Video abstracts come in a variety of forms (have a look, e.g., at the Cell youtube-channel) and lately I tried to establish a format I can offer to other scientists. I decided to have very short abstracts (not longer than 2 minutes), which can be produced quickly and inexpensively. (The contents of the paper is summarized in a few and short sentences and is illustrated by schematic drawings set up during the video/have a look at my youtube-channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCittg4tLzmxR_xsgWlwXpxA) for examples).
Do you think something like this is suitable or do you prefer other forms as, for example, interviews or animations?
As a learning media producer, I don't believe there's a universal answer to this question but it's a good question! The anticipated audience is important to consider. As an audience member with a general understanding of the topics being tabled in your videos, the abstracts worked well. However, I imagine if I was highly conversant with each topic I'd want slightly more information about methods and authors to contextualise the information. I agree that under 3 minutes is a good length for an online video. Not too much detail - just enough to get people wanting to know more, or, conversely, to get to grips with the findings and remember them for later.
I also think the purpose of the video is good to bear in mind. Is it to help undergraduates be more familiar with the researcher and their work or is it to achieve something else? These would be great to use in class and great for making research relevant and accessible to undergraduate students, but maybe not as good at engaging a general audience with the researcher or the university, if this is desired.
The audience intended here are fellow scientists. Scientists working in the same or a related field, who might take such a video as a basis to decide whether they will read the paper or not.
You are right, I could still add information on author affiliation (in one of the first statements). I am not so sure about methodological details. Often, I think, a methodological keyword is sufficient and scientists can figure out, which approach the project presented took. (Sometimes people ask that I should also look at appropriateness of this approach, soundness of data, validity of results, etc.. This will not be possible of course....)
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Graphs