Public perceptions of who counts as a scientist for controversial science

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 797-811 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brianne Suldovsky ◽  
Asheley Landrum ◽  
Natalie Jomini Stroud
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
Science Media

In an era where expertise is increasingly critiqued, this study draws from the research on expertise and scientist stereotyping to explore who the public considers to be a scientist in the context of media coverage about climate change and genetically modified organisms. Using survey data from the United States, we find that political ideology and science knowledge affect who the US public believes is a scientist in these domains. Our results suggest important differences in the role of science media attention and science media selection in the publics “scientist” labeling. In addition, we replicate previous work and find that compared to other people who work in science, those with PhDs in Biology and Chemistry are most commonly seen as scientists.

Dynamics of Public Risk Perception and Media Coverage

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Kathrin Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Risk Perception ◽  
Demographic Change ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Us ◽  
Public Risk

Many societal risks are beyond the scope of personal experience. Thus, people are increasingly dependent on third-party information to assess risks. This study examines the dynamics of public risk perception by focusing on the role of media coverage. It does so by comparing public opinion on selected societal risks, namely climate change, terrorism and demographic change over a 25-year period (1990–2015). The analysis examines risk perception in the US and Germany and provides valuable insights into how and why the public's assessment of risks differs in these countries.

scholarly journals One issue, different stories: The construction of GMO issues on Chinese, American and British mainstream media portals

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 255-275
Author(s):  
Yiqin Ruan ◽  
Jing Yang ◽  
Jianbin Jin
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
New York Times ◽  
The Public ◽  
Mainstream Media ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Uk

Biotechnology, as an emerging technology, has drawn much attention from the public and elicited hot debates in countries around the world and among various stakeholders. Due to the public's limited access to front-line scientific information and scientists, as well as the difficulty of processing complex scientific knowledge, the media have become one of the most important channels for the public to get news about scientific issues such as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). According to framing theory, how the media portray GMO issues may influence audiences’ perceptions of those issues. Moreover, different countries and societies have various GMO regulations, policies and public opinion, which also affect the way media cover GMO issues. Thus, it is necessary to investigate how GMO issues are covered in different media outlets across different countries. We conducted a comparative content analysis of media coverage of GMO issues in China, the US and the UK. One mainstream news portal in each of the three countries was chosen ( People's Daily for China, The New York Times for the US, and The Guardian for the UK). We collected coverage over eight years, from 2008 to 2015, which yielded 749 pieces of news in total. We examined the sentiments expressed and the generic frames used in coverage of GMO issues. We found that the factual, human interest, conflict and regulation frames were the most common frames used on the three portals, while the sentiments expressed under those frames varied across the media outlets, indicating differences in the state of GMO development, promotion and regulation among the three countries.

scholarly journals From Claiming Credit to Avoiding Blame: The Evolution of Congressional Strategy for Asbestos Management

1991 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Twight
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Information Costs ◽  
The Public ◽  
Congressional Behavior ◽  
The Us ◽  
Blame Avoidance ◽  
Credit Claiming

ABSTRACTThis paper develops a theory synthesizing credit-claiming and blameavoidance explanations of congressional behavior and evaluates it against asbestos policy in the United States from the 1920s through the 1980s. Public policy is viewed as shaped by officeholders' ability to achieve political ends through augmenting information costs and other transaction costs facing the public. Public perceptions are seen both as the endogenous product of congressional information-cost manipulation and as an exogenous constraint that changes in identifiable ways over time. Different policy stances - open credit claiming, concealed credit claiming, early-stage blame avoidance, and full-scale blame avoidance – are predicted to emerge in response to specified conditions, yielding implications about the expected timing of public policy changes. Specific types of transaction-cost manipulation are predicted to accompany the identified policy stances. The US asbestos policy experience is shown to be consistent with the predictions of the model.

Communication on Climate Change and Energy Alternatives in the United States

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toby Bolsen ◽  
Matthew A. Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
News Coverage ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Forthcoming Article ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
The U.S

This is an advance summary of a forthcoming article in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Please check back later for the full article. Most of what people think about politics comes from information acquired via exposure to mass media. Media thus serve a vital role in democracy as a fundamental conduit of political information. Scholars study the factors that drive news coverage about political issues, including the rise of discourse on climate change and shifts in media coverage over time. Climate change first received sustained attention in the U.S. press in the late 1980s and early 1990s. As scientific consensus emerged on the issue, interest groups and other actors emerged who accentuated the inherent uncertainty of climate science as a way to cast doubt on the existence of scientific consensus. The politicization of climate science has resulted in uncertainty among the public about its existence, anxiety about the effects of a fundamental transformation of U.S. energy systems, and support for the status quo in terms of the use of traditional energy sources. Media coverage often magnified the voices of contrarian scientists and skeptics because journalistic norms provided equal space to all sides, a semblance of false balance in news coverage that has persisted through the mid 2000s. By this time, the U.S. public had fractured along partisan lines due to rhetoric employed to generate support by elites. Media fragmentation and the rise of partisan news outlets further contributed to polarization, especially given the tendency of individuals to seek political information about climate change from trusted and credible sources. More recently, new media has come to play an increasingly significant role in communicating information on climate change to the public. Ultimately, there is a need for knowledge-based journalism in communicating climate change and energy alternatives to all segments of the U.S. public, but doing this effectively requires engagement with a broader audience in the debate over how best to address climate change. “Honest brokers” must be referenced in the media as they are best equipped to discuss the issue with citizens of different political identities and cultural worldviews. The success of collective efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change requires not only scientific consensus but the ability to communicate the science in a way that generates greater consensus among the public.

The Role of Regulatory Impact Assessment in Fighting Climate Change and the Economic Downturn: A EU-US Perspective

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 251-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacopo Torriti ◽  
Ragnar Lofstedt
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Regulatory Competition ◽  
Economic Downturn ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Us ◽  
Regulatory Impact ◽  
The Eu

In times of low economic growth and post-Copenhagen climate talks, a number of reasons for regulatory competition and cooperation between the United States and the European Union coexist. This paper discusses the role of Impact Assessment between the US and the EU on responses to the economic downturn and climate change. It is argued that, in the future, IAs will be an instrument through which it will be possible to read the level of cooperation and competition between the US and the EU, particularly on economic trade and environmental regulation.

scholarly journals A changing climate of skepticism: The factors shaping climate change coverage in the US press

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Schmid-Petri ◽  
Silke Adam ◽  
Ivo Schmucki ◽  
Thomas Häussler
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Mass Media ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Print Media ◽  
The United States ◽  
Quantitative Content ◽  
The Us ◽  
One Year

Skepticism toward climate change has a long tradition in the United States. We focus on mass media as the conveyors of the image of climate change and ask: Is climate change skepticism still a characteristic of US print media coverage? If so, to what degree and in what form? And which factors might pave the way for skeptics entering mass media debates? We conducted a quantitative content analysis of US print media during one year (1 June 2012 to 31 May 2013). Our results show that the debate has changed: fundamental forms of climate change skepticism (such as denial of anthropogenic causes) have been abandoned in the coverage, being replaced by more subtle forms (such as the goal to avoid binding regulations). We find no evidence for the norm of journalistic balance, nor do our data support the idea that it is the conservative press that boosts skepticism.

scholarly journals An Assessment of Public Perceptions of Climate Change Risk in Three Western U.S. Cities

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abigail Sullivan ◽  
Dave D. White
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Metropolitan Areas ◽  
Personal Responsibility ◽  
Mail Survey ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Climate Change Risk ◽  
The Public

Abstract Risk perceptions influence individual and collective action related to climate change, and there is an important gap between public and expert perceptions of climate change risk, especially in the United States. Past studies have found that on average 40% of the American public believe climate change will affect them personally. We contribute a study of climate change risk perceptions in the metropolitan areas of three western U.S. cities (Denver, Colorado; Las Vegas, Nevada; Phoenix, Arizona), assessing overall patterns and drivers. A representative mail survey (N = 786) of the general public in these cities revealed that 60% of respondents identified climate change as personally risky, with the perception that it will impact either their family or their city in the next 30 years. Our results indicate that the gap in risk perceptions between the public and experts may be decreasing, although we discuss several limitations and reasons why this result requires further investigation. Using regression models, we analyze factors that are hypothesized to drive risk perceptions and discover that pro-environmental worldview and perceived personal responsibility are the most influential predictors. We discuss the implications of our results for fostering collective action to address climate change in dry, western U.S. metropolitan areas.

US Media Coverage of the Cancún Climate Change Conference

2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (02) ◽  
pp. 251-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jules Boykoff
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Economic Impacts ◽  
The United States ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Media ◽  
One Year

AbstractMuch was at stake at the 2010 United Nations climate change conference in Cancún, Mexico. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was being challenged by the world's two largest greenhouse gas emitters, China and the United States, after these countries reached a tenuous backroom deal one year earlier in Copenhagen. Meanwhile, scientific studies were warning of serious and severe climate change. This article analyzes newspaper articles and television segments from the US media that appeared during the timeframe of the Cancún conference, focusing on two key facets of coverage that continue to be important as negotiations proceed: the economic impacts and opportunities that climate change creates and the role that China plays in negotiations. I also examine which sources were allowed through the news gates and which ones were marginalized. I find that the US media discussed economic opportunities more frequently than economic impacts and that the media treated China in an even-handed way. Established political actors dominated coverage, followed by representatives of nongovernmental organizations and the business community. Meanwhile, grassroots activists and indigenous voices were marginalized.

Epidemics, climate change and natural hazards: Impacts and risk perceptions under COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuliano Di Baldassarre ◽  
Elena Mondino ◽  
Elena Raffetti
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Multiple Hazards ◽  
Multiple Risks ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
The Way

<p>Epidemics, climate change and natural hazards are increasingly affecting humankind and are plausibly re-shaping the way in which people perceive multiple risks. Here we integrate epidemiological, policy, climate and natural hazard data with the results of two waves of nationwide surveys in Italy and Sweden. These were conducted in two different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic corresponding to low (August 2020) and high (November 2020) levels of infection rates. We investigate the interplay between negative impacts and public perceptions of multiple hazards including epidemics, floods, droughts, wildfires, earthquakes, and climate change. Similarities and differences between Italy and Sweden allow us to investigate the role of policy, media coverage, and direct experience in explaining public perceptions of multiple hazards. The way in which people think about epidemics, for example, is expected to have been substantially influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic that has severely affected both countries, but to which the Italian and Swedish authorities responded differently. Indeed, we found that epidemics are perceived as less likely and more impactful in Italy compared to Sweden. In addition, when multiple hazards are considered, people are more worried about risks related to recently occurred events. This is in line with the cognitive process known as availability heuristic: individuals assess the risk associated with a given hazard based on how easily it comes to their mind. Furthermore, for the majority of hazards, we found that in both countries women and younger people are generally more concerned. These new insights about the interplay between multiple hazards and public perceptions can inform the development of sustainable policies to reduce disaster risk while promoting public health.</p><p> </p>

scholarly journals Balance (Climate and Environment Coverage)

10.34778/2o ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Mahl ◽  
Lars Guenther
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
New York Times ◽  
The United States ◽  
Anthropogenic Global Warming ◽  
The Us ◽  
Prestige Press ◽  
Anthropogenic Contributions

Balance – as a journalistic norm in the domain of climate change reporting – is measured by analyzing both coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., the existence of anthropogenic global warming) and coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., actions regarding global warming) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004). Field of application/theoretical foundation: Balance is a commonly investigated and internationally agreed-upon journalistic norm that ensures that journalists portray different sides of a story in a neutral and objective way (Westerståhl, 1983). In science reporting, more specifically in reporting on climate change, this journalistic norm can lead to biased reporting in that sense that journalistic coverage does not mirror the scientific understanding (i.e., climate change does exist and action is needed) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004). References/combination with other methods of data collection: There are experimental studies that test the effects of differentially balanced news stories (e.g., Clarke et al., 2014; Dixon & Clarke, 2012), largely confirming that balanced coverage reduces confidence in a scientific consensus and heightens uncertainty of science, risks, etc. Example studies: Boykoff & Boykoff (2004); Boykoff (2007); Clarke (2008); Clarke et al. (2014); Dixon & Clarke (2012)   Information on Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004 Authors: Maxwell T. Boykoff & Jules M. Boykoff Research question: The prevalence of the norm of balance in reporting on climate change and the degree to what this coverage’s adherence to balance led to biased coverage of both anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., its existence) and resultant action. Object of analysis: A sample (636 articles) of the US prestige-press coverage of global warming, i.e., New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal Time frame of analysis: between 1988 and 2002 Info about variables Variables: Two measures of balance: (a) Coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., existence) (b) Coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., action) Level of analysis: Newspaper article Variables and values: (a) First measure: Coverage of the debate over anthropogenic contributions to global warming (i.e., existence) Article only presents argument that anthropogenic global warming exists, clearly distinct from natural variations Article presents both sides, but emphasizes that anthropogenic global warming exists, still distinct from natural variation Article presents a balanced account of debates surrounding existence of anthropogenic global warming Article presents both sides, but emphasizes dubious nature of the claim that anthropogenic global warming exists (b) Second measure: Coverage of decisions regarding action on global warming (i.e., action) Dominant coverage of decisions/assertions regarding immediate/mandatory action to deal with global warming Balanced accounts of various decisions regarding action Dominant coverage of decisions/assertions regarding cautious/voluntary approaches to deal with global warming Reliability: Intercoder reliability rate of 93% Codebook: Table 1 in Boykoff & Boykoff (2004, p. 128)   References Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental change 14, 125-136. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001 Boykoff, M. T. (2007). Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006. Area 39(2), 470-481. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00769.x Clarke, C. E. (2008). A question of balance. The autism-vaccine controversy in the British and American elite press. Science Communication 30(1), 77-107. doi: 10.1177/1075547008320262 Clarke, C. E., Dixon, G. N., Holton, A., Weberling McKeever, B. (2014). Including “evidentiary balance” in news media coverage of vaccine risk. Health Communication 30(5), 461-472. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2013.867006 Dixon, G. N., & Clarke, C. E. (2012). Heightening uncertainty around certain science: Media coverage, false balance, and the autism-vaccine controversy. Science Communication, 35(3) 358-382. doi: 10.1177/1075547012458290 Westerståhl, J. (1983). Objective News Reporting General Premises. Communication Research, 10(3), 403-424. doi: 10.1177/009365083010003007

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document