Tension between visibility and invisibility: Science communication in new information environments

The visibility and invisibility of scientific knowledge, its creation, and of scientists are at the core of science communication research. Thus, prominent paradigms, such as the public understanding of science or public engagement with science and technology, have implications for the visibility of scientific knowledge in the scientific community and among the public. This article posits that visibility in science communication is achieved with the availability of scientific knowledge, the approval of its dissemination, and its accessibility to third parties. The public understanding of science and public engagement with science paradigms emphasize different aspects of visibility with the latter focusing on the visibility of the creation of scientific knowledge more than public understanding of science which focuses on the knowledge itself. The digital information environment has engendered new formats and possibilities for visibility but also new risks, thereby creating tensions in science communication

Representation of actors and sources (Technology Coverage)

Analyzing which actors or sources are cited in the news media coverage allows for carving out different perspectives that are represented in the media coverage. Studies thus analyze which types of actors are cited by journalists to what extent. In technology coverage, actors from the domain of science, politics, NGOs, industry and citizens are often mentioned.   Field of application/theoretical foundation: The analysis of the representation of actors is based on the assumption that journalists choose actors as sources purposefully and thereby attribute relevance to them. Those actors cited in the journalistic coverage have more opportunities to present their arguments and are thus more visible in the public discourse. Actors are also analyzed within framing analysis (Entman, 1993) and analyses of discourses in various domains.   Example studies: Metag & Marcinkowski (2014); Nisbet & Lewenstein (2002)   Information on Metag & Marcinkowski, 2014 Authors: Julia Metag, Frank Marcinkowski Research question/research interest: “Does the concept of a journalistic negativity bias apply to the media coverage of nanotechnology?” Object of analysis: German speaking daily newspapers: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Tagesanzeiger, Standard, Presse Time frame of analysis: 2000-2009   Information on Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002 Authors: Matthew C. Nisbet, Bruce V. Lewenstein Research question/research interest: trends in media coverage of biotechnology Object of analysis: New York Times and Newsweek Time frame of analysis: 1970-1999    Information about variable   Authors Variable name/definition Level of analysis Values Scale level Reliability Metag & Marcinkowski (2014) the three most prominent actors cited   article   scientists economic actors journalists nominal N/A Nisbet & Lewenstein (2002) featured actors (up to 2 actors per article) article government affiliated general (the public, the media) science or medicine industry other interests (in addition: further subcategories) nominal intercoder reliability for two groups (Team A: r = .43; Team B: r = 48)   References Metag, Julia; Marcinkowski, Frank (2014): Technophobia towards emerging technologies? A comparative analysis of the media coverage of nanotechnology in Austria, Switzerland and Germany. In: Journalism 15(4), 463-481. Nisbet, Matthew C.; Lewenstein, Bruce V. (2002): Biotechnology and the American Media. The Policy Process and the Elite Press, 1970 to 1999. In: Science Communication 23 (4), 359–391.   Further References Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51-­58

Benefit/risk framing (Technology Coverage)

In order to identify interpretative patterns in the media coverage of technology, researches apply the variable risk and benefit framing. Risk and Benefit Framing is being measured differently; some studies use one variable, other studies use several variables to measure it. Either way, the variable is used to investigate to what extent either risks or benefits dominate the discourse and thus whether a positive or negative impression of a technology is given. In addition, it is analyzed how benefits and risks are portrayed, for example with regards to specificity and magnitude (Strekalova 2015) or how the ratio of risks and benefits changes over time or differs among different media (Donk, Metag, Kohring, & Marcinkowski 2012).   Field of application/theoretical foundation: The variable risk and benefit framing is often based on Entman’s framing approach, which is frequently applied in quantitative content analyses on various topics. In media content analyses, the framing concept, however, is understood and applied differently, which is the case also for the analysis of technology coverage. In addition to risk and benefit frames, thematic or issue frames are applied including risks and/or benefits as possible frames among others (e.g. Weaver et al. 2009). Yet, some analyses are based on the assumption that a frame is a specific, unique pattern of a text composed of several elements (Kohring & Matthes 2002; Matthes & Kohring 2008). These elements are (a) problem definition, (b) causal attribution of responsibility, (c) moral judgment of the protagonists and their actions, and (d) treatment recommendations (Entman 1993, p. 52). Following this inductive approach, these elements are coded as single variables. After coding, frames are identified statistically by testing for relational patterns between the frame elements (Kohring & Matthes 2002; Matthes & Kohring 2008).   References/combination with other methods of data collection: In media effects research, it can be of interest whether the frames analyzed in the media coverage are recognized by recipients and how they affect their attitudes towards a topic, which can be tested by means of surveys or experiments among recipients.   Example studies: Strekalova (2015); Donk et al. (2012)   Information on Strekalova, 2015 Authors: Yulia A. Strekalova Research question/research interest: “How do elite and regional U.S. newspapers cover nanomedicine? How was the news about nanomedicine framed by the U.S. newspapers?” Object of analysis: U.S. newspapers (3 national quality newspapers: The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal; 3 regional newspapers: Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe, The Houston Chronicle) Time frame of analysis: 1990-September 30, 2013   Information on Donk et al., 2012 Authors: André Donk, Julia Metag, Matthias Kohring, Frank Marcinkowski Research question/research interest: The framing of nanotechnology in German print media Object of analysis: 9 German daily newspapers and weekly magazines (Financial Times Deutschland, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Frankfurter Rundschau, Süddeutsche Zeitung, taz, Die Welt, Focus, Der Spiegel, die Zeit) Time frame of analysis: 2000 bis 2008 Codebook: placed at disposal   Information about variable   Authors Variable name/definition Level of analysis Values Scale level  Reliability Strekalova (2015) Risk and Benefit Frames (in addition: magnitude and specificity of risks and benefits)   article   benefits only risks only benefits and risks no benefits or risks nominal intercoder reliability: .86 (range: .72-.95)   Donk, Metag, Kohring & Marcinkowski (2012) Nanotechnology Frames: variables with frequency ≥5% for 7 categories representing 4 frame elements Categories for frame element “problem definition”: Main topic Evaluation of benefits Evaluation of risks Variables “main topic”: Scientific research medical implementation implementation in information and communication technology (ICT) economy overview of nanotechnology Variables “Evaluation of benefits”: medical benefits scientific benefits economic benefits Variables “Evaluation of risks”: Medical risks Categories for frame element “Causal attribution of responsibility”: Protagonist responsible for benefits Protagonist responsible for risks Variables “Protagonist responsible for benefits”: Scientist economic protagonist nanotechnology Variables “Protagonist responsible for risks”: Nanotechnology Category for frame element “Moral judgement”: Evaluation of nanotechnology Variables: Positive evaluation/acceptance negative evaluation/acceptance Category for frame element “Treatment recommendation”: Call for regulation/support Prospects Variables: Risk regulation Prospects Positive prospects article   nominal R = .87 Pi = .79     References Strekalova, Yulia A. (2015): Informing Dissemination Research. In: Science Communication 37(2), 151–172. Donk, André; Metag, Julia; Kohring, Matthias; Marcinkowski, Frank (2012): Framing Emerging Technologies. In: Science Communication 34(1), 5–29.    Further References Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51­58. Kohring, M., & Matthes, J. (2002). The face(t)s of biotech in the nineties: How the German press framed modern biotechnology. Public Understanding of Science, 11, 143­154. Matthes, J., &, Kohring, M. (2008). The content analysis of media frames: Toward improving reliability and validity. Journal of Communication, 58, 258­279. Weaver, D. A., Lively, E., & Bimber, B. (2009). Searching for a Frame. Science Communication, 31(2), 139–166

Political communication in and about crises – Introduction to the Thematic Section

The financial crisis in Europe and the United States, the war in Syria, the refugee crisis, and terrorist attacks – crises seem to permeate everyday life and make headlines. Crisis as a central, persistent element of modern life has been the subject of scholarly discussions in various disciplines. Political communication research approaches crisis from two different angles. First, political crisis communication research deals with communication about political crises, such as political upheavals, protests, and subversions of governments and presidents. One of the most recent examples of a political crisis comes from Venezuela, where political changes and problems, such as corruption and undemocratic governance, have brought about economic problems (hyperinflation), a rising crime rate, hunger, and disease. Second, many other types of crises involve political communication because they also lead to policy reactions or at least discussion on their political aspects. For example, natural disasters typically provoke public discussion on the roles of political organizations and actors before, during, and after these disasters and the consequences for policy

Tone (Technology Coverage)

The variable tone measures the overall impression of the technology covered in a unit of analysis (e.g. newspaper article). The variable addresses the question whether the overall interpretation of a technology within a media item is rather positive, neutral or negative. In the case of technology, the variable tone is in part related to risk and benefits portrayed in the news media coverage (e.g. Nisbet & Lewenstein 2002).   Field of application/theoretical foundation: The tone of news media coverage is analyzed in various domains to understand how actors, topics or current issues are evaluated in the media coverage. The tone reflects how journalists interpret issues, such as a technology or technological developments. It is assumed that the tone of the news media coverage is particularly relevant regarding the recipients’ interpretation of issues or actors in question.   Example studies: Lemańczyk (2012); Kojo & Innola (2017)   Information on Lemańczyk, 2012 Authors: Szczepan Lemańczyk Research question/research interest: Frames, themes and tone used in the Polish coverage of nanotechnology Object of analysis: the two largest Polish national broadsheets (elite newspapers): Gazeta Wyborcza and Rzeczpospolita Time frame of analysis: 2004-2009   Information on Kojo & Innola, 2017 Authors: Matti Kojo, Eeva Innola Research question/research interest: How is CCS handled and framed in the Finnish media and to what extent? Object of analysis: 10 Finnish newspapers Timeframe of analysis: 1996-2015   Information about variable Authors Variable name/definition Level of analysis Values Scale level Reliability Lemańczyk (2012) general tone article Positive Neutral Negative   nominal  N/A Kojo & Innola (2017) tone article Positive Negative Neutral Mixed nominal N/A   References Lemańczyk, Szczepan (2012): Between National Pride and the Scientific Success of “Others”: The Case of Polish Press Coverage of Nanotechnology, 2004-2009. In: Nanoethics 6(2), 101-115. Kojo, Matti; Innola, Eeva (2017): Carbon Capture and Storage in the Finnish Print Media. In: Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy 8(2), 113-146.   Further References Nisbet, M. C., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2002). Biotechnology and the American Media: The Policy Process and the Elite Press, 1970 to 1999. Science Communication, 23(4), 359–391

Cognitio populi – Vox populi: Implications of science-related populism for communication behavior

In many countries, science is challenged by science-related populism, which deems the common sense of “ordinary people” superior to the knowledge of “academic elites”. Individual support for science-related populism can be associated with people’s communication behavior: On the one hand, people who hold science-related populist attitudes may inform themselves differently about science; they may even be disconnected from societal discourse around science. On the other hand, they may communicate more actively on social media and in interpersonal conversations. We test this using nationally representative survey data from Switzerland. Results show that science-related populists use TV and social networking sites more often to get information about science. They are also more likely to communicate about science in social media comments. However, science-related populist attitudes are not associated with a general preference for social media over journalistic media. Science-related populism has thus not (yet) fueled a “science-related public disconnection”. We also run multiverse analyses, which show further nuances of our results, and discuss implications for science communication

Agenda-Building durch Twitter? Eine Analyse der Nutzung politischer Tweets durch Schweizer Journalistinnen und Journalisten

Viele Politiker und Journalisten nutzen Twitter inzwischen regelmäßig und sind über die Microblogging-Plattform miteinander vernetzt. Daher ist es im Sinne des Agenda-Building-Ansatzes für Politikerinnen und Politiker potenziell möglich, zu versuchen, über Twitter die Berichterstattung der Journalisten zu beeinflussen. Der Beitrag analysiert vor diesem Hintergrund, welche Faktoren politischer Tweets deren Nutzung durch Schweizer Journalisten erklären. Basis ist eine standardisierte Online-Befragung Schweizer Journalistinnen und Journalisten zu ihrer Nutzung von Tweets von Politikern für ihre Arbeit. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Journalisten politische Tweets vor allem dann für ihre Berichterstattung nutzen, wenn sie sich als Zitate eignen oder Informationen zu Hintergründen oder politischen Veranstaltungen enthalten. Da politische Tweets vor allem genutzt werden, wenn sie zitierfähig sind, ist ein Agenda-Building-Prozess über Twitter plausibel.Many politicians as well as journalists are using Twitter regularly and are connected on this microblogging platform. Following the agenda-building approach, it is thus potentially possible for politicians to try to influence journalistic media coverage through Twitter. Against this background, this article analyzes which characteristics of political Tweets explain their use by Swiss journalists. It is based on a standardized online survey of Swiss journalists in 2014 on their professional use of political Tweets. The results demonstrate that journalists use political Tweets mainly if they can use them as quotes of if they contain background information or information about political events. As political Tweets are most likely to be used by journalists if they can quote them agenda-building processes seem plausible

Who supports science-related populism? A nationally representative survey on the prevalence and explanatory factors of populist attitudes toward science in Switzerland

Science and its epistemology have been challenged by science-related populism—a variant of populism suggesting that a virtuous “ordinary people,” and not allegedly corrupt academic elites, should determine the “production of truth.” Yet almost no studies have assessed the prevalence of science-related populist attitudes among the population and explanatory factors thereof. Based on a nationally representative survey in Switzerland, our study shows that only a minority of the Swiss exhibit science-related populist attitudes. Comparisons with reference studies suggest that these attitudes may be less prevalent in Switzerland than political populist attitudes. Those who hold stronger science-related populist attitudes tend to have no university education, less personal contact with science, lower scientific literacy, and higher interest in science. Additional analyses show that left-leaning citizens are less likely to hold science-related populist attitudes than moderate and right-leaning citizens. Our findings contribute to current debates about a potential fragmentation of science communication audiences and call for further research on the sociodemographic and attitudinal profiles of people with skeptical orientations toward scienc

Editorial: Science Communication in the Digital Age—New Actors, Environments, and Practices

Digitalization challenges science communication in theoretical as well as methodological ways. It raises questions on how scientists, organizations, and institutions, as well as citizens and actors from other fields communicate about science and how science communication affects politics and the public. This thematic issue presents a collection of articles attempting to tackle digitalization’s challenge for science communication research. In this editorial, we provide a short overview of the included articles. Additionally, we outline some future avenues that research could follow to examine further the implications that digital channels could have for science communication

Who wants to be a citizen scientist? Identifying the potential of citizen science and target segments in Switzerland

Driven by the proliferation of digital media, citizen science – the involvement of non-scientists in scientific research – represents one of the most important recent developments in science communication as it brings science and the public closer together. So far, however, citizen science projects have mostly attracted people that are highly educated, mostly male and already have very positive attitudes towards science. Based on nationally representative survey data (N = 1051), our study explores the potential of citizen science in Switzerland. Using regression analysis, we show that attitudes towards science are significant antecedents of respondents’ interest in participating in citizen science – but that gender and education are not. In addition, latent class analysis identifies five segments, representing over one-third of the Swiss population, who are interested in citizen science and could potentially be engaged: ‘Free-Timers’, ‘Senior Sciencephiles’, ‘Young Sciencephiles’, ‘Intrigued Adolescents’ and ‘Fully Employed Parents’. Additional description suggests that previously overlooked segments are best addressed online via YouTube or offline in zoos or botanical gardens. Overall, our analysis suggests that citizen science’s potential is far higher than previous projects were able to realize