Podcast research provides a quick way to publish results.Credit: Getty via Grinlds/ISTock
Kate Murray, a communication expert in Melbourne, Australia, wants to see the research conducted published as a podcast.
Murray says, this is a “quite run concept”, which helps produce Walking with the city…, A podcast chain that follows scholars because they go to places that are important for their research and discuss topics such as urban policy, plan and culture.
Published by journal urban Studies Last year, Walking with the city… Edited and the colleague was reviewed using the same process that passes through paper submission, It is said in the journal.
So far, as one of some examples of colleague reviews, Walking with the city… Murray says that an audio medium can bring it to scientific literature.
For example, podcasts are much faster to produce compared to an academic paper, saying, which can be useful in situations such as public-health emergency situations, when researchers want to achieve their findings as soon as possible.
It can also be beneficial for those scholars for whom English is not their first language, says Murray. Some academics, especially early-career researchers, may feel more comfortable speaking and interviews about their research than trying to write a technical paper in English. She says, “It is strong to relay and listen to her work in her authentic voice,” she says.
A new model
Podcasts hosted by academics are as old as podcasting. Startalak, Astrophizist is hosted by Neil Degrass Tyson and various co-masters, a popular example. But by Podcast and by the Peer by the researchers and published as contributing to the scientific record, represents a very new model.
Each episode of Walked with the city… features of Michelle Auto Managing Editor of … urban StudiesInterviewing urban scientists in various city places, such as gardens, parks and cemetery. Murray says that voice recording is to bring relevant information with ambient noise on a city road that is difficult to get in a written account, Murray says.
“We did not want our colleague to be a spoken version of only one journal article,” says Murray. “Therefore, we decided to take the researchers who study the urban environment for walking at places to immerse them in the environment.”
In the first episode, Colin McFarlen, who studies urban geography at Darham University, UK, moves around London and compares his atmosphere with Glasgow, UK and Mumbai and Delhi in India. McFarlane considers how high density living and crowds can feel completely different from one city to another, and find out how poor infrastructure and hygiene can cause health problems that destroy participation in the city’s life.
Murray said, “Because researchers were walking and talking, it helped him draw connections in his research and we had, as listeners, when they came with new ideas, were present – and was very exciting to hear it,” Murray says.
Involve the reaction
How the best to include changes based on the reaction of the critics is something that is still ending the supporters of the podcasts made by co-workers.
“Most scholars are much more experienced editing lessons than sounds,” called Hanna McGragger, a communicator of Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada, who developed a colleague-review process for podcast. Secret feminist agendaIn collaboration with its publisher, Wilfrid Lawrier University Press (WLUP), is located in Waterloo, Canada. “Because reviewing podcast is a new process, yet it was known what kind of approach we could use.”
2024 research leader
Murray and the field interview did not want to re -record to make changes in his team. “The more you switch to audio quality and audio types, the more work is to attach the listener,” she says. Instead, he and his team included studio recording, where the need was, using the contribution of Acuno and Caitlin Morrisey, a PHD candidate who was researching urban transport at Melbourne University, who serve as co-scriptures.
For Secret feminist agendaMcGregor and his team took a different view: they first published podcast, and then released online peer-review comments with them. McGragger says the team did not return to the episode and edited them in response to the reviewer response, but feedback informed the future episode.
In another three-part chain, it is called Why podcast?: Podcasting publishing, sound-based scholarship and making podcastPublished by online magazine CarosMcGregor and his colleagues included an additional episode in which the colleague-review results were discussed. In the upcoming podcast of WLUP, Practician communityThe team plans to take a approach to a dead and his colleagues, with a recorded, review and edited episodes before the publication.
“It is important to oppose a size-fit-all approach,” says McGragger. “Traditional colleague reviews have been correctly criticized to identify the errors for taking time, exploitative, gatekeeping and ineffective in recent years. Podcasting has provided an opportunity to reconsider why we are reviewing colleagues in the first place and how can we re -connect this process.”
