Research literature dealing with bibliographic data that characterises research outputs in the field of science communication is relatively scarce [e.g., Bucchi and Trench, 2014; Borchelt, 2012] and the existing analyses were in some cases not done broadly or systematically.
Drawing from these findings, it is evident that the overall volume of research outputs in science communication has grown steadily in recent years.
However, a broad and systematic, bibliographic overview of the trends in research productivity within this research field is still lacking.
In 2016, for the first time, JCOM published not four but six issues per year.
Lastly, in his meta-analysis focusing on research on the media coverage of science, Schäfer  also highlights that the number of published articles increased significantly in this field which represents a prominent secondary field of enquiry within the field of science communication.
In their collection of formative papers in the field of science communication, Bucchi and Trench  present two time frames: 37 publications were published in the 60 years before 1995, and 42 in the 20 years after that.
The authors see this as reflecting an increased publishing activity in the later period [see Trench and Bucchi, 2015].
It is well documented that research productivity in the field of science communication is on the rise.  highlight that, in 2010, a Google search for the phrase “books on ‘science communication’ ” yielded about 115000 results, while a similar search for journal papers confirmed that science communication could be credited with a significant weight of scholarly enquiry and growth in research activity.
Trench  links this growth in science communication scholarship to the establishment of science communication courses and degree programmes at universities around the world that have stimulated research activity.
Research in this field aims to improve our understanding of the best ways to communicate complex information, in particular to people who are outside the arena of scientific research [Hornig Priest, 2010].
Therefore, much of what we know about the science behind science communication and best practice in the field emanates from a comprehensive body of theoretical considerations and empirical research in this field.