Recently I have had the opportunity to get a closer look at the submission, review and promotion cycle for a typical academic paper. It was a great learning experience and led to an increase in the number and of research papers, news articles, and reviews I read in preparation. However, on multiple occasions, I did think “I wish I could watch a 2 min video to explain this”. That got me thinking, why couldn’t I and should I be able to?
It is estimated that by 2022, video will make up 82% of consumer internet traffic, fifteen times the figure from 2017. Plus, with the pandemic pushing everyone further online and general social trends indicating a shift: video as a tool for communication isn’t just a trend and is here to stay. So what does this mean for the world of academia? Honestly, probably not a huge amount. Given the complex ideas we are all trying to communicate, videos are not (currently) an appropriate tool for the job. Nonetheless, I do believe there is a huge opportunity for video to be used productively in academia, as a tool to drive engagement for those in and outside the community. The next question is how? Well, there are many answers to this question but the quick, short-form explainer video I was after points towards video abstracts. Video abstracts have been used by certain journals (for example Cell and New Journal of Physics) since their introduction by Cell in 2009, however, they remain uncommon practice. Upon reflection, I believe there are two key reasons we should all be making video abstracts with our submissions.
Firstly, videos (if done well) can be an extremely effective way to communicate ideas with a very low barrier to entry. Especially where high-quality research-focused science communication is absent. Increasingly, scientific discoveries are sensationalised to form click-bait articles. When a genuine effort is made to communicate the research to the public, it is often made difficult by the poor general understanding people have of current scientific methods – perpetuating the cycle of poor communication. A 2018 Wellcome Trust report found that although 72% of people globally trust scientists, over half report having little or no understanding of science, clearly highlighting this communication barrier we as scientists need to overcome. Videos abstracts by academics provide a credible outlet to present their work through which they can communicate their enthusiasm while retaining control of the narrative of their work.
Secondly, reach! People will watch just about anything, especially if it’s interesting. In theory, everything researched is interesting and relevant, otherwise, you’d hope it wouldn’t be a topic of research. Given their low barriers to entry, video content presents a unique opportunity to reach people who wouldn’t ordinarily engage with the academic community. By making video abstracts available on YouTube, journals have the opportunity to take the research where people are already paying attention.
“Video abstracts grew out of the realisation that the Internet allows us to communicate with each other in ways that were never before possible, It allows us to personalise our papers in ways that were never before possible.”
John Kuemmerle, online editor of the journal Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.
On my quest to understand the current state of video abstracts, I watched my fair share. While I am not an expert on videos and how they should be made, I do enjoy watching them. So, here are my thoughts on how the abstracts a lot of published abstracts could be improved.
1. Make them shorter.
Typically, the best videos are the shorter ones. 2-3 mins are perfect. We only want to communicate key ideas and their relevance, therefore a time limit forces you to be concise.
2. Interesting Titles
This is the first thing people see and will make rapid decisions on whether to watch or not. A good title communicates value and grabs the viewer. Therefore, the best titles are shorter than the corresponding paper.
3. Start big, then deliver
The best videos start with the key finding from the research, then continue to put that work into context. By starting the results, it’s clear to the viewer what the goal is and why it’s relevant. Instead, many videos start with background into the research group or authors. This is nice to know, however, is not why I clicked the video.
Now I realise what I’m describing here is oddly similar to a TikTok. Despite not being on the app, I see TikToks are everywhere; maybe they’re onto something. Short, value-driven content designed to garner attention. So, admittedly I don’t think all academics should be on TikTok, nevertheless, I also don’t think it’d be a bad thing if more were. Instead, I think there is a lot we could learn from the medium as video (hopefully) becomes more widely used to communicate new research. TikTok could be useful to improve access to academia, but I’ll save that for another blog post.
