DESCRIPTION

Scholarly podcasting is a relatively new phenomenon in the landscape of public scholarship. While the technology has been in existence for many years, podcasting as a form of academic engagement has even recently been described as 'in its infancy' (Densley et al., 2025). However, the popularity and promise of scholarly podcasting have been rapidly increasing, with this 'creative method of qualitative research dissemination' praised and acknowledged 'for its effectiveness and accessibility' (Densley et al. 2025).

Defining what precisely constitutes a scholarly or academic podcast is not entirely straightforward, though efforts are being made to determine the boundaries. Densley et al. describe how scholarly podcasts usually 'include dissemination of research findings, methodological discussions, and knowledge translation', which makes the format useful for a variety of approaches to open research. Beckstead et al. (2025) recognise this overarching question as an essential issue for academics in podcast studies to contend with, considering whether an academic podcast must be produced or hosted by an academic, precisely what defines an 'academic', whether podcasts that utilise the expertise of academics fall into this category, and whether there must be a 'fundamental association' with an academic institution. In terms of dissemination, while many scholarly podcasts are an additional arena for published findings to be shared, some podcasts 'involve presenting original findings generated by researchers and experts within an academic context' (Densley et al., 2025).

From a practical standpoint, podcasts are usually presented as audio files that use internet platforms and streaming feeds for distribution, and can be downloaded free of charge by anyone online (Densley et al., 2025). They can also be live-streamed, or listened to later on a portable device, increasing convenience for the listener.

Sewell (2025) identifies four genres of scholarly podcasting: conversation, interview, debate, and crafted audio. Sewell also recognises 'podcasting as a medium [...] to more easily engage in embodied scholarship and open peer review.' Beckstead (2025) considers the emerging role of scholarly podcasting as a 'venue for exploring ideas, collaborating, and creating and disseminating knowledge', despite the persistent reliance on text-based publications as the persisting default form of academic knowledge production.

Singer (2019) recognises the various ways in which podcasting can function as a tool for 'social scholarship' as 'a broadcast medium, an interactive medium, or as an entrée to engage with the public using other forms of social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram.' Singer also discusses the dissemination approaches and possibilities for podcasts, acknowledging that while most are a one-way process, there are advocates for the medium being used in a more interactive sense, inviting more active participation from consumers and listeners. Additional functions available on broadcast platforms allow for 'these interactions, including reactions, comments, recorded voice responses, and ways for podcast content to be further quoted and incorporated into the podcasts of other individuals' (Singer, 2019). However, as will be discussed further, audience feedback is not the same as peer review. Survey respondents to the social work podcast study at the heart of Singer's paper appreciated 'the relationship between research and practice', available transcripts, high audio quality, 'guests who presented up-to-date research and information' and 'being exposed to theories, practices, or ideas that they otherwise would not have known about' (Singer 2019).

Scholarly podcasting has a number of benefits for scholars wishing to use this practice to disseminate and share their research. These include low overhead costs and the potential to use 'open-source creation software and affordable internet hosting options' (Densley et al.). The podcast format also lends itself naturally to media dissemination and offers communication potential with multiple and various audiences, being inclusive of the 'public audience' yet respectful of academic audiences, including the PhD examiner' (Densley et al.). Symulevich et al. (2025) highlight how podcasting's shortened publication schedule is 'beneficial for scholars discussing breaking news or bleeding-edge topics, similar to newspaper articles and blog posts'. The authors also discuss the conversational style of the podcast format, and how this can 'make complex topics more understandable' (Symulevich et al., 2025), a view echoed by Cook (2023) who considers the podcast a more accessible and open approach to sharing academic knowledge.

Singer (2019) discusses the various ways in which podcasting can break down financial, conceptual, and attitudinal barriers to scholarship, citing the free and public nature of podcasts, available at the consumer's convenience. Additionally, consumers (or listeners) have been found to be 'more likely to understand complex information when it is presented through a podcast' (Gachago et al., 2016, via Springer, 2019). Not least, the format of a podcast has been shown to 'bring research findings to life in a way that peer-reviewed journal articles cannot', and when done well, has the potential to be 'an exemplar of the scholarship of dissemination' (Singer, 2019, 585). Podcasts are also emerging as a way to break down barriers between scholars' findings and practitioners in related fields, whereby 'scholars can increase the depth and breadth of their influence and remove the [...] barriers that prevent [...] practitioners from consuming and implementing scholarship' (Singer, 2019).

While it may not strictly be classified as open research, there is also evidence that the use of podcasts as part of pedagogy can contribute to better outcomes in comprehension and performance for students, as podcasting aligns well to UDL (Universal Design for Learning) principles (Gunderson & Cumming, 2023). However, while written transcripts of podcasts allow for an increase in accessibility, there are certain limitations. Densley et al. noted that in their podcast around singing facilitation, where they included 'aural elements of song, harmony and soundscapes', these were 'not captured in these transcripts.'

As with any approach, podcasting has its limitations. Densley et al. (2025) discuss how advance consideration of podcasting as dissemination is also necessary to avoid revisiting consents for academic studies, particularly surrounding use of participant voices. Presently the podcast is also viewed as 'as a type of grey literature or informal scholarly communication [...] comparable to blogs and social media as they similarly allow scholars to share their ideas with a broader audience in a non–peer-reviewed manner' (Symulevich et al., 2025). This means it may not have the same standing professionally as more traditional dissemination pathways. While scholarly podcasting has shown many benefits so far in terms of reaching more audiences and improving openness and accessibility to academic research, there are also prevalent concerns for faculty around tenure and standing (Symulevich et al.).

The question of peer review involvement is a 'key consideration' in current podcast studies, according to Beckstead. A part of what makes scholarly podcasts distinct from other forms is the 'potential to be subjected to peer review' because they '"create new knowledge [...] accountable to a community of peers, whether they be scholars or others; where it is possible for knowledge to be interrogated, cited, and in some disciplines reproduced; and, crucially, where podcast series are able to respond to comments, critiques or suggestions either before publication or afterwards as part of a series or through additional material"' (Beckstead et al, 2024, in Sewell, 2025, 149). However, 'not all review processes are appropriate for all forms of scholarly audio' and 'some forms of podcasting [...], while engaged with the world of scholarship, may not be suitable to be peer-reviewed' (Beckstead et al., 2024), and even for some types of scholarly podcasts that may be suitable for peer review, creators may 'vehemently object.'

Scholars appreciate and employ podcasts for a variety of research purposes, including to 'work out ideas that are not yet fully formed,' and these 'discussions or monologues they might have during a podcast function as a sort of sense-making in the moment' (Beckstead et al., 2024). Podcasts of this sort are also essential and must be appreciated and understood as examples of open research methodology and not treated solely as a research output. Therefore, the creator's intention and scholarly podcast type must be considered. Podcasts could essentially fall into multiple categories, then - as forms of dissemination, as classified here, or as methodological transparency or even a form of peer review (see 'open peer review' entry).

References

Beckstead, L. and Llinares, D. (2025) Podcast studies: practice into theory. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press

Beckstead, L., Cook, I.M., and McGregor, H. (2024) Podcast or Perish: Peer Review and Knowledge Creation for the 21st Century. 1st ed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic (Bloomsbury Podcast Studies). https://doi.org/10.5040/9781501385179

Densley, B., Dickson-Swift, V. and Mills, J. (2025) 'Scholarly Podcasting: Lessons From Disseminating Grounded Theory Findings on Singing Facilitation', International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24, 16094069251364617. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251364617

Gunderson, J.L. and Cumming, T.M. (2023) 'Podcasting in higher education as a component of Universal Design for Learning: A systematic review of the literature', Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 60(4), 591–601. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2022.2075430

Sewell, A. (2025) 'Giving Voice to Community: Embodied Scholarship, Generative Discussion, and Other Affordances of Scholarly Podcasting', The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 28(1). https://doi.org/10.3998/jep.6036

Singer, J.B. (2019) 'Podcasting as Social Scholarship: A Tool to Increase the Public Impact of Scholarship and Research', Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 10(4), 571–590. https://doi.org/10.1086/706600

Symulevich, A. et al. (2025) 'Podcasting as Open Access: A Review and Discussion of Potential Impact on Scholarly Communication and Promotion', Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 13(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.18241