Online Participatory Journalism: A Systematic Literature Review

This article presents a systematic literature review of 378 studies (1997–2017) on online participatory journalism, i.e., audience participation in the professional news production process. Participation can challenge established understandings of journalism and affect the relationship between journalists and audience members as peripheral actors due to the increasingly blurred boundaries between these actors and the renegotiation of authority and power. The review captures research practices regarding the theoretical, conceptual and empirical approach as well as results pertaining to the impact participation has on the journalist–audience relationship and is both interdisciplinary and global in nature. The results show that research mostly focuses on journalism in Europe and North America and examines participation in the interpretation stage rather than in the formation or dissemination stage of the news production process. Longitudinal and comparative studies, examinations of regional and local participation, in-depth audience studies as well as analyses of participation in all three production stages are rare. 121 studies explicitly deal with participation’s impact on the journalist–audience relationship and produce conflicting results: 51% see journalists retaining control over news production process; 42% see shared power; and 7% see mixed results. Notably, power structures differ depending on the examined world region, production stage, and actor perspective. The review illustrates the status quo of research practices as well as the role the audience as peripheral actors play in the news production process and concludes with five observations about the field as well as future avenues to close identified research gaps

Institutionalisierte Interdisziplinarität: Chancen für die Neujustierung der Journalismusforschung in einer digitalisierten Welt

Interdisziplinarität hat in den vergangenen Jahren stark an Bedeutung gewonnen und wird häufig als Zielvorstellung wissenschaftlicher Forschung und Projekte definiert. Unklarheit besteht allerdings dahingehend, wie Interdisziplinarität definiert wird und welche Faktoren es in der Umsetzung von interdisziplinären Kooperationen zu beachten gibt. Die Journalismusforschung ist in hohem Maße für interdisziplinäre Projekte geeignet und bietet diverse Ansatzpunkte für die Kooperation mit anderen wissenschaftlichen Disziplinen. Richtig organisiert kann die Zusammenarbeit zwischen verschiedenen Disziplinen vielfältige Chancen für die Journalismusforschung bieten - sie bringt allerdings auch Herausforderungen mit sich, die es zu bewältigen gilt. Im Rahmen dieses Beitrags werden die Chancen und Herausforderungen interdisziplinärer Kooperationen in und für die Journalismusforschung auf Basis der in einem seit ca. 2010 laufenden Forschungsprogramm gemachten Erfahrungen reflektiert und kritisch diskutiert.Interdisciplinarity has become increasingly important over the last few years and is often defined as the objective of scientific research and projects. However, there is no clear consensus on how to define the concept of interdisciplinarity and what factors need to be considered when organizing and implementing interdisciplinary cooperations. Journalism research is highly suitable for interdisciplinary projects and offers various starting points for the cooperation with other scientific disciplines. Properly organized, cooperation between different disciplines can offer a wide range of opportunities for journalism research - but also poses a few challenges that need to be overcome. This article reflects and critically discusses the opportunities and challenges of interdisciplinary cooperations in and for journalism research, based on the experiences gained in a research program that has been running since about 2010

Atomic Resonance and Scattering

Contains reports on eight research projects.National Science Foundation (Grant PHY79-09743)National Bureau of Standards (Grant NB-8-NAHA-3017)Joint Services Electronics Program (Contract DAAG29-80-C-0104)National Science Foundation (Grant PHY82-10486)U.S. Navy - Office of Naval Research (Contract N00014-79-C-0183)National Science Foundation (Grant CHE79-02967-A04)U.S. Air Force - Office of Scientific Research (Contract AFOSR-81-0067)Joint Services Electronics Program (Contract DAAG29-83-K-0003

2008 Inter-laboratory Comparison Study of a Reference Material for Nutrients in Seawater

Autoclaved natural seawater collected in the North Pacific Ocean was used as a reference material for nutrients in seawater (RMNS) during an inter-laboratory comparison (I/C) study conducted in 2008. This study was a follow-up to previous studies conducted in 2003 and 2006. A set of six samples was distributed to each of 58 laboratories in 15 countries around the globe, and results were returned by 54 of those laboratories (15 countries). The homogeneities of samples used in the 2008 I/C study, based on analyses for three determinants, were improved compared to those of samples used in the 2003 and 2006 I/C studies. Results of these I/C studies indicate that most of the participating laboratories have an analytical technique for nutrients that is sufficient to provide data of high comparability. The differences between reported concentrations from the same laboratories in the 2006 and 2008 I/C studies for the same batch of RMNS indicate that most of the laboratories have been maintaining internal comparability for two years. Thus, with the current high level of performance in the participating laboratories, the use of a common reference material and the adaptation of an internationally accepted nutrient scale system would increase comparability among laboratories worldwide, and the use of a certified reference material would establish traceability. In the 2008 I/C study we observed a problem of non-linearity of the instruments of the participating laboratories similar to that observed among the laboratories in the 2006 I/C study. This problem of non-linearity should be investigated and discussed to improve comparability for the full range of nutrient concentrations. For silicate comparability in particular, we see relatively larger consensus standard deviations than those for nitrate and phosphate

Elevated protein concentrations in newborn blood and the risks of autism spectrum disorder, and of social impairment, at age 10 years among infants born before the 28th week of gestation

Among the 1 of 10 children who are born preterm annually in the United States, 6% are born before the third trimester. Among children who survive birth before the 28th week of gestation, the risks of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and non-autistic social impairment are severalfold higher than in the general population. We examined the relationship between top quartile inflammation-related protein concentrations among children born extremely preterm and ASD or, separately, a high score on the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS total score ≥65) among those who did not meet ASD criteria, using information only from the subset of children whose DAS-II verbal or non-verbal IQ was ≥70, who were assessed for ASD, and who had proteins measured in blood collected on ≥2 days (N = 763). ASD (N = 36) assessed at age 10 years is associated with recurrent top quartile concentrations of inflammation-related proteins during the first post-natal month (e.g., SAA odds ratio (OR); 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.5; 1.2–5.3) and IL-6 (OR; 95% CI: 2.6; 1.03–6.4)). Top quartile concentrations of neurotrophic proteins appear to moderate the increased risk of ASD associated with repeated top quartile concentrations of inflammation-related proteins. High (top quartile) concentrations of SAA are associated with elevated risk of ASD (2.8; 1.2–6.7) when Ang-1 concentrations are below the top quartile, but not when Ang-1 concentrations are high (1.3; 0.3–5.8). Similarly, high concentrations of TNF-α are associated with heightened risk of SRS-defined social impairment (N = 130) (2.0; 1.1–3.8) when ANG-1 concentrations are not high, but not when ANG-1 concentrations are elevated (0.5; 0.1–4.2)

Metajournalistic Discourse on Participatory Journalism: Examining a Decade of Coverage in Trade Magazines

Audience participation is a contested issue in newsrooms and can challenge journalistic authority. By conducting a mixed-method analysis of a decade (2009–2018) of metajournalistic discourse (N = 135) on participatory journalism in two leading trade magazines in the US and Germany (Columbia Journalism Review and Journalist), this study aims to contribute to the field’s understanding of how and in which contexts audience participation is covered in public discourse and of reasons for positive and negative public evaluations of participatory journalism. The results show that while metajournalistic discourse covered participatory journalism in all stages of the news production process, notable differences in the coverage emerged depending on the specific context factors of participation dealt with. It is therefore depicted as a pervasive and multi-faceted phenomenon. 93 articles featured an evaluation: 53% depicted participatory journalism positively, 16% negatively and 31% left a mixed impression. Several themes emerged in the reasons for these evaluations, some of which are exact opposites, indicating that the presented evaluation depends on the specific circumstances of audience participation, namely the contexts of participatory journalism, the degree of involvement and character of audience participation and the resources available to the journalists

Emotions in Crisis Coverage: How UK News Media Used Fear Appeals to Report on the Coronavirus Crisis

During crises, journalists rely on emotional appeals to alert the public. This includes fear appeals, i.e., journalistic depictions of threats and measures against them. Focusing on the coronavirus crisis, this study analyzes the prevalence of fear appeals in journalistic news, differences between outlets, and changes over time. It employs a manual content analysis of UK online news between January and May 2020 (N = 1048). Results indicate that, during the early phases of the coronavirus pandemic, journalists relied heavily on fear-inducing messages by emphasizing threats related to COVID-19 and, though to a lesser degree, measures against these threats. Besides differences between tabloids and quality outlets, we find that fear-inducing content decreased before the UK itself became most affected, indicating that coverage served a warning function rather than mirroring national affectedness. Overall, the study illustrates that fear appeals are common in coverage of crises, where they enable journalists to take on the role of public mobilizers and facilitators of crises response strategies, for instance by governments

Emotions in Crisis Coverage: How UK News Media Used Fear Appeals to Report on the Coronavirus Crisis

During crises, journalists rely on emotional appeals to alert the public. This includes fear appeals, i.e., journalistic depictions of threats and measures against them. Focusing on the coronavirus crisis, this study analyzes the prevalence of fear appeals in journalistic news, differences between outlets, and changes over time. It employs a manual content analysis of UK online news between January and May 2020 (N = 1048). Results indicate that, during the early phases of the coronavirus pandemic, journalists relied heavily on fear-inducing messages by emphasizing threats related to COVID-19 and, though to a lesser degree, measures against these threats. Besides differences between tabloids and quality outlets, we find that fear-inducing content decreased before the UK itself became most affected, indicating that coverage served a warning function rather than mirroring national affectedness. Overall, the study illustrates that fear appeals are common in coverage of crises, where they enable journalists to take on the role of public mobilizers and facilitators of crises response strategies, for instance by governments

Can transparency preserve journalism’s trustworthiness? Recipients’ views on transparency about source origin and verification regarding user-generated content in the news

In a digital world, journalists increasingly integrate user-generated content (UGC) in their coverage. Journalists use coping strategies to dispel the audience’s supposed concerns about the reliability of this new type of sources and to maintain the audience’s confidence in such coverage. Transparency, in particular, is often considered as a means to preserve journalism from accusations of being biased and untrustworthy. We focus on the audience’s perception and evaluation of two transparency strategies: transparency about the origin of UGC and transparency about verification attempts. Based on semi-structured interviews with German users (N = 26), this study analyzes recipients’ perceptions of transparency strategies journalists use when integrating UGC. Most of the respondents rarely perceive transparency about source origin or verification in their everyday media use. Even when noticed, transparency efforts barely seem to increase journalistic trustworthiness. In einer digitalen Welt integrieren JournalistInnen zunehmend nutzergenerierte Inhalte (UGC) in ihre Berichterstattung. Um angenommene Bedenken des Publikums in Bezug auf die Zuverlässigkeit dieser neuen Art von Quellen zu zerstreuen und das Vertrauen des Publikums in die Berichterstattung zu erhalten, wenden JournalistInnen Bewältigungsstrategien an. Besonders Transparenz wird oft als Mittel angesehen, um den Journalismus vor dem Vorwurf der Verzerrung und Misstrauenswürdigkeit zu bewahren. Wir konzentrieren uns auf die Publikumswahrnehmung und -bewertung von zwei Transparenzstrategien: Transparenz über die Herkunft von UGC und Transparenz über Verifizierungsversuche. Basierend auf semi-strukturierten Interviews mit deutschen NutzerInnen (N = 26) analysiert diese Studie die Publikumswahrnehmung journalistischer Transparenzstrategien bei der Verwendung von UGC. Die meisten Befragten nehmen selten Transparenz über die Herkunft oder Verifizierung der Quelle wahr. Selbst wenn sie bemerkt werden, scheinen Transparenzbemühungen die journalistische Vertrauenswürdigkeit kaum zu erhöhen

On measuring trust and distrust in journalism: Reflection of the status quo and suggestions for the road ahead

The rapid advancement of research on trust and distrust in the news media and the plethora of methodological approaches that accompany it leads us to critically reflect the status quo and make suggestions for the road ahead. Following a brief overview of conceptual definitions of trust and distrust as well as of related concepts used in journalism studies, we turn to our main endeavour by presenting measurements used in the field. We identify difficulties in measuring both trust and distrust in journalism and offer suggestions for dealing with them. Specifically, we focus on four main issues: the concept drawn upon for measurement, the employed research design, the object of investigation, and the items and dimensions of measurement. Rather than presenting a finished solution, we hope to advance the methodological consolidation of the field and contribute to the ongoing scholarly debate