Why get involved as a contributor?
.
- To bring a scientific point of view into our media spaces in an effective, cumulative and non-chronophagous way;
- To give the scientific community a clear and strong voice in public debate;
- To make scientific data and methods accessible to as many people as possible and increase our collective autonomy;
- To access or provide resources to support and enrich research, whether amateur, student or professional.
Who can become a contributor?
The current recruitment criteria for contributors are the completion of a doctoral thesis in a fundamental science discipline and the publication of at least one scientific article in a peer-reviewed journal.
For further details, please refer to the Frequently Asked Questions section, or contact us directly using the form below.
What is expected of contributors?
The core activity of contributors is to carry out discourse analyses within fields’ semi-contributive framework.
In addition to this analysis activity, there are a number of optional, but no less crucial, tasks aimed at enriching and perfecting fields, its resources and its interface.
During the test phases, these will essentially involve the development of more refined categories complementing those initially proposed, and the evaluation of existing categories.
Other tasks, such as participation in randomly selected juries, will be open to contributors in later development phases.
What does a typical analysis consist in?
The analytical framework we offer has been designed to save a maximum amount of time while preserving the quality of the analyses. A typical analysis is based on common categories and does not require any text to be written. Our aim is to achieve an average analysis time of between ten and fifteen minutes.
A typical analysis is based on an isolated speech in text, audio or video form. It comprises two stages.
The first is an evaluation of the scientific compatibility of the considered discourse, according to three indicators allowing the constitution of a science compatibility score. For a detailed breakdown of this score in its current version, please visit our Frequently Asked Questions page.
The second stage consists of a critical analysis of the considered discourse. In other words, it aims to establish its characteristics and, as far as possible, its presuppositions, using a scientific perspective as a reference.
This critical analysis is carried out on the basis of a tree structure of common categories, intended to be completed – and criticized if necessary – by the contributors themselves.
We have chosen not to disclose the contents of this tree structure before testing phases.
Please visit our Frequently Asked Questions page for more information on contributors (recruitment criteria and procedures, anonymity, etc.).
The following screenshots illustrate a certain state of development of fields; the items shown are subject to change during future testing and development phases.
.
