Determining the Credibility of Science Communication

Isabelle Augenstein

doi:10.18653/v1/2021.sdp-1.1

Determining the Credibility of Science Communication

Correct Metadata for

Use this form to create a GitHub issue with structured data describing the correction. You will need a GitHub account. Once you create that issue, the correction will be reviewed by a staff member.

⚠️ Mobile Users: Submitting this form to create a new issue will only work with github.com, not the GitHub Mobile app.

Important: The Anthology treat PDFs as authoritative. Please use this form only to correct data that is out of line with the PDF. See our corrections guidelines if you need to change the PDF.

Title Adjust the title. Retain tags such as <fixed-case>.

Authors Adjust author names and order to match the PDF.

Abstract Correct abstract if needed. Retain XML formatting tags such as <tex-math>. You may use <b>...</b> for bold, <i>...</i> for italic, and <url>...</url> for URLs.

Verification against PDF Ensure that the new title/authors match the snapshot below. (If there is no snapshot or it is too small, consult the PDF.)

Authors concatenated from the text boxes above:

ALL author names match the snapshot above—including middle initials, hyphens, and accents.

Abstract

Most work on scholarly document processing assumes that the information processed is trust-worthy and factually correct. However, this is not always the case. There are two core challenges, which should be addressed: 1) ensuring that scientific publications are credible – e.g. that claims are not made without supporting evidence, and that all relevant supporting evidence is provided; and 2) that scientific findings are not misrepresented, distorted or outright misreported when communicated by journalists or the general public. I will present some first steps towards addressing these problems and outline remaining challenges.

Anthology ID:: 2021.sdp-1.1
Volume:: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing
Month:: June
Year:: 2021
Address:: Online
Editors:: Iz Beltagy, Arman Cohan, Guy Feigenblat, Dayne Freitag, Tirthankar Ghosal, Keith Hall, Drahomira Herrmannova, Petr Knoth, Kyle Lo, Philipp Mayr, Robert M. Patton, Michal Shmueli-Scheuer, Anita de Waard, Kuansan Wang, Lucy Lu Wang
Venue:: sdp
SIG:
Publisher:: Association for Computational Linguistics
Note:
Pages:: 1–6
Language:
URL:: https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.1/
DOI:: 10.18653/v1/2021.sdp-1.1
Bibkey:
Cite (ACL):: Isabelle Augenstein. 2021. Determining the Credibility of Science Communication. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing, pages 1–6, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
Cite (Informal):: Determining the Credibility of Science Communication (Augenstein, sdp 2021)
Copy Citation:
PDF:: https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.1.pdf

PDF Cite Search Fix data

Export citation

BibTeX
MODS XML
Endnote
Preformatted

@inproceedings{augenstein-2021-determining,
    title = "Determining the Credibility of Science Communication",
    author = "Augenstein, Isabelle",
    editor = "Beltagy, Iz  and
      Cohan, Arman  and
      Feigenblat, Guy  and
      Freitag, Dayne  and
      Ghosal, Tirthankar  and
      Hall, Keith  and
      Herrmannova, Drahomira  and
      Knoth, Petr  and
      Lo, Kyle  and
      Mayr, Philipp  and
      Patton, Robert M.  and
      Shmueli-Scheuer, Michal  and
      de Waard, Anita  and
      Wang, Kuansan  and
      Wang, Lucy Lu",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing",
    month = jun,
    year = "2021",
    address = "Online",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.1/",
    doi = "10.18653/v1/2021.sdp-1.1",
    pages = "1--6",
    abstract = "Most work on scholarly document processing assumes that the information processed is trust-worthy and factually correct. However, this is not always the case. There are two core challenges, which should be addressed: 1) ensuring that scientific publications are credible {--} e.g. that claims are not made without supporting evidence, and that all relevant supporting evidence is provided; and 2) that scientific findings are not misrepresented, distorted or outright misreported when communicated by journalists or the general public. I will present some first steps towards addressing these problems and outline remaining challenges."
}

Download as File

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="augenstein-2021-determining">
    <titleInfo>
        <title>Determining the Credibility of Science Communication</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <name type="personal">
        <namePart type="given">Isabelle</namePart>
        <namePart type="family">Augenstein</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <originInfo>
        <dateIssued>2021-06</dateIssued>
    </originInfo>
    <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
    <relatedItem type="host">
        <titleInfo>
            <title>Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing</title>
        </titleInfo>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Iz</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Beltagy</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Arman</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Cohan</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Guy</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Feigenblat</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Dayne</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Freitag</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Tirthankar</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Ghosal</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Keith</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Hall</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Drahomira</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Herrmannova</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Petr</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Knoth</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Kyle</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Lo</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Philipp</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Mayr</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Robert</namePart>
            <namePart type="given">M</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Patton</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Michal</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Shmueli-Scheuer</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Anita</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">de Waard</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Kuansan</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Wang</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <name type="personal">
            <namePart type="given">Lucy</namePart>
            <namePart type="given">Lu</namePart>
            <namePart type="family">Wang</namePart>
            <role>
                <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
            </role>
        </name>
        <originInfo>
            <publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
            <place>
                <placeTerm type="text">Online</placeTerm>
            </place>
        </originInfo>
        <genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
    </relatedItem>
    <abstract>Most work on scholarly document processing assumes that the information processed is trust-worthy and factually correct. However, this is not always the case. There are two core challenges, which should be addressed: 1) ensuring that scientific publications are credible – e.g. that claims are not made without supporting evidence, and that all relevant supporting evidence is provided; and 2) that scientific findings are not misrepresented, distorted or outright misreported when communicated by journalists or the general public. I will present some first steps towards addressing these problems and outline remaining challenges.</abstract>
    <identifier type="citekey">augenstein-2021-determining</identifier>
    <identifier type="doi">10.18653/v1/2021.sdp-1.1</identifier>
    <location>
        <url>https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.1/</url>
    </location>
    <part>
        <date>2021-06</date>
        <extent unit="page">
            <start>1</start>
            <end>6</end>
        </extent>
    </part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>

Download as File

%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Determining the Credibility of Science Communication
%A Augenstein, Isabelle
%Y Beltagy, Iz
%Y Cohan, Arman
%Y Feigenblat, Guy
%Y Freitag, Dayne
%Y Ghosal, Tirthankar
%Y Hall, Keith
%Y Herrmannova, Drahomira
%Y Knoth, Petr
%Y Lo, Kyle
%Y Mayr, Philipp
%Y Patton, Robert M.
%Y Shmueli-Scheuer, Michal
%Y de Waard, Anita
%Y Wang, Kuansan
%Y Wang, Lucy Lu
%S Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing
%D 2021
%8 June
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Online
%F augenstein-2021-determining
%X Most work on scholarly document processing assumes that the information processed is trust-worthy and factually correct. However, this is not always the case. There are two core challenges, which should be addressed: 1) ensuring that scientific publications are credible – e.g. that claims are not made without supporting evidence, and that all relevant supporting evidence is provided; and 2) that scientific findings are not misrepresented, distorted or outright misreported when communicated by journalists or the general public. I will present some first steps towards addressing these problems and outline remaining challenges.
%R 10.18653/v1/2021.sdp-1.1
%U https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.1/
%U https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.sdp-1.1
%P 1-6

Download as File

Markdown (Informal)

[Determining the Credibility of Science Communication](https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.1/) (Augenstein, sdp 2021)

Determining the Credibility of Science Communication (Augenstein, sdp 2021)

ACL

Isabelle Augenstein. 2021. Determining the Credibility of Science Communication. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing, pages 1–6, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.