
Three National Academy of Sciences colloquia have sought to create the science of science communication as a unique discipline, fostering collaboration across disciplines and between researchers and practitioners. Each colloquium has engaged researchers from the social, behavioral, and decision sciences needed to connect the scientific community with those who depend on it. Each colloquium has also engaged both communication professionals and consumers of scientific knowledge, to share their expertise and experiences. Each colloquium has produced an open-access special issue of PNAS with peer-reviewed articles based on selected scientific presentations (1, 2) (see also “The Science of Science of Communication,” https://www.pnas.org/content/110/Supplement\_3, and the “Science of Science Communication II,” https://www.pnas.org/content/111/Supplement\_4). Video recordings of the full, rich discussions can be found online for all three of the Sackler Colloquia on The Science of Science Communication on their respective web pages: www.nasonline.org/programs/sackler-colloquia/completed\_colloquia/agenda-science-communication.html; www.nasonline.org/programs/sackler-colloquia/completed\_colloquia/agenda-science-communication-II.html; and www.nasonline.org/programs/sackler-colloquia/completed\_colloquia/Science\_Communication_III.html. This special issue includes articles from the third colloquium, which built on Communicating Science Effectively , a National Academy of Science (2017) consensus report (3), prompted by the previous colloquia. In addition to summarizing past research and future research needs, that report highlights the organizational contexts within which science communications are produced and the political contexts within which they are consumed. Those topics are central to the 10 articles in this issue. Six articles expand the set of sciences whose theory, method, and results can inform—and be informed by—science … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: baruch{at}cmu.edu. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 78 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
