Scientific Uncertainty in News Coverage of Cancer Research: Effects of Hedging on Scientists and Journalists Credibility

Jensen, Jakob D.

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00324.x

Cited by 214 publications

(265 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

236

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The absence of cancer statistics in cancer news is likely a by product of the streamlining process, whereby journalists cut scientific content that is deemed lexically challenging to the audience (Jensen, 2008). If true, then change may come only as journalists are better trained to appreciate aspects of science central to effective communication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making sense of cancer news coverage trends: a comparison of three comprehensive content analyses

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Cancer stories (N = 5,327) in the top 50 U.S. newspapers were analyzed by a team of four coders and the results were compared with the earliest analyses of this type (from 1977 and 1980). Using cancer incidence rates as a comparison, three cancers were found to be consistently underreported (male Hodgkin's, and thyroid) and four cancers were found to be consistently overreported (breast, blood/Leukemia, pancreatic, and bone/ muscle). In addition, cancer news coverage consistently has focused on treatment rather than on other aspects of the cancer continuum (e.g., prevention), portrayed lifestyle choices (e.g., diet, smoking) as the most common cancer risk factor, and rarely reported incidence or mortality data. Finally, the data were compatible with the idea that personalization bias (e.g., celebrity profiles, event coverage) may explain some news coverage distortions.Keywords: cancer, news coverage, content analyses, health communication.In their latest review of cancer trends, Jemal and colleagues (2008) noted that for all cancer sites combined, incidence rates have stabilized and mortality rates continue to decrease. At the site level, however, certain cancers still share a disproportionate amount of the cancer burden. Prostate, breast, lung, and colon cancers account for 50% of new cancer cases as well as 49%-50% of estimated cancer deaths.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making sense of cancer news coverage trends: a comparison of three comprehensive content analyses

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although scientific communicators may stress persuasion, deliberation would be better (39). Communicating uncertainty is essential to building credibility (40,41), and trust best predicts attention to scientific experts (42).…”

Section: Climate Scientists' Presumed Agendasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gaining trust as well as respect in communicating to motivated audiences about science topics

Fiske

Dupree

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

356

291

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expertise is a prerequisite for communicator credibility, entailing the knowledge and ability to be accurate. Trust also is essential to communicator credibility. Audiences view trustworthiness as the motivation to be truthful. Identifying whom to trust follows systematic principles. People decide quickly another’s apparent intent: Who is friend or foe, on their side or not, or a cooperator or competitor. Those seemingly on their side are deemed warm (friendly, trustworthy). People then decide whether the other is competent to enact those intents. Perception of scientists, like other social perceptions, involves inferring both their apparent intent (warmth) and capability (competence). To illustrate, we polled adults online about typical American jobs, rated as American society views them, on warmth and competence dimensions, as well as relevant emotions. Ambivalently perceived high-competence but low-warmth, “envied” professions included lawyers, chief executive officers, engineers, accountants, scientists, and researchers. Being seen as competent but cold might not seem problematic until one recalls that communicator credibility requires not just status and expertise but also trustworthiness (warmth). Other research indicates the risk from being enviable. Turning to a case study of scientific communication, another online sample of adults described public attitudes toward climate scientists specifically. Although distrust is low, the apparent motive to gain research money is distrusted. The literature on climate science communicators agrees that the public trusts impartiality, not persuasive agendas. Overall, communicator credibility needs to address both expertise and trustworthiness. Scientists have earned audiences’ respect, but not necessarily their trust. Discussing, teaching, and sharing information can earn trust to show scientists’ trustworthy intentions.

show abstract

“…That local and regional papers (remembering only 6 of a possible 595 UK local and regional newspapers archived by the Nexis UK database covered this story) as well as some national press, relied on the Press Association report for their stories perhaps reflects restraints on their resources, but also highlights a concern that original journalism is being lost in Newspapers in many cases did not report the complexity of the study and did not report the limitations of the research. Previous studies have shown that this is often the case, but as Jensen found in his multiple message experiment (Jensen 2008), both scientists and journalists were viewed as more trustworthy when study limitations were reported. However, the study itself was large and complex, which could prove a challenge to a busy journalist on a tight deadline.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Mediating the spaces of diet and health: A critical analysis of reporting on nutrition and colorectal cancer in the UK

Wells

2017

Geoforum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation: Wells, R. (2017). Mediating the spaces of diet and health: A critical analysis of reporting on nutrition and colorectal cancer in the UK. Geoforum, 84, pp. 228-238. doi: 10.1016Geoforum, 84, pp. 228-238. doi: 10. /j.geoforum.2016 This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent AbstractThe media are one of the main arenas in which nutrition information is framed and developed. Research has shown a predominantly individualistic framing of diet--related health issues such as obesity, type--2 diabetes and coronary heart disease in international media coverage. These issues are framed as personal, 'lifestyle' issues rather than requiring policy or structural change. In addition, research has shown a tendency in nutrition research and media coverage of it, to emphasize individual ingredients or components more than overall diet. The media have a tendency to report diet related research simplistically, often without contextualization. Taking a case study approach, this paper analyses UK news media coverage and framing of British Medical Journal (BMJ) published research into dietary fibre and bowel cancer risk. I investigate how the health issue fibre and bowel cancer is framed and dissect the process of mediation (from press release to mass media to local media), analysing the shifting 'geographies of responsibility' that result. This paper argues that media coverage of research into diet and bowel cancer can be explained by the technologies, conventions and routines of media representation. Key gatekeepers were found to have an important role in framing the information that was reported. Taking a critical approach, this paper argues that like obesity, type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease, coverage of nutritional means of preventing bowel cancer is set predominantly in the 'lifestyle' frame, often laying responsibility for increasing dietary fibre at the door of the individual rather than looking at broader social, economic, or political drivers of dietary change.

show abstract

Scientific Uncertainty in News Coverage of Cancer Research: Effects of Hedging on Scientists and Journalists Credibility

Cited by 214 publications

References 47 publications

Making sense of cancer news coverage trends: a comparison of three comprehensive content analyses

Making sense of cancer news coverage trends: a comparison of three comprehensive content analyses

Gaining trust as well as respect in communicating to motivated audiences about science topics

Mediating the spaces of diet and health: A critical analysis of reporting on nutrition and colorectal cancer in the UK

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About