Heliyon (Sep 2020)

A scoping review of co-production between researchers and journalists in research communication

  • Stephen MacGregor,
  • Amanda Cooper,
  • Andrew Coombs,
  • Christopher DeLuca

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 6, no. 9
p. e04836

Abstract

Read online

Co-production is rapidly gaining purchase as an approach to making research matter more to diverse audiences. There exists a wealth of information about co-production in areas such as public administration and sustainability science, but comparatively little within the specific area of research communication. In particular, little is known about harnessing the potential of researchers and journalists engaging in co-production to generate evidence-based knowledge, foster an informed public, and achieve societal impacts. This review aimed to address that gap in the knowledge base by systematically mapping the theoretical and empirical literature related to co-production between researchers and journalists in research communication. Given the paucity of study in this area, we advanced this aim by synthesizing the extant literature that has explored the more general concept of interactions between researchers and journalists. Following a scoping review methodology, a total of 60 articles were selected for inclusion in this review. We analyzed the included articles following a systematic method of using a data extraction framework to synthesize and interpret contextual (country of the study or author [s], publication type, sector, and methods) and thematic (objectives, theoretical framework, findings) information. Three cross-cutting themes were identified that help to elucidate important considerations for researchers and journalists engaged in or considering engaging in co-production in research communication: (a) the roles of researchers and journalists; (b) the pitfalls and promises of co-production; and (c) the barriers and facilitators of co-production. Following an in-depth examination of these themes, we conclude with a synopsis of the literature along with identifying two major topics for progressing current knowledge and practice.

Keywords