Can blogs be used as a way of scientific communication?

Over the past couple of months I have been using this blog in an unusual way. Rather than creating pointers to recent news of interest to researchers, I have posted short articles with chunks of ideas that, together, could form the basis for research articles topics. But how viable is such a means of communication for research? There are certainly pros and cons.

The arguments against this form of communication are numerous. First, in contrast with a comprehensive and cohesive scientific article, the information is delivered piece meal and might end up with inconsistent chunks. For example, my way of thinking about a certain subject in my post today might not be identical to the way I think about it in my post in two months. A reader comparing both posts will surely get confused. Second, there is no peer-review as we formally know it in the academic world. Given, if a post attracts the attention of other scientists, a discussion might be raised and the ideas debated. However, blogs are certainly not the place where most researchers will search for scientific information at this point. Third, because of its very history, blogs naturally call for a much more informal way of communication than regular research publications. Therefore, as a writer I might not be so concerned about being formal or trying to back up all of my statements as I would do in a regular research publication. And last, blogging is definitely not considered among the prestigious publications that would count points towards an academic career. In contrast with a publication in a peer-reviewed journal, at this point a blog post is seen as a mere curiosity, sometimes an odd one.

But just because blogging is currently not an integral part of what is considered science doesn't mean that it should not have a place in academic life. There are certainly advantages. First, blogging is quicker than regular publication in reaching one's scientific audience, also potentially capturing the general public. Rather than waiting for my peers to give me their thumbs up, my ability to communicate with other members of my scientific community is just a "publish post" click away. Second, because it is informal, blogs might also elicit more responses from others than it would if a formal response were required. Finally, the distinction between blogging and formal writing can be blurred if we consider blogging as an initial way of gathering opinions from peers toward a later, consistent scientific manuscript.

This trend of making quick posts the basis for something more formal is now getting momentum is areas outside of science. For example, the recent book by David Scott (Scott, 2007) on marketing and PR was built based on a series of posts on his blog, just to be later consolidated into a book incorporating his initial ideas along with the input they generated. In other words, the final content of the book has been significantly enriched by the feedback received by his blog contributors, sometimes expanding a concept, sometimes killing it with counterarguments. As Scott mentions, blogs also provide a mechanism for authors to gauge the degree of excitement an idea might generate, which directly relates to the concept of research impact I have discussed in past posts.

Finally, I also should say that blogging is not restricted to the World Wide Web age. Way before the Web came along, authors have been blogging through magazine serialization (Okker, 2003). Classical novels such as as Conan Doyle's stories on Sherlock Holmes were built based on a series of short articles in The Strand Magazine in 1891. The reason why the serialization concept is so important for research is that much scientific material material has been nearly lost or at least hidden for years while authors search for that ultimate consolidated article that will be a perfect expression of their clear thought. Perfect and perfectly clear are not really concepts that go well with science, and so history of science is permeated with examples of material that has been submerged for decades before it became public. Classical examples are the writings of Leibniz, Peirce, and Wittgenstein on topics such as First Order Logic, which could have taken computational science to a different level if they had been disclosed by the time of their writing.

In sum, the ideas of a quicker way to communicate with scientific peers, elicit their feedback, and quickly enrich concepts in a piece meal fashion is something to be considered as a new tool in the research toolbox. What do you think?



Okker, Patricia. 2003. Social Stories: The Magazine Novel in Nineteenth-Century America. University of Virginia Press.

Scott, David Meerman. 2007. The New Rules of Marketing and PR: How to Use News Releases, Blogs, Podcasting, Viral Marketing and Online Media to Reach Buyers Directly. Wiley.