Journal of Science Communication

Aims & Scope

The Journal of Science Communication (JCOM) welcomes submissions falling within the scope of the Journal, at any time in any of the following forms: Articles (i.e, research articles) present new empirical research using quantitative and/or qualitative methods. Your research article should be supported by a comprehensive literature review, a thorough theoretical grounding, enough detail within the methodology section to orient readers to how the authors plan to address the aims of the study, strong and original findings, and a conclusion with implications for the research and practice communities. Research articles are peer-reviewed. Your manuscript should be 5,000 - 8,000 words long, including an abstract of 100 - 150 words and literature references. Practice insights present critical reflections on science communication in practice, including project evaluations, action research, and innovative case studies. These articles focus on how science communication is practised in real-world contexts and, notably, on how new and creative approaches are shaping the field. We particularly welcome contributions that introduce and critically examine novel, imaginative, or experimental approaches to science communication, especially those that challenge conventional practices or open new possibilities for engaging diverse publics. Submissions should go beyond describing what was done: they must analyse why the approach matters, how it addresses a clearly defined practice issue or problem, and how it contributes to broader science communication practice beyond the specific context. Authors should describe the evidence base for their practice (e.g. evaluation methodology, action research approach, or potential for such work) and discuss the implications of their findings for practitioners and researchers internationally. Contributions should also reflect on transferability and scalability - how the lessons learned could inform science communication in other contexts or settings. Practice Insights are peer-reviewed and should be written in a reflective and analytical style. Submissions are typically 3,000 - 5,000 words, including references, and should include an abstract of 100 - 150 words. Editorials (invited contributions only) Essays explore and reflect on current issues, e.g. a policy, theory, or emerging trend in science communication. We aim to stimulate discussion in science communication communities, and such essays may be specifically designed for that purpose. Therefore, authors should be prepared for critical responses. Essays must be original and relevant, and authors' views and opinions must be grounded in robust science communication research or practice scholarship. Before submitting an Essay, please send a brief pitch to Marina Joubert, the deputy editor of JCOM (email: [email protected]), for pre-approval. Submissions of Essays that have not been pre-approved for submission will not be considered for publication. Please note that all Essays submitted will undergo the standard review process and pre-approval does not imply acceptance for publication. Your text should be 3,000 - 4,500 words long, including an abstract of 100 - 150 words and literature references. Review articles (i.e, research reviews) provide a comprehensive review of a topic pertinent to science communication. Reviews are commissioned based on a proposal. Authors wishing to propose a research review should contact the Editorial Office with a proposal that outlines the area to be explored and explains why this topic is pertinent to science communication and why a review is needed. The reporting of systematic review contributions in JCOM is guided by the standards of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement. The systematic review should present a clear supporting context and motivation and a thorough critique, including the major themes and gaps relevant to the reviewed science communication topic. Research reviews are peer-reviewed. Your review should be up to 9,000 words long, including an abstract of 100 - 150 words and literature references. Book reviews draw attention to current and significant scholarly and non-fiction books in the field of science communication, thereby helping JCOM readers stay up to date on the latest book titles in the field. A book review includes a broad overview, a summary of its contents and an introduction to the authors. Reviewers should reflect critically on the book's argument and contribution to the field, including a perspective on its strengths and weaknesses. Before writing a book review, please get in touch with Marina Joubert, the deputy editor of JCOM (email: [email protected]). The JCOM Editorial Board reviews book reviews. A book review should be no more than 1,000 words, including a short abstract (about 50 - 100 words) and a list of references. Conference reviews share the outcomes of science communication events relevant for JCOM readers. JCOM publishes a limited number of conference reviews annually and aims to achieve geographical diversity in the events covered. Conference reviewers should not be involved in organizing the conference. Conference organizers or delegates are welcome to suggest possible events for review by contacting Marina Joubert, the deputy editor of JCOM (email: [email protected]) at least three months before the event. The JCOM Editorial Board reviews conference reviews. Please don’t submit a conference review before we have reached an agreement about the relevance and timing of the event and the subsequent review. A conference review should be no more than 1,000 words, including a short abstract (about 50 - 100 words) and a list of references. Letters may be submitted as responses to published papers or to comment on topical issues. They should make a scholarly and reflective contribution. The JCOM Editorial Board reviews letters. A letter to JCOM should be no more than 1,000 words, including a short abstract (about 50 - 100 words) and a list of references. Commentary sets (invited contributions only). They comprise several author perspectives on a shared topic. We welcome topic proposals and possible contributors, but these commentaries will be commissioned directly by the journal's editors. The JCOM Editorial Board reviews contributions to commentaries. Manuscripts posted to preprint repositories can be submitted to JCOM, as long as the copyright and licence allow for it. Authors are allowed to upload the Version of Record (VoR) of their manuscript published in JCOM to an institutional and/or subject repository starting from 1 week after publication. In this case, the file name must be the same as the one in JCOM and the following credit must be included: Version of Record. Originally published in JCOM – Journal of Science Communication, [full citation as written in the "how to cite" on the manuscript's landing page], © [Year] The Author(s), licensed under CC BY 4.0. Available at: [DOI]. Manuscript submission style and template This section provides an overview of the general style guidelines that JCOM authors are asked to follow when preparing their manuscripts. After acceptan

Based on the Think.Check.Submit framework by DOAJ, COPE & OASPA. All data from verified open sources.

Source: OpenAlex · Note: citations accumulate over time so older years appear higher

SJR Quartile by Discipline

Scimago ranks this journal separately in each subject category — its quartile can differ by discipline.

Subject Classification