Knowledge, reservations, or promise? A media effects model for public perceptions of science and technology

Communication Research

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 584-608+609

  Nisbet, Matthew C ^b   Scheufele, Dietram A ^b   Shanahan, James ^b   Moy, Patricia ^a   Brossard, Dominique ^b   Lewenstein, Bruce V ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038321662     PISSN: 00936502     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/009365002236196     Document Type: Review

References (68)

1. Ankney, R. N., Heilman, P., & Kolff, J. (1996). Newspaper coverage of the coronary artery bypass grafting report. Science Communication, 18, 153-164.
2. Basalla, G. (1976). Pop science: The depiction of science in popular culture. In G. Holton & W. Blanpied (Eds.), Science and its public (pp. 261-278). Boston: Beacon.
3. Bodmer, W. (1985). The public understanding of science. London: Royal Society.
4. Bollen, K. A. (1987). Total, direct, and indirect effects in structural equation models. In C. C. Clogg (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1987, Volume 17 (pp. 37-69). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Carter, C. (1997). The X-Files meets the skeptics. Skeptical Inquirer, 21(1), 24-28.
6. Chaffee, S., & Frank, S. (1996). How Americans get political information: Print versus broadcast news. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546, 48-58.
7. Chaffee, S. H., & Schleuder, J. (1986). Measurement and effects of attention to media news. Human Communication Research, 13, 76-107.
8. Cloître, M., & Shinn, T. (1986). Enclavement et diffusion du savoir [Restriction and diffusion of knowledge]. Information, sur les Sciences Sociales, 25, 161-187.
9. Crichton, M. (1999, February). Ritual abuse, hot air, and missed opportunities: Science views media. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Anaheim, CA.
10. Davis, R. (1963, May). Scientists and engineers: The public's image. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education, Philadelphia, PA.
11. Dawkins, R. (1998a). Science, delusion, and the appetite for wonder. Skeptical Inquirer, 22(2), 28-35.
12. Dawkins, R. (1998b). Unweaving the rainbow. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
13. Dornan, C. (1990). Some problems in conceptualizing the issue of "science in the media." Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 7, 48-71.
14. Dunwoody, S. (1982, December). A question of accuracy. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication PC-25, pp. 196-199.
15. Durant, J., Evans, G., & Thomas, G. (1992). Public understanding of science in Britain: The role of medicine in the popular representation of science. Public Understanding of Science, 1, 161-182.
16. Ehrlich, P., & Ehrlich, A. (1996). The betrayal of science and reason. Washington, DC: Island Press.
17. Einsiedel, E. (1990). Scientific literacy: A survey of adult Canadians (Report to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council). Calgary, Canada: University of Calgary.
18. Einsiedel, E. (1994). Mental maps of science: Knowledge and attitudes among Canadian adults. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 6, 35-44.
19. Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Connecting news media use with gaps in knowledge and participation. Political Communication, 17, 215-237.
20. Felt, U. (2000). Why should the public "understand" science? A historical perspective on aspects of the public understanding of science. In M. Dierkes & C. von Grote (Eds.), Between understanding and trust: The public, science and technology (pp. 7-38). Amsterdam: Overseas Publishers Association.
21. Fortner, R. (1986). Relative effectiveness of classroom and documentary film presentations on marine mammals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 115-126.
22. Friedman, S. M., Dunwoody, S., & Rogers, C. L. (1999). Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorelli, N. (1981). Scientists on the TV screen. Culture and Society, 42, 51-54.
24. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorelli, N. (1985). Television entertainment and viewers' conceptions of science. Unpublished manuscript.
25. Goffman, E. (1973). The presentation of self in everyday life. Woodstock, NY: Overlook.
26. Goldman, S. (1989). Images of technology in popular films: Discussion and filmography. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 14, 275-301.
27. Gunter, B., Clifford, B. R., & McAleer, J. L. (1997). Learning from multi-topic science programmes on mainstream television. Medienpsychologies: Zeitschrift für Individual and Massenkommunikation, 9, 3-23.
28. Guo, Z., & Moy, P. (1998). Medium or message? Predicting dimensions of political sophistication. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 10, 25-50.
29. Hartz, J., & Chappell, R. (1997). Worlds apart: How the distance between science and journalism threatens America's future. Nashville, TN: First Amendment Center.
30. Hilgartner, S. (1990). The dominant view of popularization: Conceptual problems, political uses. Social Studies of Science, 20, 519-539.
31. Hirsch, E. (1988). Cultural literacy. New York: Vintage.
32. Hornig, S. (1990). Television's Nova and the construction of scientific truth. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 7, 11-23.
33. How not to respond to The X-Files. (1998). Nature, 394, 815.
34. Hoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 1-15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36. Jöreskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 294-316). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37. Jöreskog, K. G, & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User's reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
38. Krauss, L. M. (1999, February 22). Stop the flying saucer, I want to get off. The New York Times, p. A17.
39. LaFollette, M. C. (1990). Making science our own: Public images of science, 1910-1955. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Lewenstein, B. V. (1989). Magazine publishing and popular science after World War II. American Journalism, 6, 218-234.
41. Lewenstein, B. V. (1995a). From fax to facts: Communication in the cold fusion saga. Social Studies of Science, 25, 403-436.
42. Lewenstein, B. V. (1995b). Science and the media. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 343-360). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43. Long, M., & Steinke, J. (1996). The thrill of everyday science: Images of science and scientists on children's educational science shows in the United States. Public Understanding of Science, 5, 101-120.
44. MacCallum, R. C. (1995). Model specification: Procedures, strategies, and related issues. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 16-36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Mares, M. L., & Cantor, J. (1999). Using television to foster children's interest in science. Science Communication, 20, 283-297.
46. McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16, 315-336.
47. Mead, M., & Metraux, R. (1957, August 30). Image of the scientist among high school students. Science, 126, 384-390.
48. Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.
49. Miller, J. (1987). Scientific literacy in the United States: Communicating science to the public. New York: John Wiley.
50. Miller, J. D., & Kimmel, L. (2001). Biomedical communications: Purposes, audiences, and strategies. New York: Academic Press.
51. Miller, J. D., Pardo, R., & Niwa, F. (1997). Public perceptions of science and technology: A comparative study of the European Union, the United States, Japan, and Canada. Chicago: Chicago Academy of Sciences.
52. Moy, P., & Pfau, M. (2000). With malice toward all? The media and public confidence in democratic institutions. Westport, CT: Praeger.
53. National Science Board. (2000). Science and engineering indicators 2000. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
54. Nelkin, D. (1995). Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. New York: Freeman.
55. Nelkin, D., & Lindee, S. M. (1995). The DNA mystique: The gene as a cultural icon. New York: Freeman.
56. Park, R. (2000). Voodoo science: The road to foolishness and fraud. New York: Oxford University Press.
57. Pollack, A. (1998, December 1). Scientists seek a new movie role: Hero not villain. The New York Times, p. F1.
58. Potts, R., & Martinez, I. (1994). Television viewing and children's beliefs about scientists. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15, 287-300.
59. Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. In P. V. Marsden (Ed.), Sociological methodology (Vol. 2, pp. 111-183). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
60. Robinson, M. (1976). Public affairs television and the growth of political malaise: The case of "The Selling of the Pentagon." American Political Science Review, 70, 409-432.
61. Sagan, C. (1995). The demon-haunted world: Science as a candle in the dark. New York: Random House.
62. Shanahan, J. (1995). Television viewing and adolescent authoritarianism. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 271-288.
63. Shanahan, J., & Morgan, M. (1999). Television and its viewers: Cultivation theory and research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
64. Shanahan, J., Morgan, M., & Stenbjerre, M. (1997). Green or brown? Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41, 305-323.
65. Shen, S. P. (1975). Science literacy and the public understanding of science. In S. B. Day (Ed.), Communication of Scientific Information (pp. 44-52). Basel: Karger.
66. Shibeci, R. A. (1984). Attitudes to science: An update. Studies in Science Education, 11, 26-59.
67. Shortland, M. (1988, July). Mad scientists and regular guys: Images of the expert in Hollywood films of the 1950's. Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the British Society for History of Science and the History of Science Society, Manchester, England.
68. Widavsky, A., & Dake, K. (1990). Theories of risk perception: Who fears what and why? Daedalus, 119, 41-50.