<?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-jun</dateIssued>
    </originInfo>
    <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
    <relatedItem type="host">
        <titleInfo>
            <title>Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing</title>
        </titleInfo>
        <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-jun</date>
        <extent unit="page">
            <start>1</start>
            <end>6</end>
        </extent>
    </part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>

%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Determining the Credibility of Science Communication
%A Augenstein, Isabelle
%S Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing
%D 2021
%8 jun
%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

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.