Through the looking-glass: how scientists view journalists and science news

This research aims to better understand the relationship between scientists and journalists from a scientist's point of view, how scientists view science news, and how this view has changed or stayed the same over twenty years. Surveys were sent to scientists to ask their opinions about the role of the media and journalism, their opinions concerning scientist-journalist interactions, and their opinions about the role of scientists. The participants responded with "agree," "disagree," or "I don't know," and were prompted to offer written, long-form explanations as to why they chose their answer. Scientists largely agreed that journalists play an important role in disseminating science news, emphasizing the importance of staying informed and reporting in a matter-of-fact way. This group, all of whom were quoted in The New York Times, trusted journalists and outlets on a case-by-case basis. Lastly, scientists feel that, while it is important to do so, they may not always be the most equipped to discuss their own research with the public. This research allowed an untarnished view through the looking-glass and into scientists' thoughts on the role journalists play in disseminating science news. Although surveyed scientists weigh the pros and cons of journalists' science reporting, there are commonalities on which they all agree: It is critical for both journalists and scientists to accurately and effectively report on research in order to enhance the public understanding of science.Includes bibliographical references

The industrious revolution, the industriousness discourse, and the development of modern economies

ABSTRACTThe idea of industriousness has been an ever-recurring issue since Max Weber launched it as a putative explanation of the advent of economic modernity. The notion of ‘industrious revolution’ has provoked a renewed flourishing of publications focusing on this issue. Although most historians agree on the emergence of industriousness in seventeenth-century Europe, there is no consensus regarding the chronology, hence the real causes, of this mental and discursive shift. This article emphasizes the problematic role played by literary evidences in these social and cultural models of diffusion of new consumer values and desires. It then establishes the timing of the emergence of the ‘industriousness discourse’ using an original approach to diffusion based both on the quantitative analysis of very large corpora and a close reading of seventeenth-century economic pamphlets and educational literature. It concludes first that there was not one but several competing discourses on industriousness. It then identifies two crucial hinges which closely match the chronology proposed by Allen and Muldrew, but refutes that championed by de Vries and McCloskey. The industrious revolution as described by these authors would have happened both too late to fit its intellectual roots and too early to signal the beginning of a ‘consumer revolution’.This work was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research CouncilThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Cambridge University Press via https://doi.org/10.1017/S0018246X1300052

Changing portrayals of medicine and patients in eighteenth-century medical writing : Lexical bundles in Public Health, Methods, and case studies

Peer reviewe

Scientific Periodicals : The Philosophical Transactions and the Edinburgh Medical Journal

Peer reviewe

Public health

Peer reviewe

Sociohistorical and cultural context of Late Modern English Medical Texts

Peer reviewe

Towards new knowledge : The corpus of Late Modern English Medical Texts

Peer reviewe

Manual to the LMEMT corpus

Peer reviewe

A Table Alphabetical, Containing and Teaching the Understanding of Hard Usual English Words [1617]

The LEME Corpus Manual has an editorial introduction, indexes of subjects, proper names, and chronology, a primary bibliography of LEME corpus texts, as well as English language texts not included in the Corpus, a description of the XML encoding and of lemmatization and source analysis tools. The appendix includes lists of language abbreviations and of abbreviations for parts of speech.Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationUniversity of Toronto LibrariesUniversity of Toronto PressInformation & Instructional Technology, Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Toront