Evolving Structure and Diversity of Human Narratives in the Journal of Stories in Science
Mach, R. Q.; Tsai, J. W.; Muindi, F. J.
Show abstract
Fundamentally, science is about people. The stories of the people behind the science are just as important as the results themselves, even though the results are often what get more attention. Despite the growth of databases storing such stories across diverse mediums, a detailed assessment of those databases is missing. To continue innovating science storytelling, we provide the first assessment of the structure and diversity of the narratives published in the Journal of Stories in Science. In this assessment, a total of 170 published stories authored by 158 authors between 2016 and 2020 are analyzed. Majority (67%) of the authors are women from North America and in the life sciences. The narratives most commonly feature authors from academia (e.g., 23% graduate students, 13% post-doctoral fellows and 21% professors). However, there is also a growing number of authors with PhDs that are working outside of academia (15%). Nearly a quarter (23%) of the database authors come from racial groups (African American, Latino, and Hispanic) that have been shown to be underrepresented in health-related sciences in the United States. Using the industry standard Flesch Reading Ease Score, we found that 74% of the stories included in the analysis fall in the target range of 50-70, which represents readability by students in grades 8-12. The analysis here provides the first deep look into one of the databases publishing diverse stories in science using a wide range of mediums. In summary, there is a need for more emphasis on both expanding and studying such databases given the continuous demand for these stories and their inclusion into K-12 curriculums.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Inflated citations and metrics of journals discontinued from Scopus for publication concerns: the GhoS(t)copus Project 92%
- A cross-sectional audit and survey of Open Science and Data Sharing practices at The Montreal Neurological Institute-Hospital 92%
- Insights into the Datasets, Tools, and Training Needs of the AnVIL Community: 2024 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Transparency and open science reporting guidelines in sleep research and chronobiology journals 91%
- TRACKing Excess Deaths (TRACKED): an interactive online tool to monitor excess deaths associated with COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom 88%
- Improving modelling for epidemic responses: reflections from members of the UK infectious disease modelling community on their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Working groups, gender and publication impact of Canada's ecology and evolution faculty 93%
- If this title is funny, will you cite me? Citation impacts of humour and other features of article titles in ecology and evolution 93%
- Navigating methodological decisions: Balancing rigor and data volume of the Canadian Living Planet Index 84%
Similar papers in this journal
- Research productivity and collaboration of the NIH-funded HIV Vaccine Trials Network: a bibliometric analysis 89%
- Cloud-controlled microscopy enables remote project-based biology education in Latinx communities in the United States and Latin America 88%
- Perceptions of Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine: Insights from a Large-Scale International Cross-Sectional Survey of Surgery Researchers and Clinicians 87%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.