Science information in fictional movies: Effects of context and gender

Science Communication

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 3-24

  Barriga, Claudia A ^a   Shapiro, Michael A ^a   Fernandez, Marissa L ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

Fiction; Gender; Movies; Narratives; Science

Indexed keywords

EID: 77949863501     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547009340338     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Andsager, J.L., Austin, E.W., & Pinkleton, B.E. (2001). Questioning the value of realism: Young adults' processing of messages in alcohol-related public service announcements and advertising. Journal of Communication, 51, 121-142.
2. Austin, E.W., & Meili, H.K. (1994). Effects of interpretations of televised alcohol portrayals on children's alcohol beliefs. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38, 417-435.
3. Austin, E.W., Roberts, D.F., & Nass, C.I. (1990). Influences of family communication on children's television-interpretation. Communication Research, 17, 545-564.
4. Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3-11.
5. Begg, I., Anas, A., & Farinacci, S. (1992) Dissociation of processes in belief: Source recollection, statement familiarity, and the illusion of truth. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 121, 446-458.
6. Begg, I., Robertson, R., Gruppuso, V., Anas, A., & Needham, D. (1996). The illusoryknowledge effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 410-433.
7. Cohen, J., & Weimann, G. (2000). Cultivation revisited: Some genres have some effects on some viewers. Communication Reports, 13, 99-114.
8. Correll, S.J. (2004). Constraints into preferences: Gender, status and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review, 69, 93-113.
9. Dubeck, L.W., Bruce, M.H., Schmuckler, J.S., Moshier, S.E., & Boss, J.E. (1990). Science fiction aids science teaching. The Physics Teacher, 28, 316-318.
10. Erwin, L., & Maurutto, P. (1998). Beyond access: Considering gender deficits in science education. Gender and Education, 10, 51-69.
11. Fox, M.F., & Firebaugh, G. (1992). Confidence in science: The gender gap. Social Science Quarterly, 73, 101-115.
12. Frost, P., Ingraham, M., & Wilson, B. (2002). Why misinformation is more likely to be recognised over time: A source monitoring account. Memory, 10, 179-185.
13. Gerrig, R.J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds on the psychological activities of reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
14. Gerrig, R., & Prentice, D. (1991). The representation of fictional information. Psychological Science, 2, 336-340.
15. Gilbert, D.T. (1989). Thinking lightly about others: Automatic components of the social inference process. In J. A. Bargh (Ed.), Unintended thought (Vol. xxvi, p. 481). New York: Guilford Press.
16. Gilbert, D.T., Krull, D.S., & Malone, P.S. (1991). Unbelieving the unbelievable: Some problems in the rejection of false information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 601-613.
17. Gilbert, D.T., & Malone, P.S. (1995). The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 21-38.
18. Gilbert, D.T., Pelham, B.W., & Krull, D.S. (1988). On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 733-740.
19. Green, M.C., & Brock, T.C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701-721.
20. Green, M.C., & Brock, T.C. (2002). In the mind's eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 315-342). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Greenberg, B.S., & Reeves, B. (1976). Children and the perceived reality of television. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 86-97.
22. Hawkins, R.P. (1977). The dimensional structure of children's perceptions of television reality. Communication Research, 4, 299-320.
23. Haynes, R. (1994). From Faust to Strangelove. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
24. Hirschman, E.C. (1987). Consumer preferences in literature, motion pictures and television programs. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 5, 31-46.
25. Hornig, S. (1992). Gender differences in responses to news about science and technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 17, 532-542.
26. Huesmann, L.R., Eron, L.D., Klein, R., Brice, P., & Fisher, P. (1983). Mitigating the imitation of aggressive behaviors by changing children's attitudes about media violence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 899-910.
27. Johnson, M., Hashtroudi, S., Lindsay, D. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-28.
28. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
29. Kerson, J., Kerson, T.S., & Kerson, L.A. (1999). The depiction of seizures in film. Epilepsia, 40, 1163-1167.
30. Kirby, D. (2003) Scientists on the set: Science consultants and the communication of science in visual fiction. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 261-278.
31. Leiserowitz, A. (2004, November 1). Before and after the day after tomorrow: A U.S. study of climate change risk perception. Environment, 46, 22-37.
32. Losh, S.C. (2006, August 10). American stereotypes about scientists: Gender and time effects. Paper presented at the American Sociological Association, Montreal Convention Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
33. Marsh, E., Meade, M., & Roediger, H. (2003). Learning facts from fiction. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 519-536.
34. National Science Board. (2002). Science and technology: Public attitudes and public understanding. In Science and Engineering Indicators 2002 (Chapter 7). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved August 21, 2009, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c7/c7h.htm.
35. National Science Board. (2004). Science and technology: Public attitudes and understanding. In Science and Engineering Indicators2004 (chapter 7). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved August 21, 2009, from http://nsf.gov/statistics/seind04/c7/c7i.htm.
36. Nell, V. (1988). Lost in a book: The psychology of reading for pleasure. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
37. Noble, G. (1973). Effects of different forms of filmed aggression on children's constructive and destructive play. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 54-59.
38. Oliver, M.B. (2000). The respondent gender gap. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeal (pp. 215-234). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (2005). News interest index: Public attentiveness to news stories: 1986-2004.
40. Plait, P. (2007). Bad astronomy. Retrieved August 21, 2009, from http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/.
41. Polichak, J.W., & Gerrig, R.J. (2002). Get up and win! Participatory responses to narrative. In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 71-97). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42. Potter, W.J. (1988). Perceived reality in television effects research. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 32, 23-41.
43. Potts, G.R., St. John, M.F., & Kirson, D. (1989). Incorporating new information into existing world knowledge. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 303-333.
44. Reeves, B. (1978). Perceived TV reality as a predictor of children's social behavior. Journalism Quarterly, 55, 682-689, 695.
45. Rose, C. (2003). How to teach biology using the movie science of cloning people, resurrecting the dead and combining flies and humans. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 289-296.
46. Rubin, A.M. (1979). Television use by children and adolescents. Human Communication Research, 5, 109-120.
47. Rubin, A.M., Perse, E.M., & Powell, R.A. (1985). Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155-180.
48. Slater, M. (1990) Processing social information in messages. Social group familiarity, fiction versus nonfiction, and subsequent beliefs. Communication Research, 17, 327-343.
49. Thurs, D.P. (2007). Tiny tech, transcendent tech: Nanotechnology, science fiction, and the limits of modern science talk. Science Communication, 29, 65-95.
50. Wijdicks, E., & Wijdicks, C. (2006). The portrayal of coma in contemporary motion pictures. Neurology, 66, 1300-1303.