scientists to interpret their PhD research as dance. This initiative receives approximately 50 submissions a year, demonstrating the popularity of novel forms of research dissemination.

Rule 8: Respect diversity

The academic discourse on diversity has always included discussions on gender, ethnic and cultural backgrounds, digital literacy, and epistemic, ideological, or economic diversity. An approach that is often taken is to include as many diverse groups into research teams as possible; for example, more women, underrepresented minorities, or persons from developing countries. In terms of scientific communication, however, not only raising awareness about diversity issues but also increasing visibility of underrepresented minorities in research or including more women in science communication teams should be considered, and embedded in projects from the outset. Another important aspect is assessing how the communication messages are framed, and if the chosen format and content is appropriate to address and respect all audiences. Research should reach all who might be affected by it. Respect inclusion in scientific dissemination by creating messages that reflect and respect diversity regarding factors like gender, demography, and ability. Overcoming geographic barriers is also important, as well as the consideration of differences in time zones and the other commitments that participants might have. As part of this, it is a key responsibility to create a healthy and welcoming environment for participation. Having things such as a code of conduct, diversity statement, and contributing guidelines can really help provide this for projects.

The 2017 Progression Framework benchmarking report of the Scientific Council made several recommendations on how to make progress on diversity and inclusion in science: (1) A strategy and action plan for diversity should developed that requires action from all members included and (2) diversity should be included in a wide range of scientific activities, such as building diversity into prizes, awards, or creating guidance on building diversity and inclusion across a range of demographics groups into communications, and building diversity and inclusion into education and training.

Rule 9: Find the right tools

Innovative dissemination practices often require different resources and skills than traditional dissemination methods. As a result of different skills and tools needed, there may be higher costs associated with some aspects of innovative dissemination. You can find tools via a more-complete range of sources, including the OpenUP Hub. The Hub lists a catalogue of innovative dissemination services, organised according to the following categories, with some suggested tools:

• Visualising data: tools to help create innovative visual representations of data (e.g., Nodegoat, DataHero, Plot.ly)
• Sharing notebooks, protocols, and workflows: ways to share outputs that document and share research processes, including notebooks, protocols, and workflows (e.g., HiveBench, Protocols.io, Open Notebook Science Network)
• Crowdsourcing and collaboration: platforms that help researchers and those outside academia to come together to perform research and share ideas (e.g., Thinklab, Linknovate, Just One Giant Lab)
• Profiles and networking: platforms to raise academic profile and find collaboration and funding opportunities with new partners (e.g., Humanities Commons, ORCID, ImpactStory)
• Organiding events: tools to help plan, facilitate, and publicise academic events (e.g., Open Conference Systems, Sched, ConfTool)
• Outreach to wider public: channels to help broadcast your research to audiences beyond academia, including policy makers, young people, industry, and broader society (e.g., Famelab, Kudos, Pint of Science)
• Publishing: platforms, tools, and services to help you publish your research (e.g., Open Science Framework, dokieli, ScienceMatters)
• Archive and share: preprint servers and repositories to help you archive and share your texts, data, software, posters, and more (e.g., BitBucket, GitHub, RunMyCode)

The Hub here represents just one attempt to create a registry of resources related to scholarly communication. A similar project is the 101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication project, which contains different tools and services for all parts of a generalised research workflow, including dissemination and outreach. This can be broadly broken down into services for communication through social media (e.g., Twitter), as well as those designed for sharing of scholarly outputs, including posters and presentations (e.g., Zenodo or Figshare). The Open Science MOOC has also curated a list of resources for its module on Public Engagement with Science, and includes key research articles, organisations, and services to help with wider scientific engagement.

Rule 10: Evaluate, evaluate, evaluate

Assess your dissemination activities. Are they having the right impact? If not, why not? Evaluation of dissemination efforts is an essential part of the process. In order to know what worked and which strategies did not generate the desired outcomes, all the research activities should be rigorously assessed. Such evaluation should be measured via the use of a combination of quantitative and qualitative indicators (which should be already foreseen in the planning stage of dissemination; see Rule 1). Questionnaires, interviews, observations, and assessments could also be used to measure the impact. Assessing and identifying the most successful practices will give you the evidence for the most effective strategies to reach your audience. In addition, the evaluation can help you plan your further budget and minimise the spending and dedicating efforts on ineffective dissemination methods.

Some examples of quantitative indicators include the following:

• Citations of publications;
• alternative metrics related to websites and social media platforms (updates, visits, interactions, likes, and reposts);
• numbers of events held for specific audiences;
• numbers of participants in those events;
• production and circulation of printed materials;
• media coverage (articles in specialised press newsletters, press releases, interviews, etc.); and
• how much time and effort were spent on activities.

Some examples of qualitative indicators include the following:

• Visibility in the social media and attractiveness of website;
• newly established contacts with networks and partners and the outcomes of these contacts;
• feedback from the target groups; and
• share feedback within your group on what dissemination strategies seemed to be the most effective in conveying your messages and reaching your target audiences.

We recognise that researchers are usually already very busy, and we do not seek to pressurise them further by increasing their burdens. Our recommendations, however, come at a time when there are shifting norms in how researchers are expected to engage with society through new technologies. Researchers are now often partially evaluated based on such, or expected to include dissemination plans in grant applications. We also do not want to encourage the further fragmentation of scholarship across different platforms and ‘silos’, and therefore we strongly encourage researchers to be highly strategic in how they engage with different methods of innovative dissemination. We hope that these simple rules provide guidance for researchers and their future projects, especially as the tools and services available evolve through time. Some of these suggestions or platforms might not work across all project types, and it is important for researchers to find which methods work best for them.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to everyone who engaged with the workshops we conducted as part of this grant award.

Funding Statement

This work was partly funded by the OpenUP project, which received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 710722. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

NIJ Brief Highlights Research-Based Findings on Youth and Delinquency

The  National Institute of Justice  (NIJ) has released " Five Things About Youth and Delinquency, " a brief highlighting the latest data and research-based findings on youth and delinquency for identifying strategies to support positive youth development.

The five findings are:

• Youth risk-taking is part of the normative developmental process that continues into early adulthood.
• Engagement in offending tends to increase through adolescence, and then decline.
• Only a small percentage of youth are arrested for any crime, and even fewer are arrested for violent crime.
• Youth arrests for violent offences have declined from historic highs in the mid-1990s.
• The proportion of all violent crime arrests involving youth is significantly lower than that of other age groups, including young adults.

Download Brief

RESOURCES:  

• Read  NIJ's "Five Things" series  for research and evaluation on a variety of topics.
• Follow OJJDP on  X formerly known as Twitter  and  Facebook .

• Environment
• Science & Technology
• Business & Industry
• Health & Public Welfare
• Topics (CFR Indexing Terms)
• Public Inspection
• Presidential Documents
• Document Search
• Advanced Document Search
• Public Inspection Search
• Reader Aids Home
• Office of the Federal Register Announcements
• Using FederalRegister.Gov
• Understanding the Federal Register
• Recent Site Updates
• Federal Register & CFR Statistics
• Videos & Tutorials
• Developer Resources
• Government Policy and OFR Procedures
• Congressional Review
• My Clipboard
• My Comments
• My Subscriptions
• Sign In / Sign Up
• Site Feedback
• Search the Federal Register

This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.

The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.

The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.

Design Updates: As part of our ongoing effort to make FederalRegister.gov more accessible and easier to use we've enlarged the space available to the document content and moved all document related data into the utility bar on the left of the document. Read more in our feature announcement .

Findings of Research Misconduct

A Notice by the Health and Human Services Department on 08/15/2024

This document has been published in the Federal Register . Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

• Document Details Published Content - Document Details Agencies Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Secretary Document Citation 89 FR 66420 Document Number 2024-18289 Document Type Notice Pages 66420-66422 (3 pages) Publication Date 08/15/2024 Published Content - Document Details
• View printed version (PDF)

This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents. This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links has no substantive legal effect.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Supplementary information:.

This feature is not available for this document.

Additional information is not currently available for this document.

• Sharing Enhanced Content - Sharing Shorter Document URL https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2024-18289 Email Email this document to a friend Enhanced Content - Sharing
• Print this document

Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling, reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.

This document is also available in the following formats:

More information and documentation can be found in our developer tools pages .

This PDF is the current document as it appeared on Public Inspection on 08/14/2024 at 8:45 am.

It was viewed 0 times while on Public Inspection.

If you are using public inspection listings for legal research, you should verify the contents of the documents against a final, official edition of the Federal Register. Only official editions of the Federal Register provide legal notice of publication to the public and judicial notice to the courts under 44 U.S.C. 1503 & 1507 . Learn more here .

Document headings vary by document type but may contain the following:

• the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
• the number of the CFR title and the number of each part the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly related to
• the agency docket number / agency internal file number
• the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

See the Document Drafting Handbook for more details.

Department of Health and Human Services

Office of the secretary.

Office of the Secretary, HHS.

Findings of research misconduct have been made against Richard L. Eckert, Ph.D. (Respondent), who was a Professor, Chair of the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Deputy Director of the University of Maryland and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Maryland, Baltimore (UMB). Respondent engaged in research misconduct in research supported by U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) funds, specifically National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), grants R01 CA211909, R01 CA184027, R01 CA131074, R01 CA131064, R01 CA092201, R01 CA109196, P30 CA134274, and P30 CA043703, National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), NIH, grants R21 AR065266, R01 AR046494, R01 AR053851, R01 AR060388, P30 AR039750, R01 AR041456, R01 AR049713, and R01 AR045357, National Eye Institute (NEI), NIH, grants P30 EY011373 and T32 EY007157, and National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), NIH, grant R01 GM043751. The questioned research was included in two (2) grant applications submitted for PHS funds, specifically R01 CA233450-01 and R01 CA233450-01A1 submitted to NCI, NIH. The administrative actions, including debarment for a period of eight (8) years, were implemented beginning on August 1, 2024, and are detailed below.

Sheila Garrity, JD, MPH, MBA, Director, Office of Research Integrity, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Suite 240, Rockville, MD 20852, (240) 453-8200.

Notice is hereby given that the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has taken final action in the following case:

Richard L. Eckert, Ph.D., University of Maryland, Baltimore (UMB): Based on the report of an investigation conducted by UMB and additional analysis conducted by ORI in its oversight review, ORI found that Dr. Richard L. Eckert (Respondent), former Professor, Chair of the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Deputy Director of the University of Maryland and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, UMB, engaged in research misconduct in research supported by PHS funds, specifically NCI, NIH, grants R01 CA211909, R01 CA184027, R01 CA131074, R01 CA131064, R01 CA092201, R01 CA109196, P30 CA134274, and P30 CA043703, NIAMS, NIH, grants R21 AR065266, R01 AR046494, R01 AR053851, R01 AR060388, P30 AR039750, R01 AR041456, R01 AR049713, and R01 AR045357, NEI, NIH, grants P30 EY011373 and T32 EY007157, and NIGMS, NIH, grant R01 GM043751. The questioned research was included in two (2) grant applications submitted for PHS funds, specifically R01 CA233450-01 and R01 CA233450-01A1 submitted to NCI, NIH.

ORI found that Respondent engaged in research misconduct by intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly falsifying and/or fabricating data in the following thirteen (13) published papers and two (2) PHS grant applications:

• Inhibition of YAP function overcomes BRAF inhibitor resistance in melanoma cancer stem cells. Oncotarget. 2017 Nov 22; 8(66):110257-110272. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.22628 (hereafter referred to as “ Oncotarget 2017”).
• The Bmi-1 helix-turn and ring finger domains are required for Bmi-1 antagonism of (-) epigallocatechin-3-gallate suppression of skin cancer cell survival. Cell Signal. 2015 Jul;27(7):1336-44. doi: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2015.03.021 (hereafter referred to as “ Cell Signal 2015”). Erratum in: Cell Signal. 2021 Jun;82:109952. doi: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2021.109952.
• P38δ regulates p53 to control p21Cip1 expression in human epidermal keratinocytes. J Biol Chem. 2014 Apr 18; 289(16):11443-11453. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M113.543165 (hereafter referred to as “ J Biol Chem. 2014”). ( print page 66421)
• Methylosome protein 50 and PKCδ/p38δ protein signaling control keratinocyte proliferation via opposing effects on p21Cip1 gene expression. J Biol Chem. 2015 May 22;290(21):13521-30. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M115.642868 (hereafter referred to as “ J Biol Chem. 2015”).
• Transamidase site-targeted agents alter the conformation of the transglutaminase cancer stem cell survival protein to reduce GTP binding activity and cancer stem cell survival. Oncogene. 2017 May 25;36(21):2981-2990. doi: 10.1038/onc.2016.452 (hereafter referred to as “ Oncogene 2017”). Erratum in: Oncogene. 2021 Apr;40(13):2479-2481. doi: 10.1038/s41388-021-01709-5.
• Suppression of AP1 transcription factor function in keratinocyte suppresses differentiation. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36941. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036941 (hereafter referred to as “ PLoS One 2012”). Retraction in: PLoS One. 2021 Feb 11;16(2):e0247222. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247222.
• Suppressing AP1 factor signaling in the suprabasal epidermis produces a keratoderma phenotype. J Invest Dermatol. 2015 Jan;135(1):170-180. doi: 10.1038/jid.2014.310 (hereafter referred to as “ J Invest Dermatol. 2015”). Erratum in: J Invest Dermatol. 2021 Jul; 141(7):1862. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2021.05.008.
• Protein kinase C (PKC) delta suppresses keratinocyte proliferation by increasing p21(Cip1) level by a KLF4 transcription factor-dependent mechanism. J Biol Chem. 2011 Aug 19; 286(33):28772-28782. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M110.205245 (hereafter referred to as “ J Biol Chem. 2011”).
• The Bmi-1 polycomb protein antagonizes the (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate-dependent suppression of skin cancer cell survival. Carcinogene sis. 2010 Mar;31(3):496-503. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgp314 (hereafter referred to as “ Carcinogenesis 2010”).
• PKC-delta and -eta, MEKK-1, MEK-6, MEK-3, and p38-delta are essential mediators of the response of normal human epidermal keratinocytes to differentiating agents. J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Aug;130(8):2017-30. doi: 10.1038/jid.2010.108 (hereafter referred to as “ J Invest Dermatol. 2010”).
• Sulforaphane suppresses PRMT5/MEP50 function in epidermal squamous cell carcinoma leading to reduced tumor formation. Carcinogenesis. 2017 Aug 1;38(8):827-836. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgx044 (hereafter referred to as “ Carcinogenesis 2017”). Erratum in: Carcinogenesis. 2023 Oct 20;44(7):626-627. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgad044.
• Localization of the TIG3 transglutaminase interaction domain and demonstration that the amino-terminal region is required for TIG3 function as a keratinocyte differentiation regulator. J Invest Dermatol. 2008 Mar;128(3):517-29. doi: 10.1038/sj.jid.5701035 (hereafter referred to as “ J Invest Dermatol. 2008”).
• Transglutaminase interaction with α6/β4-integrin stimulates YAP1-Dependent ΔNp63α stabilization and leads to enhanced cancer stem cell survival and tumor formation. Cancer Res. 2016 Dec 15;76(24):7265-7276. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-2032 (hereafter referred to as “ Cancer Res. 2016”).
• R01 CA233450-01, “Sulforaphane suppression of PRMT5 epigenetics to reduce cancer stem cell survival,” submitted to NCI, NIH, on 01/26/2018, administratively withdrawn by NCI on 07/01/2020
• R01 CA233450-01A1, “Sulforaphane suppression of PRMT5 epigenetics to reduce cancer stem cell survival,” submitted to NCI, NIH, on 10/30/2018, administratively withdrawn by NCI on 03/01/2021

Specifically, ORI found that Respondent intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly falsified and/or fabricated Western blot image data and microscopy image data by:

• using images representing unrelated experiments, with or without manipulating them, and falsely relabeling them as data representing different proteins and/or experimental results as follows:

—In Figure 3F of Oncotarget 2017, the bands in rows 4 and 7 of the A375-PLX-R right-side panel, representing expression of TAZ- P (row 4) and ERK1/2 (row 7), are falsified and/or fabricated by using unrelated bands from a source image representing different proteins in an unrelated experiment

—In Figure 2B of J Biol Chem. 2014, the bands in row 2 in the top panel, representing MEK3 expression in normal human keratinocytes (KERn) infected with Ad5-EV, Ad5-MEK3, and Ad5-PKCδ (from left to right), are falsified and/or fabricated by compiling unrelated bands from a source image representing p44 expression in an unrelated experiment

—In Figure 2B of J Biol Chem. 2014, the bands in row 3 in the top panel, representing p38δ expression in KERn infected with Ad5-EV, Ad5-MEK3, and Ad5-PKCδ (from left to right), are falsified and/or fabricated by compiling unrelated bands from a source image representing β-actin expression in an unrelated experiment

—In Figure 1B of J Biol Chem. 2015, the bands in rows 1-3 in the upper panel, representing expression of MEP50 (row 1), FLAG (row 2), and β-actin (row 3), are falsified and/or fabricated by compiling different bands from source images representing expression of different proteins in unrelated experiments

—In Figure 7C of J Biol Chem. 2011, the bands in row 2 in the right panel, representing p21 Cip1 expression under treatments of Control-siRNA or hKLF4-siRNA, are falsified and/or fabricated by using unrelated bands from a source image representing p21 expression in cells treated with Ad5-EV or Ad5-PKCd

—In Figure 1B of PLoS One 2012, the bands in row 1, representing TAM67-FLAG expression, are falsified and/or fabricated by using unrelated bands from a source image representing CyclinA expression

—In Figure 2C of PLoS One 2012, the bands in rows 3 and 4, representing negative expression of junB (row 3) and junD (row 4), are falsified and/or fabricated by using blank areas that were far from the target molecular weight in a source image

—In Figure 6a of J Invest Dermatol. 2015, the bands 1-4 in the bottom row, representing β-Actin expression under treatments of Loricrin, TAM67-rTA, and/or Dox, are falsified and/or fabricated by:

—➢ using 3 bands from a source image representing β-actin expression in an unrelated experiment for bands 1-3

—➢ duplicating band 3 to create band 4

—In Figure 1B of Carcinogenesis 2010, the bands in rows 1, 2, and 5 in the left panel, representing expression of Ezh2 (row 1), H3 K27-3M (row 2), and β-actin (row 5) in two different cell types treated with 60 µM EGCG, are falsified and/or fabricated by using unrelated bands from a source image representing expression of the same proteins under an unrelated experiment

—In Carcinogenesis 2010, the bands in row 3 in the right panel of Figure 1B and the bands 1-5 in row 3 in the upper panel of Figure 2A are falsified and/or fabricated by using unrelated bands from a source image. Specifically:

—➢ the bands 1-4 in the upper panel of Figure 2A, representing Ezh2 expression treated with 0, 10, 20, and 40 µM EGCG are used from the bands representing the same protein ( print page 66422) but treated with different doses of EGCG in the source image

—➢ the bands 1 and 5 in the upper panel of Figure 2A, representing Ezh2 expression, are reused and relabeled in the bands in Figure 1B, row 3 in the right panel to represent Suz12 expression

—In Figure 4A of Carcinogenesis 2010, the bands in rows 6 and 7, representing expression of cyclin E (row 6) and cyclin A (row 7) in cells treated with 60 µm EGCG plus other reagents, are falsified and/or fabricated by reusing and relabeling the bands from a source image representing cyclin E expression in cells treated with 150 µm EGCG plus other reagents

—In Figure 7a of J Invest Dermatol. 2008:

—➢ bands 1 and 5 (including the empty lanes) in the COX4 panel, representing expression of COX4 treated with EV (band 1) and TIG3 1-134 (band 5), are falsified and/or fabricated by reusing a band labeled as TGI C377 sample 3 from the primary data

—➢ band 8 (including the empty lanes) in the Cytochrome c panel, representing expression of Cytochrome c treated with TIG3 124-164, is falsified and/or fabricated by using an unrelated band from unknown source

• reusing the same source images, with or without manipulating them to conceal their similarities, and falsely relabeling them as data representing different proteins or experimental results as follows:

—In Figure 2 of Cell Signal 2015, two control samples in the bottom panel, representing cells in tAd5-FLAG-hBmiΔRF condition (left) and tAd5-FLAG-hBmi-1ΔHT condition (right), are reused from different fields of a same source image

—In J Biol Chem. 2014, Figure 2B, bands 2 and 3 in row 1 of 3rd panel, representing ATF2- P expression, and Figure 6C, bands 1 and 2 in row 2 of the 3rd panel, representing p38α expression, are identical

—In J Biol Chem. 2014, Figure 2C, bands 1 and 3 in row 3 of the upper panel, representing MEK3 expression, and Figure 6C, bands 1 and 2 in row 2 of the top panel, representing p38α expression, are identical

—In Figure 3C of Oncogene 2017, band 9, representing TG2 expression treated with total CP4d, is falsified and/or fabricated by reusing and relabeling band 3, representing TG2 expression treated with NC9 (total) in the same figure

—In Carcinogenesis 2010, Figure 3C, the bands in row 2, representing β-actin expression, and Figure 4C, the bands in row 3, representing procaspase 9 expression, are identical

—In Figure 7b of J Invest Dermatol. 2010, the bands in the upper panel, representing expression of MEKK1 and its β-Actin control, are falsified and/or fabricated by reusing and relabeling the bands in the middle panel, representing expression of MEK6 and its

—β-Actin control in the same figure

—In Figure 1D of Carcinogenesis 2017, Figure 5B of R01 CA233450-01 and Figure 3B of R01 CA233450-01A1, the bands in rows 3 in both the upper and bottom panels, representing H4 expression, are falsified and/or fabricated by reusing and relabeling the same source images that are used for the bands in row 2 in Figure 3J of Carcinogenesis 2017, representing PRMT5 expression

—In Figure 1c of J Invest Dermatol. 2008, the background area between molecular weight 20-45 in the TIG3 (41-164) lanes of the right panel is falsified and/or fabricated by reusing and relabeling the background area of TIG3 WT group with flipping

—In Figure 1c of J Invest Dermatol. 2008, the bands in lanes 7-8 of the left panel, representing expression of TIG3 monomer under TIG3 (100-164) condition, are falsified and/or fabricated by reusing and relabeling the bands in lanes 9-10 of the left panel, representing expression of TIG3 monomer under TIG3 (41-164) condition

—In Cancer Res. 2016, bands 2-3 in the bottom row in Figure 3C, representing β-actin expression treated with Integrin α6-siRNA (band 2) and Integrin β4-siRNA (band 3), and bands 1-2 in the bottom row in Figure 3D, representing β-actin expression treated with Control-siRNA (band 1) and FAK-siRNA (band 2), are identical

• manipulating the data to exclude the band from a source image to falsely show a favorable result in Figure 2C of PLoS One 2012 by erasing the band in the left lane of the top row to falsely represent a lack of TAM67-FLAG expression

Respondent entered into a Voluntary Exclusion Agreement (Agreement) and voluntarily agreed to the following:

(1) Respondent will exclude himself voluntarily for a period of eight (8) years beginning on August 1, 2024 (the “Exclusion Period”) from any contracting or subcontracting with any agency of the United States Government and from eligibility for or involvement in nonprocurement or procurement transactions referred to as “covered transactions” in 2 CFR parts 180 and 376 (collectively the “Debarment Regulations”).

(2) During the Exclusion Period, Respondent will not apply for, permit his name to be used on an application for, receive, or be supported by funds of the United States Government and its agencies made available through contracts, subcontracts, or covered transactions.

(3) During the Exclusion Period, Respondent will exclude himself voluntarily from serving in any advisory or consultant capacity to PHS including, but not limited to, service on any PHS advisory committee, board, and/or peer review committee.

(4) Respondent will request that the following papers be corrected or retracted:

• Oncotarget 2017 Nov 22;8(66):110257-110272. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.22628.
• J Biol Chem. 2014 Apr 18;289(16):11443-11453. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M113.543165.
• J Biol Chem. 2015 May 22;290(21):13521-30. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M115.642868.
• J Biol Chem. 2011 Aug 19;286(33):28772-28782. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M110.205245.
• Carcinogenesis 2010 Mar;31(3):496-503. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgp314.
• J Invest Dermatol. 2008 Mar; 128(3):517-29. doi: l 0.1038/sj.jid.5701035.
• J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Aug;130(8):2017-30. doi: 10.1038/jid.2010.108.
• Cancer Res. 2016 Dec 15;76(24):7265-7276. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-2032.

Respondent will copy ORI and the Research Integrity Officer at UMB on the correspondence with the journals.

Dated: August 12, 2024.

Sheila Garrity,

Director, Office of Research Integrity, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health.

[ FR Doc. 2024-18289 Filed 8-14-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4150-31-P

• Executive Orders

Reader Aids

Information.

• About This Site
• Legal Status
• Accessibility
• No Fear Act
• Continuity Information

Aug. 12, 2024

What the researchers say

Why it matters.

• Alzheimer's
• Health Sciences Research
• School of Medicine
• Woodruff Health Sciences Center

Recent News

Download emory news photo.

By downloading Emory news media, you agree to the following terms of use:

Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License

By exercising the Licensed Rights (defined below), You accept and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License ("Public License"). To the extent this Public License may be interpreted as a contract, You are granted the Licensed Rights in consideration of Your acceptance of these terms and conditions, and the Licensor grants You such rights in consideration of benefits the Licensor receives from making the Licensed Material available under these terms and conditions.

Section 1 – Definitions.

• Adapted Material   means material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights that is derived from or based upon the Licensed Material and in which the Licensed Material is translated, altered, arranged, transformed, or otherwise modified in a manner requiring permission under the Copyright and Similar Rights held by the Licensor. For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image.
• Copyright and Similar Rights   means copyright and/or similar rights closely related to copyright including, without limitation, performance, broadcast, sound recording, and Sui Generis Database Rights, without regard to how the rights are labeled or categorized. For purposes of this Public License, the rights specified in Section   2(b)(1)-(2)   are not Copyright and Similar Rights.
• Effective Technological Measures   means those measures that, in the absence of proper authority, may not be circumvented under laws fulfilling obligations under Article 11 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty adopted on December 20, 1996, and/or similar international agreements.
• Exceptions and Limitations   means fair use, fair dealing, and/or any other exception or limitation to Copyright and Similar Rights that applies to Your use of the Licensed Material.
• Licensed Material   means the artistic or literary work, database, or other material to which the Licensor applied this Public License.
• Licensed Rights   means the rights granted to You subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, which are limited to all Copyright and Similar Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material and that the Licensor has authority to license.
• Licensor   means the individual(s) or entity(ies) granting rights under this Public License.
• Share   means to provide material to the public by any means or process that requires permission under the Licensed Rights, such as reproduction, public display, public performance, distribution, dissemination, communication, or importation, and to make material available to the public including in ways that members of the public may access the material from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.
• Sui Generis Database Rights   means rights other than copyright resulting from Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, as amended and/or succeeded, as well as other essentially equivalent rights anywhere in the world.
• You   means the individual or entity exercising the Licensed Rights under this Public License.   Your   has a corresponding meaning.

Section 2 – Scope.

• reproduce and Share the Licensed Material, in whole or in part; and
• produce and reproduce, but not Share, Adapted Material.
• Exceptions and Limitations . For the avoidance of doubt, where Exceptions and Limitations apply to Your use, this Public License does not apply, and You do not need to comply with its terms and conditions.
• Term . The term of this Public License is specified in Section   6(a) .
• Media and formats; technical modifications allowed . The Licensor authorizes You to exercise the Licensed Rights in all media and formats whether now known or hereafter created, and to make technical modifications necessary to do so. The Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any right or authority to forbid You from making technical modifications necessary to exercise the Licensed Rights, including technical modifications necessary to circumvent Effective Technological Measures. For purposes of this Public License, simply making modifications authorized by this Section   2(a)(4)   never produces Adapted Material.
• Offer from the Licensor – Licensed Material . Every recipient of the Licensed Material automatically receives an offer from the Licensor to exercise the Licensed Rights under the terms and conditions of this Public License.
• No downstream restrictions . You may not offer or impose any additional or different terms or conditions on, or apply any Effective Technological Measures to, the Licensed Material if doing so restricts exercise of the Licensed Rights by any recipient of the Licensed Material.
• No endorsement . Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be construed as permission to assert or imply that You are, or that Your use of the Licensed Material is, connected with, or sponsored, endorsed, or granted official status by, the Licensor or others designated to receive attribution as provided in Section   3(a)(1)(A)(i) .

Other rights .

• Moral rights, such as the right of integrity, are not licensed under this Public License, nor are publicity, privacy, and/or other similar personality rights; however, to the extent possible, the Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any such rights held by the Licensor to the limited extent necessary to allow You to exercise the Licensed Rights, but not otherwise.
• Patent and trademark rights are not licensed under this Public License.
• To the extent possible, the Licensor waives any right to collect royalties from You for the exercise of the Licensed Rights, whether directly or through a collecting society under any voluntary or waivable statutory or compulsory licensing scheme. In all other cases the Licensor expressly reserves any right to collect such royalties.

Section 3 – License Conditions.

Your exercise of the Licensed Rights is expressly made subject to the following conditions.

Attribution .

If You Share the Licensed Material, You must:

• identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if designated);
• a copyright notice;
• a notice that refers to this Public License;
• a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties;
• a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable;
• indicate if You modified the Licensed Material and retain an indication of any previous modifications; and
• indicate the Licensed Material is licensed under this Public License, and include the text of, or the URI or hyperlink to, this Public License.
• You may satisfy the conditions in Section   3(a)(1)   in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in which You Share the Licensed Material. For example, it may be reasonable to satisfy the conditions by providing a URI or hyperlink to a resource that includes the required information.
• If requested by the Licensor, You must remove any of the information required by Section   3(a)(1)(A)   to the extent reasonably practicable.

Section 4 – Sui Generis Database Rights.

Where the Licensed Rights include Sui Generis Database Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material:

• for the avoidance of doubt, Section   2(a)(1)   grants You the right to extract, reuse, reproduce, and Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database, provided You do not Share Adapted Material;
• if You include all or a substantial portion of the database contents in a database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights, then the database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights (but not its individual contents) is Adapted Material; and
• You must comply with the conditions in Section   3(a)   if You Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database.

Section 5 – Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liability.

• Unless otherwise separately undertaken by the Licensor, to the extent possible, the Licensor offers the Licensed Material as-is and as-available, and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Licensed Material, whether express, implied, statutory, or other. This includes, without limitation, warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement, absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the presence or absence of errors, whether or not known or discoverable. Where disclaimers of warranties are not allowed in full or in part, this disclaimer may not apply to You.
• To the extent possible, in no event will the Licensor be liable to You on any legal theory (including, without limitation, negligence) or otherwise for any direct, special, indirect, incidental, consequential, punitive, exemplary, or other losses, costs, expenses, or damages arising out of this Public License or use of the Licensed Material, even if the Licensor has been advised of the possibility of such losses, costs, expenses, or damages. Where a limitation of liability is not allowed in full or in part, this limitation may not apply to You.
• The disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liability provided above shall be interpreted in a manner that, to the extent possible, most closely approximates an absolute disclaimer and waiver of all liability.

Section 6 – Term and Termination.

• This Public License applies for the term of the Copyright and Similar Rights licensed here. However, if You fail to comply with this Public License, then Your rights under this Public License terminate automatically.

Where Your right to use the Licensed Material has terminated under Section   6(a) , it reinstates:

• automatically as of the date the violation is cured, provided it is cured within 30 days of Your discovery of the violation; or
• upon express reinstatement by the Licensor.
• For the avoidance of doubt, the Licensor may also offer the Licensed Material under separate terms or conditions or stop distributing the Licensed Material at any time; however, doing so will not terminate this Public License.
• Sections   1 ,   5 ,   6 ,   7 , and   8   survive termination of this Public License.

Section 7 – Other Terms and Conditions.

• The Licensor shall not be bound by any additional or different terms or conditions communicated by You unless expressly agreed.
• Any arrangements, understandings, or agreements regarding the Licensed Material not stated herein are separate from and independent of the terms and conditions of this Public License.

Section 8 – Interpretation.

• For the avoidance of doubt, this Public License does not, and shall not be interpreted to, reduce, limit, restrict, or impose conditions on any use of the Licensed Material that could lawfully be made without permission under this Public License.
• To the extent possible, if any provision of this Public License is deemed unenforceable, it shall be automatically reformed to the minimum extent necessary to make it enforceable. If the provision cannot be reformed, it shall be severed from this Public License without affecting the enforceability of the remaining terms and conditions.
• No term or condition of this Public License will be waived and no failure to comply consented to unless expressly agreed to by the Licensor.
• Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be interpreted as a limitation upon, or waiver of, any privileges and immunities that apply to the Licensor or You, including from the legal processes of any jurisdiction or authority.

Creative Commons is not a party to its public licenses. Notwithstanding, Creative Commons may elect to apply one of its public licenses to material it publishes and in those instances will be considered the “Licensor.” The text of the Creative Commons public licenses is dedicated to the public domain under the   CC0 Public Domain Dedication . Except for the limited purpose of indicating that material is shared under a Creative Commons public license or as otherwise permitted by the Creative Commons policies published at   creativecommons.org/policies , Creative Commons does not authorize the use of the trademark “Creative Commons” or any other trademark or logo of Creative Commons without its prior written consent including, without limitation, in connection with any unauthorized modifications to any of its public licenses or any other arrangements, understandings, or agreements concerning use of licensed material. For the avoidance of doubt, this paragraph does not form part of the public licenses.

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

•   Facebook
•   Twitter
•   Linkedin
•   Digg
•   Reddit
•   Pinterest
•   Email

Latest Earthquakes |    Chat Share Social Media  

USGS Friday's Findings - August 23, 2024

Indigenous knowledge: providing insight into climate change.

Title:  Indigenous Knowledge: Providing Insight into Climate Change

Date:   August 23, 2024, at 2:00-2:30 pm Eastern/11:00 -11:30 am Pacific 

Speaker:  Nicole Herman-Mercer, Research Social Scientist, USGS Southwest Climate Adaptation Science Center and Advisor, Department of the Interior - Indigenous Knowledges Coordination Committee  

Indigenous Knowledge can provide insights into past conditions and uncover ecosystem level relationships among plants, animals, and humans that can help scientists better understand climate impacts on humans and the environment and identify sustainable pathways for climate adaptation.  Including Indigenous Knowledge in USGS science must be done in a respectful, equitable, and reciprocal way guided by Indigenous leadership and oversight.  The Arctic Rivers Project provides an example of a research project seeking to include Indigenous Knowledge to improve understanding of ongoing and possible future climate changes in Northern regions.  Indigenous communities in Alaska and Canada rely upon rivers to support diverse and complex social, subsistence, and economic systems. As the Arctic and its rivers continue to warm, the ultimate impacts on people, their fisheries and winter travel corridors are highly uncertain. This talk will focus on the approaches of the Arctic Rivers Project to increase collective understanding of the impacts of climate change on rivers, fish, and Indigenous communities across Alaska and the Yukon River basin with Indigenous leadership and guidance.  Through engagement with Indigenous communities, the results of climate and river models are being combined with community-level perspectives, experiences, and knowledge to craft storylines of Arctic change and community resilience. This approach seeks to make quantitative modeling results of potential future conditions more tangible and applicable to community-level adaptation planning.

Get Our News

These items are in the RSS feed format (Really Simple Syndication) based on categories such as topics, locations, and more. You can install and RSS reader browser extension, software, or use a third-party service to receive immediate news updates depending on the feed that you have added. If you click the feed links below, they may look strange because they are simply XML code. An RSS reader can easily read this code and push out a notification to you when something new is posted to our site.

Biology News

Climate Adaptation Science Centers News

Climate News

Ecosystems Mission Area News

Ecosystems News

Watch CBS News

Global cancer deaths for men projected to rise 93% by 2050, study finds

Looks and Gaming: Who and Why?

We investigate the relationship between physical attractiveness and the time people devote to video/computer gaming. Average American teenagers spend 2.6% of their waking hours gaming, while for adults this figure is 2.7%. Using the American Add Health Study, we show that adults who are better-looking have more close friends. Arguably, gaming is costlier for them, and they thus engage in less of it. Physically attractive teens are less likely to engage in gaming at all, whereas unattractive teens who do game spend more time each week on it than other gamers. Attractive adults are also less likely than others to spend any time gaming; and if they do, they spend less time on it than less attractive adults. Using the longitudinal nature of the Add Health Study, we find supportive evidence that these relationships are causal for adults: good looks decrease gaming time, not vice-versa.

We are grateful for helpful comments from Sarah Jewell, Simonetta Longhi, Samantha Rawlings, Rachel Scarfe, Dominik Schreyer, and Paul Telemo. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

• data appendix

More from NBER

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .