Iberica 13


Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192

ISSN: 1139-7241 / e-ISSN: 2340-2784

Abstract

The Internet provides researchers with tools to disseminate their research
findings to different audiences and meet the information needs of  various
publics. One of  these tools is online science videos, which can be addressed to
audiences with different degrees of  expertise and shared on various platforms.
The current study analyzes a set of  online videos used by research groups to
inform about their research and findings and engage the audience with this
research. My purpose is to analyze how multimodal strategies are used in these
videos to recontextualize knowledge for a wide audience. The analysis reveals
four types of  strategies, which may be performed through the orchestration of
various semiotic modes: (i) strategies to construct the research group’s credibility
and authority; (ii) strategies to construct persuasive arguments; (iii) strategies to
tailor information to the assumed knowledge of  potential viewers; (iv) strategies
to bond with the viewers and engage them. 

Keywords: digital genres, online videos, multimodality, science
dissemination, recontextualization

Resumen

T e n di e nd o pu e nt e s  e n tre  e xp e rt os  y  p úb l ic os :  e l  pa pe l  d e  l a  mu l tim od al i d ad

e n  l a di s e mi na c ió n d e  l a  inv es t ig ac i ón  e n  v íd e os  on l in e

Internet ofrece a los investigadores diversas herramientas para difundir los
resultados de su investigación y satisfacer las necesidades de información de
públicos diversos. Una de estas herramientas es el vídeo científico en línea,
dirigido a públicos más o menos expertos en la disciplina, y que puede
compartirse a través de varias plataformas. El presente estudio analiza una serie

Bridging the gap between experts and
publics: the role of  multimodality in
disseminating research in online videos

María-José Luzón

Universidad de Zaragoza

mjluzon@unizar.es

167

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 167



Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

de vídeos utilizados por diferentes grupos de investigación para informar sobre
su trabajo y resultados. Mi objetivo es analizar cómo se utilizan las estrategias
multimodales en estos vídeos para recontextualizar el conocimiento cuando se
dirige a un público más amplio. El  análisis revela la existencia de cuatro tipos de
estrategias, que pueden llevarse a cabo por medio de la coordinación de varios
modos semióticos: (i) estrategias para construir la credibilidad y autoridad del
grupo de investigación; (ii) estrategias para construir argumentos persuasivos;
(iii) estrategias para adaptar la información al conocimiento de los espectadores
potenciales, y (iv) estrategias para crear vínculos con los espectadores e
implicarlos en la investigación. 

Palabras clave: géneros digitales, vídeos en línea, multimodalidad,
divulgación científica, recontextualización

1. Introduction

The online environment, with its multimodal affordances, offers researchers
new possibilities for dissemination of  their research and for public outreach.
Online videos have become a popular tool to communicate science to the
public (Kousha, Thelwall & Abdoli, 2012; Erviti & Stengler, 2016; León &
Bourk, 2018) and are used by academics, universities and other organizations
to disseminate courses and other educational content (Pasquali, 2007;
Kousha, Thelwall & Abdoli, 2012). Given the potential of  online videos for
the communication of  science, researchers are analyzing them from different
perspectives, e.g. the uses of  online videos for education (DeCesare, 2014),
the different types and purposes of  online science videos (Thelwall, Kousha,
Weller & Puschmann, 2012; Muñoz-Morcillo, Czurda & Trotha, 2016), or
the factors that affect their popularity (Thelwall et al., 2012; Welbourne &
Grant, 2016; Erviti & León, 2016). However, except for studies on a specific
type of  online video genre, TED Talks (e.g. Scotto di Carlo, 2014; Santini,
2015), there has been little research on how online videos are exploited by
academics to disseminate information about science to the public and to
promote their work and findings. Additionally, studies on TED Talks have
foregrounded the oral mode of  communication and have concentrated
almost exclusively on the analysis of  linguistic features. However, the
multiplicity of  semiotic resources deployed in online science videos calls for
the need to study how various modes interact to make meaning and achieve
the communicative purpose of  the genre. The main focus of  this paper is
the interplay of  various modes in online science videos to recontextualize
knowledge for the intended audience. 

168

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 168



The possibilities for public dissemination afforded by online videos are
particularly important in the current research context, where funding
agencies are increasingly encouraging researchers’ involvement in outreach
activities and interaction with the lay public. The current study analyzes
online videos used by research groups to inform both peers and the
interested public about their research, in order to update scientifically
informed users and engage peers and the public with this research. These
videos share features with science documentaries, in that they combine
narration and audiovisual modes for both informative and persuasive
purposes: they are intended not only to inform the audience but also to
persuade them of  the relevance of  the research. The purpose of  the study
is to analyze how multimodal strategies are used to achieve specific rhetorical
purposes and to meet the information needs of  the audience. I attempt to
answer the following questions: (i) How is the credibility and authority of  the
research group constructed? (ii) How do different modes interplay in the
construction of  arguments? (iii) How do different modes contribute to
making the content understandable? (iv) What rhetorical strategies are used
to engage the viewer and how are they realized? 

2. Online videos and audiences in academic

communication

There is a wide variety of  online science videos (Kousha et al., 2012; León
& Bourk, 2018), differing in terms of  purpose and intended audience. In
their study, Thelwall et al. (2012) classified online science videos into six
categories: scientific demonstration, public dissemination, education, talks to
academics, information about scientists, and comedy. These purposes and
the way the videos are produced are clearly related to the audience. Some
online videos are used as tools to communicate with peers, to show
experimental details or illustrate methods (Thelwall et al., 2012). The Journal
of  Visualized Experiments (JoVE, http://www.jove.com/), for instance, is a
peer reviewed scientific video journal which publishes research in a visual
format. Some journals provide short video summaries of  their published
papers, either embedded on the journal website as a complement to the
paper or on their YouTube channel, e.g. the journal Clinical Gastroenterology
and Hepatology, the New Journal of  Physics or the Journal of  Number Theory. These
videos help to provide information that is difficult to convey only with text,
such as the morphological change of  cells (Pasquali, 2007).

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 169

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 169



Online video is also used as a tool to communicate with and engage the lay
public (Jenkins, 2007; Thelwall et al., 2012; Scotto di Carlo, 2014). Its
multimodal nature makes it a very effective and accessible format to
communicate complex scientific ideas, explain scientific concepts and
communicate science to the interested public (Pasquali, 2007; Thelwall et al.,
2012). Publications like Nature or New Scientist use videos as a complement
to their publication to tell people about the research they publish in a visual
way. In the words of  Sandrine Ceurstemont (multimedia producer at New
Scientist), “in certain cases, video is the most attractive way to convey certain
stories, because you can describe some things in words, but you just see the
video and, right away, you get the point” (Erviti & Stengler, 2016: 7). The
web helps researchers publishing in Nature to reach a wide diversified
audience, consisting both of  other researchers and the interested public. The
fact that online videos can be embedded in several websites and shared on
social media contributes to this widening of  their audience. 

Some research groups are also harnessing the affordances of  the online
video to promote their work among different audiences. The audiovisual
presentations embedded on their websites or available on online platforms
(e.g. YouTube, Vimeo) are more engaging both for peers and for the lay public
than the written description of  their research available on their websites.
Through these videos, groups can interact directly not only with peers but
also with a wider audience, and arouse public interest in their research
activity and their discipline.

3. Multimodality and recontextualization

Online science videos are multimodal texts which draw on several modes or
semiotic resources (e.g. non-verbal sound, spoken and written language,
image) to re-contextualize scientific discourse. Therefore, the analysis of
communication, representation and re-contextualization in these texts
should be approached from a multimodal perspective.

3.1. Multimodality

MDA (Multimodal Discourse Analysis) is based on several assumptions (Kress
& van Leeuwen, 2001; Kress, 2003; Bezemer & Kress, 2008; Jewitt, 2009):
language is just one part of  an ensemble of  modes, all of  which contribute to
meaning; modes have differing modal resources (e.g. writing and speech share

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192170

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 170



lexical and grammatical resources, but they also have other resources, like
punctuation in the case of  writing, and pitch in the case of  speech; images use
resources like size and color, and, in the case of  moving images, movement) and
therefore they can be used to realize different meanings, i.e. they have different
affordances; meaning is constructed through the selection, combination and
interaction of  modes, that is, modes work together to create what Kress and
Van Leeuwen (2001) call “communicational ensembles”. The affordances of
the different modes for meaning-making enable “sign makers to do different
work in relation to their interests and their rhetorical intentions for designs of
meaning, which, in modal ensembles, best meet the rhetor’s interest and sense
of  the needs of  the audience” (Bezemer & Kress, 2008: 171). 

Analyzing academic genres from this perspective involves regarding genres
as “discernible patterns of  semiosis” (O’Halloran, 2009: 99) and accepting
that the social purpose of  the genres is achieved not only through language
but through the interaction of  several semiotic modes. Genres differ in their
semiotic affordances for creating various types of  meaning (Kress & van
Leeuwen, 2001; Bateman, Delin & Henschel, 2007; Bateman, 2008). Users
select semiotic resources from these afforded by the genre and combine
them in such a way that they work together to achieve the communicative
purpose of  the genre. According to Bateman (2008), multimedia genres are
constituted by collections of  rhetorical strategies which collaborate to
achieve the goal of  the genre through the deployment and selection of  the
semiotic modes made available by the medium. 

3.2. Recontextualization

This study explores communication and representation in interview-based
science documentaries, i.e. documentaries where the researchers themselves
tell the story of  their research. In these texts the scientific discourse of
formal academic genres is recontextualized in online science videos,
harnessing the multimodal affordances of  digital video. Bezemer and Kress
(2008: 184) define recontextualization as follows: 

moving meaning material from one context with its social organization of
participants and its modal ensembles to another, with its different social
organization and modal ensembles. Meaning material always has a semiotic
realization, so recontextualization involves the re-presentation of  the
meaning materials in a manner apt for the new context in the light of  the
available modal resources.

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 171

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 171



This definition is particularly relevant in the context of  this study because it
is based on the assumption that meaning is made through the interaction of
modes. 

recontextualization is achieved through various rhetorical processes, e.g.
“simplification” or “condensation”; “explicitation”, “reformulation” and
“elaboration”; and “refocusing” (Calsamiglia & van Dijk, 2004; Bezemer &
Kress, 2008; Bondi, Cacchiani & Mazzi, 2015). According to Bezemer and
Kress (2008), recontextualization involves four rhetorical principles:
“selection” (of  meaning material that is relevant in the new context and
contributes to the rhetor’s interest, and of  modal resources which are
available in the new context and are appropriate for the audience of  this
context); “arrangement” (of  the meaning materials in a way that is best for
the audience and for the rhetor’s purpose); “foregrounding” (of  the
elements that are particularly significant in the new context); and “social
reposition” (or reconstruction of  social relations between the rhetor and the
audience of  the new context).

As a result of  the current interest in the public understanding of  science,
there is a growing body of  research on the strategies used in different genres
to transform scientific discourse into discourse that meets the interests of
the lay or interested public (e.g. Hyland, 2010; Luzón, 2013; Scotto di Carlo,
2014; Hunston, 2015). Hyland’s (2010) concept of  “proximity” helps us to
understand the different facets of  recontextualization in popular texts.
“Proximity” refers to: 

a writer’s control of  rhetorical features which display both authority as an
expert and a personal position towards issues in an unfolding text. It involves
responding to the context of  the text (…) It is concerned with how writers
represent not only themselves and their readers, but also their material, in
ways which are most likely to meet their readers’ expectations (Hyland, 2010:
117). 

Hyland compares how proximity is constructed in texts intended for experts
and for a lay public and in doing so he shows how the discourse of  research
articles is recontextualized in popular science. For instance, in popular
science new concepts are defined and explained, in order to adapt
information to the assumed knowledge of  the potential readers, and
questions and second person pronouns are used to involve the reader.
Hunston (2015) analyzed interviews with scientists on a radio programme
and found that they used interpersonal strategies to promote their work in

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192172

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 172



front of  the general public, e.g. evidentials and status markers, emphasis on
the novelty of  results or value of  the research. recontextualization strategies
have also been explored in digital genres (e.g. Luzón, 2013; Scotto di Carlo,
2014). In science blogs, the bloggers’ desire to reach a wide and diversified
audience leads to the use of  strategies to connect with the interested public
(e.g. informal discourse, personal narratives) and to the blending of
discursive practices from different discourses (Luzón, 2013). In TED Talks
speakers draw on various discourse strategies to establish a close relation
with the audience and enhance their credibility (Scotto di Carlo, 2014). 

4. Corpus and Method

4.1. Corpus

The corpus analyzed in this study is composed of  14 online videos where
research groups report on their research. Two sets of  videos have been
selected: (i) promotional videos produced by research groups themselves or
their institutions, available on the research group’s website or on other
platforms like YouTube or Vimeo (or on both), where the groups tell about
their research lines (henceforth referred to as “Presentation Videos”); (ii)
videos from Nature Online Video Streaming Archive, also available on the
Nature YouTube channel, which act as complements to published papers
(henceforth referred to as “nature Videos”). Charlotte Stoddart, the Head
of  Multimedia at Nature, stated that the video format enabled both scientists
and public to understand better the published research (Erviti & Stengler,
2016). The objective of  both types of  videos is the promotion of  scientific
culture and the dissemination of  the group’s research activity. However,
while nature Videos recontextualize the specific research reported in the
paper, Presentation Videos report more broadly on the group’s areas of
research and interests. Therefore, they may resort to different rhetorical
strategies and resources to achieve their communicative purpose.

Seven videos were selected from each group (see Appendix). In order to find
the Presentation Videos, search words like “(our) research group”, “(our)
research team” were used in Google Videos, YouTube and Vimeo. The following
criteria were used to select these videos: (i) they should be in English; (ii) they
should be interview-based science documentaries; (iii) they should be
between 3 and 6 minutes long; (iv) they should have been produced in the
last 3 years or (if  they were older) they should still be present on the research

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 173

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 173



group’s website (to make sure that they were still relevant for the group).
regarding the nature Videos, all of  them are written in English. I selected
the seven most recent interview-based science documentaries (at the time of
collection) with a length between 3 and 6 minutes. 

The corpus size is moderate for two reasons. First, it was difficult to find
Presentation Videos that met all the selection criteria listed above: many
research groups produce Presentation Videos in their own first language,
rather than in English, to reach a local audience; in addition, in some cases
groups do not use interview-based science documentaries to present their
research, but a monologic format. The second reason to select only 14
videos was the need to work with a manageable corpus, since the analysis
involved looking at a variety of  semiotic resources. A corpus of  this size
provides enough analytic data for the type of  study (i.e. mostly qualitative)
reported in this paper, and is in line with the corpora used in other studies
of  multimodality in academic genres (Querol-Julián & Fortanet Gómez,
2012; Valeiras-Jurado, ruiz-Madrid & Jacobs, 2018).

4.2. Method

In this research a multimodal perspective is adopted to analyze the
recontextualization of  academic discourse in online science videos. From
this perspective, the focus of  analysis is on how the different semiotic
resources which are co-present in the videos interplay to enact rhetorical
strategies. 

Paltridge (2012) notes that when carrying out MDA there are often too many
data for analysis and therefore it is necessary to select specific aspects to
examine. Due to the impossibility of  analyzing all the semiotic resources that
contribute to the recontextualization of  science in online videos, I decided
to focus on the following modes: speech, written language, static images, and
moving images. Paralanguage and kinesic features are not analyzed, despite
their importance in genres where scientists present research orally (see
Querol-Julián & Fortanet Gómez, 2012; ruiz-Madrid & Fortanet Gómez,
2017). I will discuss briefly the role of  gestures when they play a particularly
important role, but the detailed study of  gestures by participants in the video
is too complex to be dealt with in this study.

The data for this study were analyzed with Atlas.ti, a qualitative data analysis
tool which allows annotation and coding of  text, audio and video
documents. Documents can be loaded on Atlas.ti to make a corpus, and

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192174

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 174



selected data segments in these documents (video segments in the current
study) can be assigned one or more codes. In this study, coding was done by
starting with an initial list of  anticipated codes which evolved over time, as
some codes were eliminated and new codes emerging from the data were
added.

To design this initial code list, I took into account research on the discursive
strategies used in scientific discourse to respond to the context of  the text
(Fahnestock, 1986; Calsamiglia & Van Dijk, 2004; Giannoni, 2008; Hyland,
2010; Luzón, 2013). These studies provided the justification for the
classification of  recontextualizing strategies into four groups: (i) strategies to
construct the research group’s credibility and authority (“Source credibility”);
(ii) strategies to construct persuasive arguments (“Convincing arguments”);
(iii) strategies to tailor information to the assumed knowledge of  potential
readers (“Framing”); (iv) strategies to engage the viewers (“Engagement”).
Previous research on rhetorical strategies also provided information on the
semiotic resources to realize these strategies, which guided their
identification in the corpus. For instance, “Appeal to novelty” can be realized
verbally through positive evaluation (e.g. “a new approach”). The initial code
list based on previous research was complemented with codes generated on
the basis of  my observation of  the data, using the “coding in vivo” option
of  Atlas.ti. The rationale for this methodological decision was that previous
research focuses mainly on verbal modes, and, since visual modes have such
an important role in meaning-making in science videos, it is necessary to
consider also visual semiotic resources and analyze how they are co-deployed
with other semiotic resources to enact rhetorical strategies. 

The first phase in the analysis of  the video corpus consisted in viewing each
of  the videos twice to get a general impression of  the rhetorical work and of
the strategies used in these videos to recontextualize scientific knowledge.
The second phase consisted in coding the data. In the first round, video
segments were assigned descriptive codes (semiotic resources related to each
of  the four broad categories of  strategies: “Source credibility”, “Convincing
arguments”, “Framing” and “Engagement”), e.g. “Video footage
representing researchers doing science. Source credibility”. “Verbal non-
technical explanation. Framing”. These codes were then grouped into
categories (strategies). For instance, “Video footage representing researchers
doing science” was grouped into the category “representing researchers as
experts”. Coding was an iterative process, which involved refining codes,
eliminating redundant ones or merging those that were minimally different.

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 175

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 175



The possibility of  assigning more than one code to each data segment helps
to reveal how various semiotic resources are co-deployed to enact rhetorical
strategies.

Tables 1-4 in section 5 list the different strategies and semiotic resources that
were coded for. As pointed out above, this is a qualitative study, intended to
show how various modes interplay to realize strategies through which
research is contextualized in online videos. However, some quantitative
information is provided (i.e. the number of  videos in each set where the
various semiotic resources are used) to help establish the relation between
the use of  these resources and the communicative purpose of  the genre.

5. Results

In this section I discuss how various semiotic resources are co-deployed in
science videos to establish the group’s authority and credibility, shape the
material to construct persuasive arguments, tailor information to the
audience’s needs, and engage and position the audience. 

5.1. Establishing the group’s authority and credibility

Table 1 presents the different strategies to establish the group’s authority (in
italics) and the resources through which these strategies are realized. The
table also provides quantitative information on the number of  videos where
these strategies and resources occur, to determine the extent to which they
are typical of  this type of  video. Quantitative data are provided on the two
sets of  videos separately to reveal any possible difference.

In order to bestow credibility on the researchers reporting the information,
three strategies are used: informing of  the researcher’s/ group’s position and
affiliation, representing researchers as experts, and informing about the
group’s collaborators. Viewers are informed of  the group’s affiliation
through several modes: by means of  superimposed writing when the
researchers first appear on screen; through speech, with the researchers
introducing themselves (e.g. 1a) or with voice-over presenting the group (e.g.
1b); by means of  images (e.g. Faculty, logo). Setting contributes to
constructing the academic identity: all videos but one are filmed in an
academic setting (laboratories, facilities of  the research center, offices) and
in the case of  Presentation Videos a picture of  the main entrance of  the

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192176

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 176



Faculty building or the research Centre is always present. All these resources
contribute to the meaning that the researchers’ authority is institutionally
legitimate.

1a. My name is Guido Schäfer. I’m the group leader of  the networks
and Optimization Group here at CW (V11)

1b. The heterogeneous catalysis and sustainable chemistry group led
by professor Gaddy rothenberg forms part of  the Vanette HOF
Institute for molecular sciences at the university of  Amsterdam
(V12).

The representation of  researchers as experts is also achieved by the interplay
of  visual and verbal resources. In all the videos researchers themselves
present their research (even if  in some videos there is also a voice-over or
external narrator): in nature Videos researchers present a specific finding
and in Presentation Videos they present their research line or main
achievement. In all the videos, live-action footage represents members of  the
group “doing research” in their research setting and using the methods of
their discipline, e.g. digging in archaeological sites, using laboratory
equipment or computers. Additionally, in 64.3% of  the videos (100% of  the

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 177

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN EXPERTS AND PUBLICS 

of this type of video. Quantitative data are provided on the two sets of videos 
separately to reveal any possible difference. 

Strategies and semiotic resources No. of videos 
(Nature) 

No. of videos 
(Presentation) 

Informing of researcher’s/ group’s position and affiliation   
Voice-over information about researcher’s/ group’s 
affiliation 

1 2 

Researcher’s self-introduction 1 2 
Written identification of researcher’s/ group’s 
affiliation 

7 7 

Image of Faculty, University, Research Centre 0 7 
University logo 0 2 
Visual representation of academic setting  6 7 

Representing researchers as experts    
Researchers presenting their own research 
verbally 

7 7 

Video footage representing researchers “doing 
science” 

7 7 

Video footage representing researchers explaining 
aspects of their research  

7 2 

Visual representation of equipment 7 7 
Exclusive “we” 7 7 
Positive verbal evaluation of the group and their 
facilities 

0 2 

Informing about the group’s network   
Reference to collaborators 0 6 

Table 1. Semiotic resources to establish the group’s authority and credibility. 

In order to bestow credibility on the researchers reporting the information, three 
strategies are used: informing of the researcher’s/ group’s position and affiliation, 
representing researchers as experts, and informing about the group’s 
collaborators. Viewers are informed of the group’s affiliation through several 
modes: by means of superimposed writing when the researchers first appear on 
screen; through speech, with the researchers introducing themselves (e.g. 1a) or 
with voice-over presenting the group (e.g. 1b); by means of images (e.g. Faculty, 
logo). Setting contributes to constructing the academic identity: all videos but 
one are filmed in an academic setting (laboratories, facilities of the research 
center, offices) and in the case of Presentation Videos a picture of the main 
entrance of the Faculty building or the Research Centre is always present. All 
these resources contribute to the meaning that the researchers’ authority is 
institutionally legitimate. 

1a. My name is Guido Schäfer. I’m the group leader of the Networks and 
Optimization Group here at CW (V11) 

1b. The heterogeneous catalysis and sustainable chemistry group led by 
professor Gaddy Rothenberg forms part of the Vanette HOF Institute for 
molecular sciences at the university of Amsterdam (V12). 

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 177



nature Videos) researchers are represented explaining aspects of  their
research: they describe the procedures and methods they use, or they explain
concepts and theories. These visual and verbal resources are combined to
show researchers’ expertise and knowledge of  the discipline and their
mastery of  disciplinary procedures and practices. 

The use of  “exclusive we” also helps to enhance authority and give visibility
to the group. This linguistic device is, however, used differently in the two
sets of  videos. In nature Videos “exclusive we” performs mostly the
discourse function of  “recounter of  the research process”: a writer “who
describes or recounts the various steps of  the research process” (Tang &
John, 1999: S28) (see example 2). This recount shows that researchers are
familiar with disciplinary procedures and methods and thus helps to
construct their identity as experts. 

2. We selected two pairs of  animals (…) We measured the muscle
power (…) So to measure these things, we used wildlife tracking
collars (V2)

In Presentation Videos “exclusive we” performs mainly the discourse
function of  “originator”, a role in which speakers “claim authority” and
ownership of  findings and show ”that they perceive themselves as people
who have the right and the ability to originate new ideas” (Tang & John,
1999: S29) (see examples 3a and 3b). 

3a. In our group we develop mathematical tools to solve complex
optimization problems coming from real world applications (V11)

3b. Several or our discoveries have resulted in valuable inventions
(…) Most recently, we’ve discovered a new type of  biodegradable
plastic. It is completely biodegradable, made of  100% plant-
based materials (V12) 

Authority is also constructed by the positive evaluation of  the group, their
research outcomes or their equipment (as evidence of  their capability to
conduct research). For example, in V14 the researcher states “we have become
a world recognized research team internationally”. Similarly, in V12 the voice-
over describes the group as “internationally known as a leader in catalyst
discovery and optimization” and the members of  the group use the following
words to describe their lab: “newest commercially available equipment”,

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192178

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 178



“brand new lab”, “state of  the art equipment”. The frequent pairing or
“we”/“our” with positive evaluation foregrounds the relevance, novelty and
importance of  the groups’ research (see examples 3a and 3b above). 

Finally, in Presentation Videos, making reference to collaborators and
stressing the importance of  the collaboration also helps to reinforce the
credibility of  the researchers.

5.2. Shaping material to construct persuasive arguments

Table 2 presents the different strategies and semiotic resources used in these
videos to make arguments and claims more acceptable for the viewers.

Although in both sets of  videos several semiotic resources are combined to
construct persuasive arguments, there are some differences in the resources
used for this purpose. nature Videos are similar to popularizations in that
they present a “narrative of  nature” (Myers, 1990): the narrative is organized
chronologically and focuses on the object of  research, rather than on the
research process. This chronological presentation helps to “enhance the
visibility of  information and make the message more convincing” (Hyland,
2010: 121). In the videos the verbal chronological narration is integrated with
images which help viewers visualize the stages of  the narrative and attract
their attention to the object of  research. Presentation Videos do not present
a narrative of  nature, probably due to the fact that these videos are intended
to present an overview of  the group’s research activity rather than report on
a specific finding.

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 179

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN EXPERTS AND PUBLICS 

Finally, in Presentation Videos, making reference to collaborators and stressing 
the importance of the collaboration also helps to reinforce the credibility of the 
researchers. 

5.2. Shaping material to construct persuasive arguments 
Table 2 presents the different strategies and semiotic resources used in these 
videos to make arguments and claims more acceptable for the viewers. 

Strategies and semiotic resources No. of videos 
(Nature) 

No. of videos 
(Presentation) 

Presenting a narrative of nature   
Chronological verbal presentation 6 0 
Visuals to support the narrative 6 0 

Appeal to novelty or newsworthiness   
Evaluative language to express a gap/ problem/ challenge 4 5 
Positive verbal evaluation of their research 4 5 

Appeal to application   
Linguistic expression of ability 4 7 
Listing of uses or applications 3 3 
Visual representation of uses or applications 3 3 

Providing supporting evidence for claims   
Visual providing evidence for what is being said 5 1 
Providing evidence with gesture/ action 1 0 

Table 2. Semiotic resources to make claims and arguments convincing. 

Although in both sets of videos several semiotic resources are combined to 
construct persuasive arguments, there are some differences in the resources used 
for this purpose. Nature Videos are similar to popularizations in that they present 
a “narrative of nature” (Myers, 1990): the narrative is organized chronologically 
and focuses on the object of research, rather than on the research process. This 
chronological presentation helps to “enhance the visibility of information and 
make the message more convincing” (Hyland, 2010: 121). In the videos the 
verbal chronological narration is integrated with images which help viewers 
visualize the stages of the narrative and attract their attention to the object of 
research. Presentation Videos do not present a narrative of nature, probably due 
to the fact that these videos are intended to present an overview of the group’s 
research activity rather than report on a specific finding. 

Another difference between the two sets of videos is the use of visuals to 
construct arguments. There are more Nature Videos where visuals help to 
provide evidence for claims. This is consistent with the fact that these videos 
recontextualize Nature papers where a claim to knowledge is made. As can be 
seen in example (4), different types of visuals can be used for support, e.g. video 
footage, computer simulation, still images, or various disciplinary visual aids. In 
V2 video footage illustrates what the researcher says: a cheetah is filmed chasing 
its prey and trying to catch it up (e.g. 4a); in V1 the researcher shows that a 

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 179



Another difference between the two sets of  videos is the use of  visuals to
construct arguments. There are more nature Videos where visuals help to
provide evidence for claims. This is consistent with the fact that these videos
recontextualize Nature papers where a claim to knowledge is made. As can be
seen in example (4), different types of  visuals can be used for support, e.g.
video footage, computer simulation, still images, or various disciplinary visual
aids. In V2 video footage illustrates what the researcher says: a cheetah is
filmed chasing its prey and trying to catch it up (e.g. 4a); in V1 the researcher
shows that a helmet fits on her head by actually trying it on (e.g. 4b); in the
same video the researcher explains how MEG (Magnetoencephalography)
works and uses the scan image on the computer to actually show areas of  the
brain moving, and thus provide evidence for what he says (e.g. 4c). 

4a. The prey is … always a stride ahead and the predator is always
playing catch-up (+video footage) (V2)

4b. It fits perfectly on my head (+video footage) (V1)

4c. We can localize which area of  the brain is responsible for the
movement (+scan image) (V1)

To make the research valuable for the audience, these videos draw on the
“novelty” appeal, i.e. presenting the research as a new contribution to
existing disciplinary knowledge (Hyland, 2010) and the “applications”
appeal, i.e. presenting the research as having further benefits or future
applications (Fahnestock, 1986). Hyland (2010) notes that novelty is
negotiated differently in research papers and popular texts. While in research
papers claims for novelty are made against existing disciplinary knowledge,
in popular texts the novel is changed into the newsworthy and scientific
findings are evaluated in terms of  uniqueness and immediate value for the
audience. The evaluative statements in examples (5a) and (5b) are used to
emphasize that the group is making a contribution to existing knowledge:

5a. What makes the group special is that it connects deep methods
from mathematics to practical problems from logistics (V11)

5b. We are taking all that software and all that knowledge....and
bringing it into new domains of  biology and nanotechnology (V9)

Example (6) illustrates the newsworthiness appeal. The first sequences of
the video intersperse the expressions of  “wonder” by an expert outside the

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192180

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 180



research group and by a group member with written text on a black screen.
Both in the participants’ speech and in the written text, uniqueness and
originality is stressed with the use of  evaluative vocabulary. This is combined
with emphasis of  this evaluation achieved through intonation (high pitch
words appear in CAPITALS) and gestures.

6. Expert’s speech: My first reaction on reading the paper was nO
this is wrong, something is wrong.

Written text: An archaeological dig in California...

researcher’s speech: They are gonna think, this is crazy, this is
outrageous

Written text: ...has unearthed something almost unbelievable...

Expert: I didn’t believe it. I STILL don’t believe it properly.

Written text: ..about the first human to reach north America

researcher’s speech: It really is a paradigm shift in terms of  when
humans arrived in this continent.

Expert’s speech: and if  it DOES turn out to be true, it changes
ABSOLUTELY everything

Videos in both sets establish the relevance of  the research by presenting the
research process as a result of  the researchers’ effort to solve a problem or
challenge (see examples 7a and 7b). The claim for novelty or newsworthiness is
usually based on the positive evaluation of  the solution to that problem (see
examples 7c and 7d). Although the presentation of  the problem is mostly done
verbally, through the use of  evaluative vocabulary, visuals can help to provide
evidence for the negative evaluation, as shown in example (7b). The utterance
of  “very large, they are very bulky and that one size fits all” is synchronous first
with the researcher’s gestures and then with the image of  an EMG scanner
through which the audience can actually see how bulky these devices are.

7a. One of  the real challenges for sport teams is to decide when their
athletes will be ready to return to sport. The work we do here at
LGMU allows us to help inform those decision-making
processes (V8)

7b. The problem with current EMG scanners is that they are very
large, they are very bulky and that one size fits all (V1)

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 181

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 181



7c. The existing commercial processes for making nylon are not very
clean. They use corrosive chemicals and produce large amount of
byproducts. We are now developing a new process that avoids
these problems (V12) 

7d. One of  its work areas is the design of  revolutionary biosensors
with highly competitive properties …(V10)

The “applications” appeal is realized through semiotic resources that stress
and present the usefulness or benefits of  the research (both verbally and
visually): linguistic expressions of  ability help to present the benefits that the
research will bring to the audience (see example 8a); verbal presentation of
uses or applications are synchronized with video footage representing these
applications, which helps the viewers visualize and remember them (see
example 8b)

8a. With this new technology scanning babies… is going to become
possible (…) I think we will certainly be able to really start seeing
the neural substrate that underlie these disorders in children (V1)

8b. These kind of  three-dimensional visualizations may instead be
used to train medical professionals for advanced procedures. They
can also be used in aviation. (+ visuals showing applications) (V5)

5.3. Strategies to tailor information to the needs of  the interested

public

In the videos analyzed visual and verbal semiotic resources interplay to make
the message more understandable for the lay audience. As in popular texts,
in online science videos language is used to explain or clarify concepts or
processes that may be unfamiliar for viewers. Concepts, theories or
processes are defined or explained in non-technical language or compared to
other everyday concepts or processes that lay people can engage with (see
example 9). These linguistic resources are most often co-deployed with
visuals for a clearer explanation of  how science works. Visual resources
interact with verbal resources in a variety of  ways: definitions, comparisons
and descriptions may be accompanied by images, as is the case of  the
definition in example 9; an object may be mentioned synchronously with its
verbal representation, which makes further verbal explanation unnecessary
(see example 10); deixis is accompanied by visual representation of  the

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192182

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 182



object (see example 11); moving simulations show what the researcher is
explaining or what the voice-over is saying. For instance, in V3 the researcher
explains the different injuries in a skull and the video shows a simulated skull
spinning to show the injuries that the speaker is talking about.

9. A volumetric image is essentially an image that is taking up three-
dimensional space (+ filmed image of  a volumetric image) (V5)

10. If  you produce a trabecular lattice, you could grow cells.(+ filmed
image of  a trabecular lattice) (V9)

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 183

MARÍA JOSÉ LUZÓN 

Ibérica xx (xxxx): …-… 

Strategies and semiotic resources No. of videos 
(Nature) 

No. of videos 
(Presentation) 

Comparison 3 0 
Definition 3 3 
Representation/ description of an object   

Verbal description of an object 4 0 
Visual representation of an object mentioned in the 
video (naming+ deixis) 

7 4 

Non-technical explanation of disciplinary procedures and 
methods 

  

Verbal non-technical explanation  5 1 
Representation of disciplinary procedures through video 
footage 

3 2 

Non-technical explanation or demonstration of concepts, 
theories  

  

Verbal non-technical explanation or demonstration of 
concepts, theories 

6 5 

Symbolic images to facilitate understanding of 
researcher’s explanation 

6 4 

Visual elaboration of what the researcher is saying 2 0 
Emphasis, noticing   

Written language of key words 4 1 
Gestures  7 7 

Table 3. Strategies to tailor information to the needs of the interested public. 

In the videos analyzed visual and verbal semiotic resources interplay to make the 
message more understandable for the lay audience. As in popular texts, in online 
science videos language is used to explain or clarify concepts or processes that 
may be unfamiliar for viewers. Concepts, theories or processes are defined or 
explained in non-technical language or compared to other everyday concepts or 
processes that lay people can engage with (see example 9). These linguistic 
resources are most often co-deployed with visuals for a clearer explanation of 
how science works. Visual resources interact with verbal resources in a variety of 
ways: definitions, comparisons and descriptions may be accompanied by images, 
as is the case of the definition in example 9; an object may be mentioned 
synchronously with its verbal representation, which makes further verbal 
explanation unnecessary (see example 10); deixis is accompanied by visual 
representation of the object (see example 11); moving simulations show what the 
researcher is explaining or what the voiceover is saying. For instance, in V3 the 
researcher explains the different injuries in a skull and the video shows a 
simulated skull spinning to show the injuries that the speaker is talking about. 

 9. A volumetric image is essentially an image that is taking up three-
dimensional space (+ filmed image of a volumetric image) (V5) 

10. If you produce a trabecular lattice, you can.(+ filmed image of a 
trabecular lattice) (V9)!

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN EXPERTS AND PUBLICS 

 
Figure 1. Researcher holding a trabecular lattice 

11. This is a cheetah collar, this is a zebra collar and this is a lion collar (+ 
filmed image of the researcher pointing to the different collars) (V2) 

The explanations of disciplinary procedures and methods are also illustrated 
visually: information is presented synchronously in two modes (moving image 
and speech) to help understanding. For instance, in V7, the narrator’s and the 
researcher’s voices are interspersed to explain how the research group makes a 
new kind of maser using diamond, while one of the researchers demonstrates the 
whole process, in such a way that the viewers have a visual representation of the 
process and can actually see all the stages (e.g. “And then what we do, we 
actually shine a green laser, And when the laser hits the NV centers, the diamond 
glows a rich pink”). Similarly, in V8 the principal investigator explains one of 
the techniques used by the group, i.e. three-dimensional motion analysis, while a 
participant in the video illustrates this technique (see Figure 2). 

 
Figure 2. Illustration of three-dimensional motion analysis. 

Another frequent strategy to help the viewers understand how science works and 

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

EEN BETWAPGTHE NGIDGBRI    

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

CSIPUBLAND TS EXPEREEN    

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

1.e gurFi

11. sisiTh a coaheetch
se reeefilm

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

ecitatlarulabecrta ng diholhercearesR1.

a rzeba sisiht,arllco arllco tdan
ne thtinino prehcrae

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

(arllconoila sisiht + 
srllaot cn )2(V) 

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

ilpicsidfosnoitanalpxeeTh
ylluasvi rpisntioamrin: enes

antserdnupelhot)eechpsdan
rsetnireaseciovs’rehrcaesre
mading iusresamofnd kiwne
ywaahcusni,ssecorpelowh
eesy lluatcan acnd asseocpr

A,erasleenrga e nihsylaluact
lralimiS.)nk”pih cirasowgl
rgethybdesuseuiqnhcteeth

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

sdohtemdnaserudecorpani
mowtniylsuonorchnysedten

ce,antsniroF.gnidan th, 7Vin
sreehtwohnialpxeotderseprs

hetofoneelhiwond,m hrcaesre
lausivaevahsrweeivehttahty
hetnd A“g..e(sgeatshetllae

VNe htstiherasle htenhwdnA
gaitsnveilpainciprhet8 Vn i,yl

eerth. i.e, puor - otmlonainsemdi

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

detartsullioslaeras
e agmignivom(esdom
ethdnas’rtoarraneth
asekampuroghrcae
ehtsetratsnomedrseh
ehtfonoitatneserper
ewdo,ewthawn he

tcen ers, dnomiadeth
ofonensiaxpleortga
aelhiw,siyslnaaon iot

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

rgethybdesuseuiqnhcteeth
rtusllio devihetn intpaicitrpa

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

eerth. i.e, uor otmlonainsemdi
setar eruig Fees (enhc teisth

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

aelhiw,siyslnaaon iot
.) 2

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

2.e gurFi sIllu

hotygetartstneuqerehtoAn

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

eref th ontiotras - ysianalon iotmonalensimdi

ohdnatsrednusrweeivehtpleh

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

sysi .

dnaskrwoecneicsw o

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 183



11. This is a cheetah collar, this is a zebra collar and this is a lion collar
(+ filmed image of  the researcher pointing to the different collars) (V2)

The explanations of  disciplinary procedures and methods are also illustrated
visually: information is presented synchronously in two modes (moving
image and speech) to help understanding. For instance, in V7, the narrator’s
and the researcher’s voices are interspersed to explain how the research
group makes a new kind of  maser using diamond, while one of  the
researchers demonstrates the whole process, in such a way that the viewers
have a visual representation of  the process and can actually see all the stages
(e.g. “And then what we do, we actually shine a green laser. And when the
laser hits the nV centers, the diamond glows a rich pink”). Similarly, in V8
the principal investigator explains one of  the techniques used by the group,
i.e. three-dimensional motion analysis, while a participant in the video
illustrates this technique (see Figure 2).

Another frequent strategy to help the viewers understand how science works
and clarify scientific content is having the researcher explain or demonstrate
the concepts with the help of  visual aids: explanations are combined with
writing or drawing on a whiteboard or on paper, with images and simulations
on computers, or with simulations superimposed on the video footage. In
V7, for example, the researcher uses the whiteboard to explain how masers
work and in V8 (see Figure 3) a computer simulation helps to explain how
three-dimensional motion analysis works.

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192184

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN EXPERTS AND PUBLICS 

 
Figure 1. Researcher holding a trabecular lattice 

11. This is a cheetah collar, this is a zebra collar and this is a lion collar (+ 
filmed image of the researcher pointing to the different collars) (V2) 

The explanations of disciplinary procedures and methods are also illustrated 
visually: information is presented synchronously in two modes (moving image 
and speech) to help understanding. For instance, in V7, the narrator’s and the 
researcher’s voices are interspersed to explain how the research group makes a 
new kind of maser using diamond, while one of the researchers demonstrates the 
whole process, in such a way that the viewers have a visual representation of the 
process and can actually see all the stages (e.g. “And then what we do, we 
actually shine a green laser, And when the laser hits the NV centers, the diamond 
glows a rich pink”). Similarly, in V8 the principal investigator explains one of 
the techniques used by the group, i.e. three-dimensional motion analysis, while a 
participant in the video illustrates this technique (see Figure 2). 

 
Figure 2. Illustration of three-dimensional motion analysis. 

Another frequent strategy to help the viewers understand how science works and 

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

EEN BETWAPGTHE NGIDGBRI    

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

CSIPUBLAND TS EXPEREEN    

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

1.e gurFi

11. sisiTh a coaheetch
se reeefilm

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

ecitatlarulabecrta ng diholhercearesR1.

a rzeba sisiht,arllco arllco tdan
ne thtinino prehcrae

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

(arllconoila sisiht + 
srllaot cn )2(V) 

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

ilpicsidfosnoitanalpxeeTh
ylluasvi rpisntioamrin: enes

antserdnupelhot)eechpsdan
rsetnireaseciovs’rehrcaesre
mading iusresamofnd kiwne
ywaahcusni,ssecorpelowh
eesy lluatcan acnd asseocpr

A,erasleenrga e nihsylaluact
lralimiS.)nk”pih cirasowgl
rgethybdesuseuiqnhcteeth

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

sdohtemdnaserudecorpani
mowtniylsuonorchnysedten

ce,antsniroF.gnidan th, 7Vin
sreehtwohnialpxeotderseprs

hetofoneelhiwond,m hrcaesre
lausivaevahsrweeivehttahty
hetnd A“g..e(sgeatshetllae

VNe htstiherasle htenhwdnA
gaitsnveilpainciprhet8 Vn i,yl

eerth. i.e, puor - otmlonainsemdi

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

detartsullioslaeras
e agmignivom(esdom
ethdnas’rtoarraneth
asekampuroghrcae
ehtsetratsnomedrseh
ehtfonoitatneserper
ewdo,ewthawn he

tcen ers, dnomiadeth
ofonensiaxpleortga
aelhiw,siyslnaaon iot

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

rgethybdesuseuiqnhcteeth
rtusllio devihetn intpaicitrpa

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

eerth. i.e, uor otmlonainsemdi
setar eruig Fees (enhc teisth

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

aelhiw,siyslnaaon iot
.) 2

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

2.e gurFi sIllu

hotygetartstneuqerehtoAn

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

eref th ontiotras - ysianalon iotmonalensimdi

ohdnatsrednusrweeivehtpleh

   

 
    

              
 

          
        

            
            

           
               

          
           

          
         

    

 
   

           

sysi .

dnaskrwoecneicsw o

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 184



Visuals can also be used to elaborate content that has been presented in
speech, although this is not frequent, since visuals usually co-occur with
explicit verbal explanations. For instance, in V3 the utterance in example (12)
is synchronous with a drawing which provides more detailed and specific
information of  “peculiar position”. The researcher does not need to
describe that “peculiar position” verbally because it is very clear from the
image.

12. A young lady who was found sitting and she had her hands
crossed in a very peculiar position (V3)

Finally, another strategy that helps comprehension by enhancing information
is emphasis, defined by Valeiras-Jurado et al. (2018: 110) as “highlighting parts
of  the message so that they receive more attention”. In the videos in the
corpus emphasis is mainly achieved through intonation, gestures and written
text. Written language helps to emphasize and draw attention to elements of
spoken discourse (e.g. technical concepts). For instance, in V7 the participant
is using the whiteboard to explain how masers work and when he says “This
putting electrons into a higher stage is called a population inversion”,
“population inversion” is written on the blackboard and underlined. In the
same video, the researcher describes a maser assembly, with the help of  video
footage, and the different elements of  the assembly are labeled with written
text superimposed on the image of  the assembly. 

5.4. Strategies to engage the audience

Hyland (2010: 295) defines engagement as “an alignment dimension of
interaction where writers acknowledge and connect to others”. The semiotic

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 185

MARÍA JOSÉ LUZÓN 

Ibérica xx (xxxx): …-… 

clarify scientific content is having the researcher explain or demonstrate the 
concepts with the help of visual aids: explanations are combined with writing or 
drawing on a whiteboard or on paper, with images and simulations on computers, 
or with simulations superimposed on the video footage. In V7, for example, the 
researcher uses the whiteboard to explain how masers work and in V8 (see 
Figure 3) a computer simulation helps to explain how three-dimensional motion 
analysis works. 

 
Figure 3. Computer simulation of three-dimensional motion analysis. 

Visuals can also be used to elaborate content that has been presented in speech, 
although this is not frequent, since visuals usually co-occur with explicit verbal 
explanations. For instance, in V3 the utterance in example (12) is synchronous 
with a drawing which provides more detailed and specific information of 
“peculiar position”. The researcher does not need to describe that “peculiar 
position” verbally because it is very clear from the image. 

12. A young lady who was found sitting and she had her hands crossed in 
a very peculiar position (V3) 

Finally, another strategy that helps comprehension by enhancing information is 
emphasis, defined by Valeiras-Jurado et al. (2018: 110) as “highlighting parts of 
the message so that they receive more attention”. In the videos in the corpus 
emphasis is mainly achieved through intonation, gestures and written text. 
Written language helps to emphasize and draw attention to elements of spoken 
discourse (e.g. technical concepts). For instance, in V7 the participant is using 
the whiteboard to explain how masers work and when he says “This putting 
electrons into a higher stage is called a population inversion”, "population 
inversion" is written on the blackboard and underlined. In the same video, the 
researcher describes a maser assembly, with the help of video footage, and the 
different elements of the assembly are labeled with written text superimposed on 
the image of the assembly.  

 

ÓNZULÉOSJAÍRMA

sitentncoc itencisiarcl
usivfopelhe hthtiwstcepnco

on ord rboaethiwaon ng iwadr
posmirupesonsitaulmish tiwor
obetihwehtsesur ehrcaesre
talumisretupmoca)3erugFi

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

nailpexerchearesre htgniavh
atanlpex:sdaialu bmocerasnio

ulmisnd asgeamih tiw,rpepaon 
n I.geao deviheton d epos
wrsesamwohnialpxeotrda

wohnialpxeotsplehnoit eerth

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

e hte atrtsnoemdron
rogitinrwithwdeinb
,sreputomcon onsitaul

het,eplmxae7,V
nidnarkow ees(V8

e- on iotmlonainsemdi

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

.skrowsisyalan

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

erputomC3.e gurFi

eotdesueboslanacslausVi
al t, neuqet onisisthhguoth

nice,antsniroF.snoiatanlpex
vorphciwhgnwiardahtwi

ehT”.noitisoparilecu“p sre

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

eehrtofon iatulmiser - analon iotmonalensimdi

neebsahtahttnetnocetarobale
ocllyausulsauisvecins - urcoc

e lpamexnice anerttue ht3Vn
sediv epsdnadeliatedermo

edotdeentonseodr ehrcaes

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

sysianal .

,hceepsnidetneserp
lbarveticixpleh tiwur
suonorchnyssi)21(e 
fonoitmarnicic
r ailucep“tahtebrics

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

itieusacbey llbarveon”itipos

12. ohwydalgnuoyA 
yerva on itiraiulc

tahtygetartsrehtona,yllanFi
asreiybednd,siashpem
ceryetht athosegassemeth
edeviachylnaimsisiashpem
meotsplehegaugnalnettiWr

oncclachnicetg..e(esourcsdi
ohinlapxetodraobitehweth

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

.geamihetomraelcy rvesi

dahehsdnagnittisdnusaw
on )3(V

pmocspleh ahneybnoisnehre
as- “s a)011:8102(.lateodarJu

ethnI. ”ntiontteaeromeivec
esrutesg,noiatnotnihguorhted
otnoitnettawarddnaezisahpm

het7 Vn i,encatnsiorF.)spteonc
hnehwdnakrowsresamwo

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

nidessorcsdnahreh

sinoitarmfonignicna
fos trapgnithgilhgih“
suprocethinsoeidv

aes .xtetn ettirwnd 
nekopsfostnemeleo

ng iussintpaicitrpahe
e sysa gnittupsih“T

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

x xaicréIb ): …xxx(x -…

p
orectel geatsrghehiao ntins

bethnonitterwis"niosrevin
r esamasebricsedr ehrcaesre

sahetofsntemelenterdi se
. lybmess ae oega imeth

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

nveion itapopulad ellacsige
nI. delinrednudnadraobkclab
ivf oplehehthtiw,ylbmessa
tnettirwhtiwdelebaleraylbmse

   

  

       
            

      
        

            
          

  

 
     

              
         

         
           

         
        

              
   

          
          

            
        

            
         

             
       

           
          

            
 

 

y gp
on itapopul",on”isrnve

eth, oeidvemasethn
ehtdna,egatofooedi
nodseopmirepsutxet

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 185



devices that interplay in the videos analyzed to engage the audience are
presented in Table 4.

As table 4 shows, resources to engage the audience are more varied and more
frequently deployed in nature Videos. A variety of  semiotic resources help
to establish affinity and solidarity, and to recognize the presence of  the
viewers and connect with them. 

Pronouns play an important role in establishing affinity and intimacy. Most
nature Videos use inclusive “we” or “our” to construct a bond with the
audience (see example 13). As in TED Talks (Scotto di Carlo, 2014),
“inclusive we” helps to involve the audience by transmitting the message that
researchers and audience are alike and share common interests. These
inclusive uses help to represent the viewers as participants in scientific
research.

13. nanotechnology is placing tools within our grasp that will
revolutionize the way in which we carry out diagnosis and treat
diseases, the way we manage the environment and the food
industry (V10)

Viewer pronouns are also present in more than half  of  nature Videos (e.g.
14a and 14b). They help researchers to attract the viewer’s attention; to
involve the viewers in the construction of  the argument, by anticipating their
opinion and accepting or rejecting it to present their own claim (e.g. 14a); or
to engage in a dialogic interaction with the viewers (e.g. 14b). In example

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192186

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN EXPERTS AND PUBLICS 

5.4. Strategies to engage the audience 
Hyland (2010: 295) defines engagement as “an alignment dimension of 
interaction where writers acknowledge and connect to others”. The semiotic 
devices that interplay in the videos analyzed to engage the audience are 
presented in Table 4. 

Strategies and semiotic resources No. of videos 
(Nature) 

No. of videos 
(Presentation) 

Creating intimacy and dialogic involvement   
Inclusive we 5 1 
Reference to viewers 4 2 
Questions 3 1 
Personal narratives 6 0 
Informal language 4 0 
Representation of researchers in everyday situations, actions 2 1 

Attracting or focusing the audience’s attention, raising interest   
Images representing content mentioned in speech 6 1 
Questions 3 1 
Statement of a problem or challenge to solve  4 5 

Expressing feelings or emotional reactions   
Verbal expressions of feelings or emotional reactions 4 2 
Non-linguistic expressions of feelings or emotional reactions 5 0 

Table 4. Semiotic resources to engage the audience. 

As table 4 shows, resources to engage the audience are more varied and more 
frequently deployed in Nature Videos. A variety of semiotic resources help to 
establish affinity and solidarity, and to recognize the presence of the viewers and 
connect with them.  

Pronouns play an important role in establishing affinity and intimacy. Most 
Nature Videos use inclusive “we” or “our” to construct a bond with the audience 
(see example 13). As in TED Talks (Scotto Di Carlo, 2014), “inclusive we” helps 
to involve the audience by transmitting the message that researchers and 
audience are alike and share common interests. These inclusive uses help to 
represent the viewers as participants in scientific research. 

13. Nanotechnology is placing tools within our grasp that will 
revolutionize the way in which we carry out diagnosis and treat diseases, 
the way we manage the environment and the food industry (V10) 

Viewer pronouns are also present in more than half of Nature Videos (e.g. 14a 
and 14b). They help researchers to attract the viewer’s attention; to involve the 
viewers in the construction of the argument, by anticipating their opinion and 
accepting or rejecting it to present their own claim (e.g. 14a); or to engage in a 
dialogic interaction with the viewers (e.g. 14b). In example (14b) the question is 
directly addressed to the viewer and both linguistic elements (the pronoun you, 
and the question) contribute to initiating an imaginary dialogue. Questions help 
to create an intimate relation by helping to present videos as conversations with 

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 186



(14b) the question is directly addressed to the viewer and both linguistic
elements (the pronoun you, and the question) contribute to initiating an
imaginary dialogue. Questions help to create an intimate relation by helping
to present videos as conversations with the audience. 

14a. So, you might think the prey’s strategy should be to run as quickly
as possible away from the predator. That is absolutely not the
case. Because the predator is faster and is catching the prey up
(longer explanation) (V2)

14b. For example, imagine you’re a transportation company and have
to route your trucks through the network in order to satisfy
several pick-up and delivery requests of  your customers. How
can you determine an optimal routing scheme, satisfying all these
requests in the cheapest possible way? (V11)

representation of  researchers in everyday situations (e.g. drinking coffee,
chatting with colleagues), informal language (e.g. “So, yeah”, “I mean”, “you
know”, “my thing is stone tools”, “that starts to ring alarm bells”), and
researchers’ personal narratives about their research (see example 15) also
contribute to establishing a close social distance. 

15. We had been trying for about a year to kind of  observe this
amazing phenomenon and we’d had no kind of  positive results.
And then we saw this quirky phenomenon and I knew what that
was and I got very excited. So the next day everyone was there.
(V7)

In all but one of  the nature Videos there are in-motion and still images
representing content mentioned in the video which do not have an
explanatory or elucidating function: their purpose seems to be rather to
connect to what is already known by the viewers, to attract their interest and
thus keep them engaged. For instance, in V7, the utterance “Based on an
effect predicted by Einstein, masers were invented in the 1950” is
synchronous with a picture of  Einstein. 

Other devices to attract the audience’s attention and arouse their interest,
which also serve to organize content, are the presentation of  research as a
challenge or problem to solve (with the use of  nouns like “challenge”,
“puzzle”, “problem” and negative evaluative vocabulary) (see example 7

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 187

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 187



above) and questions (e.g. 16). As was said above, some of  these videos are
constructed to show how the group’s research provides the answer to a
challenge for researchers or practitioners or to a question posed at the
beginning of  the video. 

16a. How did those rocks get there? (V11)

16b. The hobbits were a new and unique species of  ancient human.
But where did they come from? and how did they end up so
small? (V4)

Another element intended to engage the viewer is the expression of  feelings
or emotional reaction, both verbally or through gestures (e.g. 17).
researchers express their enthusiasm and excitement when carrying out
research, in order to provoke the same feeling or emotions in the viewers. 

17a. We’re excited about the publication of  a research project we’ve
been working on for a few years that, I guess, in a nutshell, we
could call the oldest archaeological site here in north America
(V6)

17b. I never expected to find the remains of  a massacre (V3)

regarding gestures, they are a ubiquitous resource, used at some moment in
all the videos for the expression of  emotions and feelings. However, the
detailed analysis of  gestures is beyond the scope of  this study. I have just
coded very explicit facial gestures, which are clearly visible and evident for
the viewers. As can be seen, this is a frequent resource in nature Videos,
used by researchers when reporting their findings to share their excitement
with the viewer. For instance in V6, the researcher reporting their
“unbelievable” finding smiles with satisfaction at the end of  the utterance in
example (17a). Similarly, in V7, when remembering the day when the team
managed to produce a continuous room temperature maser one of  the
researchers says “We were all excited actually, so it was really a great day”
while she laughs and smiles broadly.

6. Conclusions

The current communication landscape, where digital technologies bring new
affordances for the communication of  science, requires a multimodal

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192188

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 188



approach to the analysis of  academic discourse, which accounts for all the
elements that contribute to meaning creation in a specific context. In some
academic genres, particularly those intended for the public dissemination of
knowledge, visual modes play an important role in meaning making and in
meeting the audience’s expectations and communicative needs. The online
science video is one of  these genres.

This study has shown that in online science videos a multiplicity of  semiotic
resources from different modes are co-articulated to realize rhetorical
strategies intended to recontextualize knowledge for a wide audience. The
videos introduce the research groups and position their members as
disciplinary experts by informing of  their affiliation to a research institution
and by using the affordances of  the verbal and visual modes to actually show
them “explaining science”, “doing science”, and using disciplinary
equipment and procedures. Speech and image are also interwoven to
construct persuasive arguments, with images being used to support the
narrative of  nature or to provide evidence for claims. Various resources are
also combined to establish novelty and newsworthiness, and show the value,
relevance and applications of  the research carried out by the group. As for
the strategies used to make scientific knowledge more comprehensible to the
interested audience, definitions and non-technical explanations of  concepts,
procedures and methods are synchronized with visuals that facilitate
understanding. Finally, the strategies to engage the viewers and attain
affective engagement are also realized by orchestrating resources of  speech
(e.g. lexical and grammatical choices which convey intimacy, informality or
affinity), image and gestures. The current study has also shown that the
various modal resources and elements are multifunctional and can contribute
to making different meanings in combination with other resources. The
motion image of  the researchers explaining or demonstrating procedures,
for instance, is combined with other resources to bestow authority on the
researchers, make explanations easy to understand, and even engage the
audience by showing them how researchers carry out research and obtain
findings. 

The analysis of  two different sets of  videos has revealed some differences in
the strategies realized in the two sets and the semiotic resources to perform
such strategies, which suggests subtle differences in the intended audience
and communicative purpose. The purpose of  nature Videos seems to be to
inform the interested audience of  a recent discovery reported in the journal
and to show the relevance and newsworthiness of  this discovery.

BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 189

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 189



Presentation Videos are embedded on the groups’ websites and the purpose
seems to be to show both to peers and to the public the relevance of  their
research as a contribution to disciplinary knowledge. This explains, for
instance, why only Presentation Videos include pictures of  the Faculty
building to bestow credibility on the researchers, why only nature Videos
present a narrative of  nature, why “exclusive we” is used differently in the
two sets of  videos, and why the strategies and semiotic resources to make
content understandable and to connect with the audience play a more
important role in nature Videos. The study therefore contributes to showing
that the sign makers combine the multiplicity of  generic resources made
available by the medium to meet their rhetorical interests. The results of  this
study provide insights into strategies for the recontextualization of  scientific
discourse which can be useful for research groups interested in reaching the
general public and promoting interest in their research. 

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Spanish Ministry of  Economy and
Competitiveness (project code: FFI2015-68638-r MInECO/FEDEr, EU)
and by the regional Government of  Aragón (project code: H16_17r).

Article history:

Received 4 July 2018

Received in revised form 8 November 2018

Accepted 8 November 2018

References

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192190

Bateman, J.A. (2008). Multimodality and Genre.

Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bateman, J.A., J.L. Delin & R. Henschel (2007).

“Mapping the multimodal genres of traditional and

electronic newspapers” in T.D. Royce & W.L.

Bowcher (eds.), New Directions in the Analysis of

Multimodal Discourse, 147-172. Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bezemer, J.A. & G. Kress (2008). “Writing in

multimodal texts: a social semiotic account of

designs for learning”. Written Communication

25,2: 166-195.

Bondi, M., S. Cacchiani & D. Mazzi (eds.) (2015).

Discourse In and Through the Media:

Recontextualizing and Reconceptualizing Expert

Discourse. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge

Scholars Publishing.

Calsamiglia, H. & T.A. van Dijk (2004).

“Popularization discourse and knowledge about

the genome”. Discourse and Society 15,4: 369-

389.

DeCesare, J.A. (2014). “The expanding role of

online video in teaching, learning, and research”.

Library Technology Reports 50,2: 5-12.

Erviti, M.C. & B. León (2016). “Participatory culture

and science communication: A content analysis of

popular science on YouTube” in C. del Valle Rojas

& C. Salgado Santamaría (eds.), Nuevas Formas

de Expresión, 271-286. Madrid: Ediciones

Universitarias McGraw-Hill.

Erviti, M.C. & E. Stengler (2016). “Online science

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 190



BrIDGInG THE GAP BETWEEn ExPErTS AnD PUBLICS

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192 191

videos: An exploratory study with major

professional content providers in the United

Kingdom”. Journal of Science Communication

15,6: A06. URL: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/30236

[01/06/18]

Fahnestock, J. (1986). “Accommodating science:

The rhetorical life of scientific facts”. Written

Communication 3,3: 275-96.

Giannoni, D. (2008). “Popularizing features in

English journal editorials”. English for Specific

Purposes 27: 212-232.

Hunston, S. (2015). “Talking science: Science in

the news on BBC radio” in M. Bondi, S. Cacchiani,

& D. Mazzi (eds.), Discourse In and Through the

Media. Recontextualizing and Reconceptualizing

Expert Discourse, 66-91. Newcastle upon Tyne,

UK: Cambridge Scholars.

Hyland, K. (2010). “Constructing proximity:

Relating to readers in popular and professional

science.” Journal of English for Academic Purpos-

es 9: 116-127.

Jenkins, H. (2007). “From YouTube to

YouNiversity”. Chronicle of Higher Education

53,24: pB9.

Jewitt, C. (2009). “An introduction to multimodality”

in C. Jewitt (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of

Multimodal Analysis, 14-27. London: Routledge.

Kousha, K., M. Thelwall & M. Abdoli (2012). “The

role of online videos in research communication: A

content analysis of YouTube videos cited in

academic publications”. Journal of the American

Society for Information Science and Technology

63,9: 1710-1727.

Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age.

London: Routledge.

Kress, G. & T. van Leeuwen (2001). Multimodal

Discourse: the Modes and Media of Contemporary

Communication. London: Arnold.

León, B. & M. Bourk (2018). “Investigating

sicence-related online video” in B. León & M.

Bourk (eds.) Communicating Science and

Technology Through Online Video, 1-14. New York

and London: Routledge.

Luzón, M.J. (2013). “Public communication of

science in blogs: Recontextualizing scientific

discourse for a diversified audience”. Written

Communication 30,4: 428-457.

Muñoz Morcillo, J.M., K. Czurda & C.Y. Trotha

(2016). “Typologies of the popular science web

video”. Journal of Science Communication 15,4:

A02.

Myers, G. (1990). Writing Biology: Texts in the

Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge.

Madison: University of Wisconsin Press

O’Halloran, K.L. (2009). “Historical changes in the

semiotic landscape: from calculation to

computation” in C. Jewitt (ed.), The Routledge

Handbook of Multimodal Analysis, 98-113.

London: Routledge.

Paltridge, B. (2012). Discourse Analysis (2nd

edition). London/Sydney: Bloomsbury.

Pasquali, M. (2007). “Video in science”. EMBO

Reports 8,8: 712-716.

Querol-Julián, M. & I. Fortanet-Gómez (2012).

“Multimodal evaluation in academic discussion

sessions: How do presenters act and react?”.

English for Specific Purposes 31: 271-283.

Ruiz-Madrid, N. & I. Fortanet Gómez (2017). “An

analysis of multimodal interaction in a webinar:

Defining the genre”. EPIC Series in Language and

Linguistics 2: 274-282.

Santini, L. (2015). “Online edutainment videos:

Recontextualizing and reconceptualizing expert

discourse in a participatory web-culture”.

Journalism and Mass Communication 52: 51-63.

Scotto di Carlo, G. (2014). “The role of proximity in

online popularizations: The case of TED Talks”.

Discourse Studies 16,5: 591-606.

Tang, R. & S. John (1999). “The ‘I’ in identity:

exploring writer identity in student academic

writing through the first-person pronoun”. English

for Specific Purposes 18: S23-S39.

Thelwall, M., K. Kousha, K. Weller & C.

Puschmann (2012). “Assessing the impact of

online academic videos”, in G.W. Wulff & K.

Holmberg (eds.), Social Information Research,

195-213. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Group Publishing

Limited.

Valeiras-Jurado, J., N. Ruiz-Madrid & G. Jacobs

(2017). “Revisiting persuasion in oral academic

and professional genres: Towards a

methodological framework for Multimodal

Discourse Analysis of research dissemination

talks”. Ibérica 35: 93-118.

Welbourne, D.J. & W.J. Grant (2016). “Science

communication on YouTube: Factors that affect

channel and video popularity”. Public

Understanding of Science 25,6: 706-718.

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 191



María José Luzón is Senior Lecturer at the University of  zaragoza, Spain.
She has a PhD in English Philology and has published papers on academic
and professional discourse and on language teaching and learning in the field
of  English for Academic Purposes. Her current research interests include
the analysis of  online academic genres and the analysis of  ELF in academic
online and written discourse.

Appendix: videos making up the corpus

MAríA-JOSé LUzón

Ibérica 37 (2019): 167-192192

BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN EXPERTS AND PUBLICS 

analysis of online academic genres and the analysis of ELF in academic online 
and written discourse. 

Appendix: videos making up the corpus 
 

Nature Videos 

Brainwaves in Motion: A Wearable Brain Scanner 
(https://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/brainwaves/index.html) (V1) 

Anatomy of a Hunt: Speed Strategy and Survival (https://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/hunt/index.html) 
(V2) 

Attack by the Lake: A Prehistoric Massacre 
(https://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/ancient_massacre/index.html) (V3) 

Hobbit Histories: The Origins of Homo floresiensis (https://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/hobbit-
histories/index.html) (V4) 

Pictures in the Air: 3D Printing with Light (https://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/3D-printing/index.html) 
(V5) 

The First Americans: Clues to an Ancient Migration (https://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/first-
americans/index.html) (V6) 

The Maser Goes Mainstream Diamond Microwave Lasers 
(https://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/maser/index.html) (V7) 

 

Presentation Videos 

Biomechanics Research Group (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZFvVc3DX-Y) (V8) 

BioNano Research Group at Autodesk Research (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSWkaa_f4rg) (V9) 

Capsules of Nanotechnology Nanosensors (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnToLYyc_Gs) (V10) 

CWI Networks and Optimization Group (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMdb32UDL1g) (V11) 

Gadi Rothenbergs Research Group at the University of Amsterdam 
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afggRfw0-Ko) (V12) 

Research Team Presentation Video: Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry UPV 
(https://ehutb.ehu.eus/video/58c66df4f82b2b93748b456d) (V13) 

Music Technology Group Presentation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAfa2GK3NRo) (V14) 

07 IBERICA 37_Iberica 13  8/5/19  18:22  Página 192