Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Commentary

Has Contemporary Academia Outgrown the Carl Sagan Effect?

Susana Martinez-Conde
Journal of Neuroscience 17 February 2016, 36 (7) 2077-2082; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0086-16.2016
Susana Martinez-Conde
State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York 11203
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Susana Martinez-Conde
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Information

DOI 
https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0086-16.2016
PubMed 
26888919
Published By 
Society for Neuroscience
History 
  • Received January 8, 2016
  • Revision received January 12, 2016
  • Accepted January 13, 2016
  • First published February 17, 2016.
  • Version of record published February 17, 2016.
Copyright & Usage 
Copyright © 2016 the authors 0270-6474/16/362077-06$15.00/0

Author Information

Author contributions

Disclosures

    • Received January 8, 2016.
    • Revision received January 12, 2016.
    • Accepted January 13, 2016.
  • This work was supported by a challenge grant from Research to Prevent Blindness Inc. to the Department of Ophthalmology at SUNY Downstate, and by an Empire Innovation Award from The State of New York. I thank the Society for Neuroscience for selecting me as recipient of the 2014 Science Educator Award, and for inviting me to write this commentary. I am indebted to Stephen L. Macknik for his detailed feedback and extended discussions on the topic of this article. I also thank Robert Alexander for discussion and Mahzarin Banaji for her thoughts on the framing of this article. Jordi Chanovas Colomé, Max Dorman, Manuel Ledo, and Rosario Malpica contributed research and administrative support, and very helpful input. Devin Powell provided invaluable assistance in compiling the sample of neuroscientists surveyed, and conducting and transcribing the interviews themselves. I am most grateful to all the scientists that agreed to the interviews for their time and candid reports.

  • The author declares no competing financial interests.

  • Correspondence should be addressed to Susana Martinez-Conde, Department of Ophthalmology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, 450 Clarkson Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11203. smart{at}neuralcorrelate.com

Online Impact

 

Article usage

Select a custom date range for the past year
E.g., 2022-06-21
to
E.g., 2022-06-21

Article usage: February 2016 to April 2022

AbstractFullPdf
Feb 20164852107419
Mar 2016100279101
Apr 2016366113
May 2016327225
Jun 20168267
Jul 2016302310
Aug 201680508
Sep 20160158373
Oct 2016018971
Nov 20160254106
Dec 2016016432
Total 201677133831165
Jan 2017026112
Feb 2017021413
Mar 2017016912
Apr 201701127
May 2017012814
Jun 2017015015
Jul 2017010715
Aug 2017015618
Sep 201709025
Oct 2017011318
Nov 2017012413
Dec 20170847
Total 201701708169
Jan 2018015716
Feb 2018018613
Mar 2018033119
Apr 2018021212
May 2018018019
Jun 2018018518
Jul 2018015459
Aug 2018016731
Sep 2018018118
Oct 2018016510
Nov 201801826
Dec 2018022214
Total 201802322235
Jan 2019028917
Feb 2019023832
Mar 2019020329
Apr 2019013712
May 2019016120
Jun 2019016223
Jul 201901087
Aug 2019011315
Sep 2019017723
Oct 2019017619
Nov 2019016325
Dec 2019016418
Total 201902091240
Jan 2020019914
Feb 2020015919
Mar 2020015124
Apr 2020019936
May 2020022128
Jun 2020021518
Jul 2020024418
Aug 2020015617
Sep 2020072172
Oct 2020038943
Nov 2020050943
Dec 2020044256
Total 202003605388
Jan 2021037141
Feb 2021024254
Mar 2021028527
Apr 202101462943
May 2021027430
Jun 2021024414
Jul 2021039332
Aug 2021049629
Sep 2021024820
Oct 2021033937
Nov 2021030743
Dec 2021019019
Total 2021018018389
Jan 2022035732
Feb 2022019830
Mar 2022023844
Apr 2022030352
Total 202201096158
Total771322232744
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 36 (7)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 36, Issue 7
17 Feb 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Has Contemporary Academia Outgrown the Carl Sagan Effect?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Has Contemporary Academia Outgrown the Carl Sagan Effect?
Susana Martinez-Conde
Journal of Neuroscience 17 February 2016, 36 (7) 2077-2082; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0086-16.2016

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Has Contemporary Academia Outgrown the Carl Sagan Effect?
Susana Martinez-Conde
Journal of Neuroscience 17 February 2016, 36 (7) 2077-2082; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0086-16.2016
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

  • Thank you, and follow-up article in Scientific American
    Susana Martinez-Conde
    Published on: 27 October 2016
  • Public outreach needs to be more than a hobby
    Nathan K. Evanson
    Published on: 21 April 2016
  • Published on: (27 October 2016)
    Page navigation anchor for Thank you, and follow-up article in Scientific American
    Thank you, and follow-up article in Scientific American
    • Susana Martinez-Conde, Professor, State University of New York, Downstate Medical Center

    I am grateful for Dr. Evanson's kind comments and encouragement. Many other colleagues have expressed similar sentiments, and a few people have come forward, in addition, to discuss their (often mixed) personal experiences as active scientists who engage the public. This positive reaction from the scientific community led me to write a follow-up version of this work for Scientific American, intended for a general readership. A printed article and a related blog post can be found in the following links: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-should-speak-out-m...
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/survey-how-scientists-can-eng...

    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (21 April 2016)
    Page navigation anchor for Public outreach needs to be more than a hobby
    Public outreach needs to be more than a hobby
    • Nathan K. Evanson, Assistant Professor

    As a new assistant professor, I am not unaware of the pressure to publish, and to be focused while I am beginning my independent research career. I have also heard disparaging remarks about "popularizers," with the implication that they are sub-standard scientists. Dr. Martinez- Conde's review of studies on the subject refutes this idea, for which I am grateful. To me, it would be a frightening scientific landscape if the...

    Show More

    As a new assistant professor, I am not unaware of the pressure to publish, and to be focused while I am beginning my independent research career. I have also heard disparaging remarks about "popularizers," with the implication that they are sub-standard scientists. Dr. Martinez- Conde's review of studies on the subject refutes this idea, for which I am grateful. To me, it would be a frightening scientific landscape if the task of teaching the public about the content and importance of science were to be relegated to only "sub-par" scientists.

    As scientists, we have an obligation to share our discoveries with the public. Most of us have had a significant investment of public funds in our professional development. This initial investment is followed by further funds to support our ongoing research programs. The public thus have a vested interest in, and a right to know about, the discoveries that are made using this public money. And we should feel an obligation to make the results of our work broadly accessible. Although doing this could be as straightforward as writing research articles in more accessible language, direct public outreach is also clearly desirable.

    We should not be spurred only by a feeling of duty to communicate with the public, however. Although it is true that we owe a debt to those who are paying for the research we do, scientists should also be thinking about the future of research funding. How many of us have bemoaned the fact that pay lines are going down, the size of grants is being cut back, and the number of applications one must submit in order to obtain funding is going up? It is a bleak picture. I see a cynicism that has led many of my colleagues to pursue non-research industry jobs or jobs outside of science altogether, rather than deal with the funding woes of an academic scientist.

    How do funding challenges relate to public outreach? I have frequently seen social media portrayals (often caricatures) of publically funded studies, given as justification for why research budgets should be reined in and funding of science curtailed. By a refusal to engage the public directly, we run the risk of losing control of the narrative about the importance of investing in science. All of us should be concerned about informing the public about what we do, why it is important, and how it fits in with their interests. In light of this, it is not only unfair to characterize those who have public visibility as less able researchers, it is inimical to the long-term survival of the scientific endeavor to do anything but encourage those who have a talent for and inclination toward public outreach. I applaud Dr. Martinez-Conde's effort to bring this important issue to our attention.

    Conflict of Interest:

    None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Toward an Anti-Racist Approach to Biomedical and Neuroscience Research
  • Black In Neuro, Beyond One Week
  • Reporting Grantee Demographics for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Neuroscience
Show more Commentary
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2022 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.