This is a very interesting question - many thanls also for the two very stimulating references.

I am working here, in Paris, with a reserach group on similar questions: since 2001, we are filming researchers in human and social sciences (conferences, seminars, intefrviews and field works) in order to republish these material for research, education, communication, etc.

One of the goals of republishing ("rewriting") original records is indeed to produce short videos offering a broader public a more comprehensive access to a given scientific problem and/or to illustrate, to exemplify (analogically to "still images") a (digital) textual publication.

In fact, I think that there are several interrelated questions (problems) to be considered such as, for instance:

a) the collection and archiving of audiovisual data documenting a scientific heritage;

b) the indexing and preservation of those data;

c) the "exploitation" of these archived data in form of scenarised and edited films (short films, web-documentaries, hypermedia scientific publications, etc.).

It's a good idea, but it first needs a well-defined goal.

It's a good training for us scientists to increase our communication resources, and yes, sometimes papers or articles are very cold and one misses a picture of the experimental arrangement, or a clearer explanation of the experimental process.

There are some pros and cons I've perceived, precisely based on the lobsters video you mention:

1. Videos sometimes have the problem of being a SLOW mechanism when SEARCHING thousands or hundreds of papers. Or making a robot which automatically searches information from abstracts, of course, it feels more feasible that such robot searches in abstracts, we don't have yet the technology of "searching a concept inside a video".

2. Videos might be a good resource perhaps if they add a new way of presenting DYNAMICS, because currently we present changes it time mostly through cold graphics, but slow motion videos might help to even to provide new data or new sources for extension. For example, if you are trying to understand precisely the change from one state to another in time, videos might be excellent.

3. There's the risk of losing the goal, making the video too funny, or trying to talk too much about irrelevant things, such as the research team or context, making the video irrelevantly long. For example, the lobsters video has too much irrelevant words, and tries also to be funny, but in such purpose it is changing its goal. The problem of changing the goal, is, of course, time, if we realize it doesn't "push" or "accelerate" the research.

4. I had recently a discussion with a friend of mine, the physicist and researcher Antonio Sánchez. He pointed out that people learn differently. So that, for example, I didn't quite get the purpose of the this lobsters' research when I watched the video. It seemed a funny thing, not so serious, made by young enthusiasts, but I didn't get the point. BUT when I read the abstract, in a few seconds, I understood what it was all about. Some people understand better visually, some people understand better reading, some people understand better listening. So videos as complements to other ways of presenting the information, might be useful, but the written abstract must necessarily continue existing. Some people grasp quite much more information reading, and a lot faster (SEVERAL TIMES FASTER), than through a video, for example if the've followed a fast-reading-program. In a video, you depend on the rythm of the narrator.

So, I think it might be a good idea, but the goal must be specific: "what information can the video provide, that would be too cold or not quite informative with graphics? The effort in making a good video will really imply results in better understanding from potential readers?" and questions like those.

Those are my thoughts about it, I hope it was helpful. Thanks for your question, best regards!

I often do. Making posters and a short video would be so effective and it works wonder.

This is a very interesting question - many thanls also for the two very stimulating references.

I am working here, in Paris, with a reserach group on similar questions: since 2001, we are filming researchers in human and social sciences (conferences, seminars, intefrviews and field works) in order to republish these material for research, education, communication, etc.

One of the goals of republishing ("rewriting") original records is indeed to produce short videos offering a broader public a more comprehensive access to a given scientific problem and/or to illustrate, to exemplify (analogically to "still images") a (digital) textual publication.

In fact, I think that there are several interrelated questions (problems) to be considered such as, for instance:

a) the collection and archiving of audiovisual data documenting a scientific heritage;

b) the indexing and preservation of those data;

c) the "exploitation" of these archived data in form of scenarised and edited films (short films, web-documentaries, hypermedia scientific publications, etc.).

Anyone knows JOVE? JoVE publishes peer-reviewed scientific video protocols. It is much better than regular papers.

Very interesting question - and answers up to now.

(1) With the right metadata attached (DOI, keywords) to the video it shouldn't be a problem locating it and connecting it to the content of the paper.

(2) Don't rely on proprietary or HW formats (3,5" disquettes, CD-ROMs), which might turn out to be difficult to read in the future. That's b) in Peter's response, I think.

(3) Also don't rely on streaming sites that may disappear for some reason.

(4) Whereas there is a long tradition of academic writing among scholars, something similar is missing for multimedia authoring. We have to learn how to convey knowledge and concepts in videos effectively. The studies by Richard E. Mayer and other scholars presenting evidence for good practices on e-learning and multimedia learning will probably be very helpful here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_E._Mayer

As Marcelo Silva pointed out Jove is a peer reviewed scientific video journal. It is excellent in watching protocols that one has to incorporate into the lab. It has helped me personally in learning how to dissect out the Dentate Gyrus from mouse Hippoacampus. The ease of going through a written article while commuting back home cannot be disregarded, but learning through observation is our species knack which Jove fulfills.

Plus the search criterion that was mentioned, Jove has the written e-article alongside its videos. Hence it is easily integrated into the Google meta search base engine.

Historically as well as from personal experience, many scientists and researchers have brilliant ideas and pertinent questions, but are hampered by a lack of "audio-visual presence", yet when their articles are written, they are nothing short of wondrous. Possibly another drawback to trying to get everybody to describe their work on video.

Thanks to everyone who responded so far with insights and viewpoints.

I linked the lobster video to illustrate efforts to encourage scientists to use video to explain their research. I did not offer it as an example of a good video abstract, necessarily, although this is the one that won the contest (and apparently met the judging criteria best).

In designing a video abstract for a technical paper, however, I think one must identify the target audience. You want to produce a version for technical audiences (which would possibly be posted on the journal website) and perhaps another for a general audience (which might be less "serious" and posted on a video-sharing site).

A technical audience likely won't appreciate frivolity and just want the facts. JoVE videos are good examples of the technical type of video abstract, which researchers find very useful to learn protocols, and being peer-reviewed lends them credibility. For a non-specialist audience, the video abstract will need to emphasize something about the topic that is interesting, odd, or relevant to them personally to keep their attention. I think the lobster video falls into this category.

One drawback to getting scientists to do videos about their research is that the effort is not seen as counting toward their publication record or tenure. So why bother? On the other hand, if one can list the video as a peer-reviewed publication, then it may be worth the effort. I've produced several videos, which went through an extensive peer/policy-review process within the government agency I worked for; they were then published and posted online on the agency's website. I now list those videos on my CV, with a hyperlink to them, of course. Unfortunately, there are not yet many outlets (other than JoVE) that publish peer-reviewed videos.

Another drawback is that some authors may find it difficult to make a video abstract or simply don't like appearing on camera. I've been exploring alternatives, such as a slide show (an approach some journals are offering to authors). I've recently created a "visual abstract" of a paper using the Prezi platform. The journal liked it and is featuring it on their website: http://www.newphytologist.org/news/view/25

Most authors would be able to produce a visual, interactive abstract like that. I included video and animations, but someone could create a visual abstract with still images and text alone. The advantage of the Prezi platform is that it provides a non-linear, multi-dimensional canvas to work from. If you prefer a more linear approach, PowerPoint will allow export of a slideshow as a movie. There are also ways to record narration. In addition to publicizing the paper, a visual abstract could be used as a conference presentation (or the basis for one)—doubling its usefulness.

My point is that there are alternative approaches/tools to create a visual or video abstract to publicize a paper. And journals seem to want such content.

The question is quite relevant vis-à-vis the concern about socializing knowledge and seeking for further (social) impact. As we all know, papers have and get to a rather limited -although highly specialized auditorium-. The trouble with scholastic papers is a sort of gap that is generated between society at large and the circle of knowledgable people. That gap is undesirable and should be overcome as fast and as solidly as possible.

New ways of presentation are being increasingly incorporated. We're all -whether we like or not; whether we are fully aware of that or not- in the 21st Century. Hence, new technologies, new channels are to be implemented.

I have recently started to use videos either as kind of summaries, or as preludes to further developments. I cordially invite scholars and academicians to explore these ways. The closed world of written papers and books can indeed be nurtured with audio-visual tools (or rods).

Hello,

I have heard about the virtual presentation of a conference paper - but not an abstract - a good idea - but needs a good archiving system! size might be a problem.

In teaching we are now required to use ilectures - that would be recorded before meeting the students in the class! so, increasing as we go!

Regards

Theodora Issa

A number of journals accepting video abstracts are mentioned in the 2013 article "Video abstracts, the latest trend in scientific publishing" http://www.universityaffairs.ca/video-abstracts-the-latest-trend-in-scientific-publishing.aspx

Also, I have seen video abstracts published in the Arizona-based journal Education Policy Analysis Archives http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/

Some repositories (e.g. Merlot) allow for advanced search including material types such as animations, tutorials, etc. and technical types such as wikis, podcasts and videos (see http://www.merlot.org/merlot/advSearchMaterials.htm). I haven't seen video abstracts as a separate option yet but it is not hard to see how it will be incorporated one day when it becomes the norm.

Any interactive features should bring more value to the print article for the reasons you mentioned - clarification of methods, bigger outreach and diverse audience - but also because they add elements of personalization (readers may connect to the author) and because of cognitive aspects - some people prefer audio books and videos to print forms. However, in case one is not comfortable with presenting and speaking, in particular, the option will lose its appeal and may compromise the quality of the article in terms of how it's perceived by the audience (if a speaker has not been convincing, his article might not attract readers regardless of its objective value).

Hi Karen, I think video can be a powerful medium for getting messages across. I wanted to give this a try when the paper I currently have in press with Elsevier (Nurse Education Today DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2013.06.013 ) was finished. They gave me the option of creating an author video (http://www.elsevier.com/about/content-innovation/author-videos), which I created using Powerpoint. I uploaded it page by page to their system and did a voiceover for each slide. I've yet to discover how successful it will be, but it was a helpful exercise in deciding what the key messages are, and how to put them across. Thank you for starting this discussion - I'll look forward to following up some of the links above.

Best wishes

Anthea

Peter, Michael, Theodora, and Hristina bring up good points about archiving/repositories and digital identifiers. Anyone have experience with and/or recommendations for other archiving systems or digital identifiers that will accommodate multimedia (especially for science-related information)? The DOI system is the standard for electronic documents, but getting a DOI number requires a registered (and paying) organization.

Carlos: Yes, we can help bridge the gap between technical papers and people without access or the training to understand them. Even if we are not interested in engaging directly with the general public, we can create semi-technical visuals that help students (future voters) better understand science and how it works.

Anthea: Thanks for telling us about your experience with the Elsevier author video process. A colleague of mine also had this option offered to him and his student in connection with a recent paper accepted in an Elsevier journal. They unfortunately did not take advantage of it because the student was "too busy" to bother. Sounds like you had a positive experience.

Everyone: thanks for providing some interesting links to additional information regarding these topics.

Karen, I agree with you that we can create semi-technical visuals that help students better understand science and how it works. Thank you for providing some interesting links and stimulating this discussion.

Yes, do it a lot these days as its now becoming easier

here is an example

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQZlKpyDiT4

and also on my YouTube channel page you can find various 5 minute

examples of summaries for students. They have low production quality

but they seem to work.

I just wonder - will next step be a virtual papers only? Like show?

Thank you everyone for this insightful discussion! As it happens, my research paper exploring this very topic was just published today in the Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication (complete with a video abstract of course)!

Spicer, S. (2014). Exploring Video Abstracts in Science Journals: An Overview and Case Study. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 2(2):eP1110. http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1110

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t1pLfedLRY#t=211

As this study was designed to be initial snapshot study of this practice, I wasn't able to include the voices of the researchers who created these videos as much as I would have hoped. Accordingly, I welcome continued discussion on your experiences and perceived benefits of these works.

If you are based in Europe and you are working on Advanced Materials you might be interested to participate in our public outreach competition! Check this out: http://www.materialsfuture.eu/en/community/contests/

I am working as a free-lance scientific illustrator and to gain some experience I produced video abstracts for 8 papers selected more or less by chance from the literature. I published these abstracts on my youtube-channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCittg4tLzmxR_xsgWlwXpxA) and introduced them on facebook. My top video (about soil organic matter) received almost 400 clicks in 2 months, which is not bad in my view. So I definitely think that video abstracts do have a future.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCittg4tLzmxR_xsgWlwXpxA

Thomas, thanks for your comment. Unfortunately, assessing the impact of video abstracts is not that easy, as Scott Spicer's study (referenced above) showed. But they seem to help authors reach a larger audience...beyond just the specialists in a particular field.

Hi all,

During my PhD I made an animation video about my paper that you can see here https://youtu.be/g3cIr9RomPM

This video turned out be be very successful. It won multiple awards and proved to be a great addition to the media release of my paper.

Now I help other scientists communicating their research using animation videos and story telling. I run workshops where i teach these things but also work as a freelancer making the script, voiceover and animations for other scientists. Feel free to have a look at my website www.tulliorossi.com if you are interested in my work.

Cheers!

With one of my editors in my country we do that - for books. Recently I have published two little books and we did that. Now there is one more heavy book coming, and we have discussed about a video for that.

Bu I hadn't thought about that for papers. Neither did I know the links you mention dear Karen. Thank you very much for that.

Hi everyone,

I am creating a specific video portal for academic abstract videos. Please take a look and comment.

https://www.abstract.tube/

Thanks.