Newspaper reporters' priorities and beliefs about environmental journalism: An application of Q-methodology

Science Communication

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 425-466

  Giannoulis, Christos ^a,b   Botetzagias, Iosif ^a   Skanavis, Constantina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE AEGEAN   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

Author keywords

environmental communication; environmental journalism; environmental reporters; Greece; Q methodology

Indexed keywords

EID: 78651069925     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547010364927     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Anderson, A. (2009). Media, politics and climate change: Towards a new research agenda. Sociology Compass, 3, 166-182.
2. Anderson, A.G. (2002). The media politics of oil spills. Spill Science & Technology Bulletin, 7, 7-15.
3. Archibald, E. (1999). Problems with environmental reporting: Perspectives of daily newspaper reporters. Journal of Environmental Education, 30(4), 27-32.
4. Bohner, G., & Wänke, M. (2002). Attitudes and attitude change. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
5. Borden, S.L., & Tew, C. (2007). The role of journalist and the performance of journalism: Ethical lessons from fake news (seriously). Journal of Mass Media Ethics: Exploring Questions of Media Morality, 22, 300-314.
6. Boroş, S. (2006). Q-methodology: Applications and implications. Invited lecture at the Research Colloquium of the Department of Organizational Studies, Tilburg University, the Netherlands.
7. Boykoff, M.T. (2009). We speak for the trees: Media reporting on the environment. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 34, 431-457.
8. Boykoff, M.T., & Boykoff, J.M. (2007). Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of US mass-media coverage. Geoforum, 38, 1190-1204.
9. Boykoff, M.T., & Mansfield, M. (2008). Ye Olde Hot Aire: Reporting on human contributions to climate change in the UK tabloid press. Environmental Research Letters, 3(2), 024002.
10. Brainard, C. (2009). Science journalism's hope and despair. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/science_journalisms_hope_and_d.php?page=all.
11. Brenner, D.J., Aucoin, J., & Xiaoming, H. (1998). Quantum stuff in communication: Some implications of Stephenson's concept. Operant Subjectivity, 21, 139-150.
12. Brossard, D., Shanahan, J., & McComas, K. (2004). Are issue-cycles culturally constructed? A comparison of French and American coverage of global climate change. Mass Communication and Society, 7, 359-377.
13. Brown, S.R. (1971). The forced-free distinction in Q technique. Journal of Educational Measurement, 8, 283-287.
14. Brown, S.R. (1980). Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
15. Brown, S.R. (1985). Comments on the search for structure. Political Methodology, 11, 109-117.
16. Brown, S.R. (1996). Q methodology and qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 6, 561-567.
17. Brown, S.R. (2006). Variance explained by each factor. Retrieved fromhttp://listserv.kent.edu/archives/q-method.html.
18. Brown, S.R. (2008). Q methodology. In L. Given (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 699-702). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Brown, S.R., Durning, D.W., & Selden, S.C. (2007) Q-methodology. In K. Yang & G. J. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in public administration (pp. 721-764). Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach.
20. Carvalho, A. (2007). Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge: Re-reading news on climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 16, 223-243.
21. Christidou, V., Dimopoulos, K., & Koulaidis, V. (2004). Constructing social representations of science and technology: The role of metaphors in the press and the popular scientific magazines. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 347-362.
22. Clarke, A. (1999). Changing attitudes through persuasive communication. Nursing Standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain): 1987), 13(30), 45-47.
23. Corbett, J.B. (2006). Communicating nature: How we create and understand environmental messages. Washington, DC: Island Press.
24. Cottle, C.E., & McKeown, B.F. (1980). The forced-free distinction in Q technique: A note on unused categories in the Q sort continuum. Operant Subjectivity, 3, 58-63.
25. Cox, R. (2009). Environmental communication and the public sphere (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. Cross, R.M. (2005). Exploring attitudes: The case for Q methodology. Health Education Research, 20, 206-213.
27. Cunningham, B. (2003). Re-thinking objectivity. Columbia Journalism Review, 42(2), 24-32.
28. de Burgh, H.W. (2003). Skills are not enough: The case for journalism as an academic discipline. Journalism, 4, 95-112.
29. Demertzis, N. (2002). Political communication in Greece. Athens, Greece: Papazisis.
30. Dimopoulos, K., & Koulaidis, V. (2002). The socio-epistemic constitution of science and technology in the Greek press: An analysis of its presentation. Public Understanding of Science, 11, 225-241.
31. Dimopoulos, K., & Koulaidis, V. (2003). Science and technology education for citizenship: The potential role of the press. Science Education, 87, 241-256.
32. Dispensa, J.M., & Brulle, R.J. (2003). Media's social construction of environmental issues: focus on global warming- a comparative study. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(10), 74-105.
33. Dryzek, J.S., & Berejikian, J. (1993). Reconstructive democratic theory. American Political Science Review, 87, 48-60.
34. Durning, D. (1999). The transition from traditional to postpositivist policy analysis: A role for Q-methodology. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18(3), 389-410.
35. Eden, S., Donaldson, A., & Walker, G. (2005). Structuring subjectivities? Using Q methodology in human geography. Area, 37, 413-422.
36. Entman, R. (1989). Democracy without citizens: Media and the decay of American politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
37. Esrock, S.L. (2005). Review and criticism: Research pioneer tribute-William Stephenson: Traveling an unorthodox path to mass communication discovery. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49, 244-250.
38. European Commission. (2007). Scientific research in the media (Eurobarometer 282/ Wave 67.2). Retrieved fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_282_en.pdf.
39. Fenton, N. (2009). New media, old news: Journalism and democracy in the digital age. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40. Fjæstad, B. (2007). Why journalists report science as they do. In M. W. Bauer & M. Bucchi (Eds.), Journalism, science and society: Science communication between news and public relations (pp. 123-131). London, England: Routledge.
41. Gans, H.J. (2004). Deciding what's news: A study of CBS evening news, NBC nightly news, Newsweek, and Time. Chicago, IL: Northwestern University Press.
42. Hansen, A. (2009, April). Communicating the environment: Journalists, media, sources and the production of environmental news. Presented at The Media and The Environment: Between Complexity and Urgency, Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal. Retrieved fromhttp://gulbenkian.mrnet.pt/media/files/FTP_files/pdfs/ambiente09/AMBIENTE_02-03Abril09-AndersHansen.pdf.
43. Harbinson, R., Mugara, R., & Chawla, A. (2006). Whatever the weather: Media attitudes to reporting on climate change. London, England: Panos Institute.
44. Harrabin, R. (2000). Reporting sustainable development: A broadcast journalist's view. In J. Smith (Ed.), The Daily Globe: Environmental change, the public and the media (pp. 49-63). London, England: Earthscan.
45. Hashim, N.H., & Meloche, J.A. (2007). Australian online newspaper: An exploratory study on Internet savvy users using Q-methodology (Faculty of Commerce Papers 410). University of Wollongong, Wollongogng, New South Wales, Australia.
46. Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K.J. (2008). Framing environmental policy by the local press: Case study from the Dadia Forest Reserve, Greece. Forest Policy and Economics, 10, 316-325.
47. Hutchinson, I., & Wolf, A. (2004). Hunches and insights in social science research. Paper presented at the Social Policy Research & Evaluation Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.
48. Johnson, B.B., & Chess, C. (2006). From the inside out: Environmental agency views about communications with the public. Risk Analysis, 26, 1395-1407.
49. Maillé, M., Saint-Charles, J., & Lucotte, M. (2010). The gap between scientists and journalists: The case of mercury science in Quebec's press. Public Understanding of Science, 19, 70-79.
50. McKeown, B. (1990). Q methodology, communication, and the behavioral text [Electronic version]. Electronic Journal of Communication, 1(1).
51. McKeown, B. (1998). Circles: Q methodology and hermeneutical science. Operant Subjectivity, 21, 112-138.
52. McKeown, B., & Thomas, D. (1988). Q methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53. McKeown, M., Hinks, M., Stowell-Smith, M., Mercer, D., & Forster, J. (1999). Q methodology, risk training and quality management. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 12, 254-266.
54. Mormont, M., & Dasnoy, C. (1995). Source strategies and the mediatization of climate change. Media, Culture & Society, 17, 49-64.
55. O'Donnell, C., & Rice, R.E. (2008). Coverage of environmental events in US and UK newspapers: Frequency, hazard, specificity, and placement. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 65, 637-654.
56. Oppenheim, A.N. (2001). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. London, England. Continuum International.
57. Popovich, M.N., & Massé, M.H. (2005). Individual assessment of media writing student attitudes: Recasting the mass communication writing apprehension measure. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82, 339-355.
58. Prasad, R.S. (2001). Development of the HIV/AIDS Q-sort instrument to measure physician attitudes. Clinical research methods. Family Medicine, 33, 772-778.
59. Rademakers, L. (2004). Examining the handbooks on environmental journalism: A qualitative document analysis and response to the literature (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, Tampa.
60. Robbins, P., & Krueger, R. (2000). Beyond bias? The promise and limits of Q method in human geography. The Professional Geographer, 52, 636-648.
61. Rupar, V. (2007). Investigating the journalistic field: The influence of objectivity as a journalistic norm on the public debate on genetic engineering in New Zealand (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
62. Sachsman, D.B., Simon, J., & Valenti, J.A.M. (2002). The environment reporters of New England. Science Communication, 23, 410-441.
63. Sachsman, D.B., Simon, J., & Valenti, J.M. (2004). Risk and the environment reporters: A four-region analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 399-416.
64. Sachsman, D.B., Simon, J., & Valenti, J.M. (2005). Wrestling with objectivity and fairness: U.S. environment reporters and the business community. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 4, 363-373.
65. Sachsman, D.B., Simon, J., & Valenti, J.M. (2006). Regional issues, national norms: A four-region analysis of U.S. environment reporters. Science Communication, 28, 93-121.
66. Sachsman, D.B., Simon, J., & Valenti, J.M. (2008). Environment reporters and U.S. journalists: A comparative analysis. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 7, 1-19.
67. Schmolck, P., & Atkinson, J. (2002). PQMethod 2.11. Retrieved fromhttp://www.rz.unibwmuenchen.de/p41bsmk/qmethod.
68. Schneider, J. (in press). Making space for the nuances of truth: Communication and uncertainty at an environmental journalists' workshop. Science Communication. doi:10.1177/1075547009340344.
69. Schoenfeld, A.C. (1980). Newspersons and the environment today. Journalism Quarterly, 57(3), 456-62.
70. Schooler, J.W., & Wilson, T.D. (1991). Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 181-192.
71. Schwartz, D. (2006) Writing green: Advocacy and investigative reporting about the environment. Baltimore, MD: Apprentice House.
72. Shemmings, D. (2006). Quantifying qualitative data: An illustrative example of the use of Q methodology in psychosocial research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 147-165.
73. Simon, J. (2009). Unnatural disaster: The crisis of environmental journalism. World Policy Journal, 26, 87-94.
74. Singer, J.B. (1997). Changes and consistencies: Newspaper journalists contemplate online future. Newspaper Research Journal, 18, 2-18.
75. Skanavis, C., & Sakellari, M. (2007). Assessment of environmental intention of journalists. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 6, 233-240.
76. Smith, J. (2000). The Daily Globe: Environmental change, the public and the media. London, England: Earthscan/James & James.
77. Steelman, T.A., & Maguire, L.A. (1999). Understanding participant perspectives: Q-methodology in national forest management. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18, 361-388.
78. Stephenson, W. (1953). The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
79. Stephenson, W. (1982). Q-methodology, interbehavioral psychology, and quantum theory. Psychological Record, 32, 235-248.
80. Stephenson, W. (1983). Quantum theory and Q-methodology: Fictionalistic and probabilistic theories conjoined. Psychological Record, 33, 213-230.
81. Stocking, S.H., & Holstein, L.W. (2009). Manufacturing doubt: Journalists' roles and the construction of ignorance in a scientific controversy. Public Understanding of Science, 18, 23-42.
82. Stricklin, M. (1996). PCQ: Factor analysis program for Q-technique (Version 3.8) [Computer software]. Lincoln, NE: Author.
83. Taylor, P., Delprato, D.J., & Knapp, J.R. (1994). Q-methodology in the study of child phenomenology. Psychological Record, 44, 171-183.
84. Top environment reporters talk about journalism vs. activism. (2006, August 24) Retrieved fromhttp://www.grist.org/article/reporters/.
85. Tsekos, C.A., & Matthopoulos, D.P. (2008). Environmental news in Greece: Evaluation of the way newspapers deal with environmental issues. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 65, 209-218.
86. Toulmin, S. (1964). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
87. Valenti, J.M. (1998). Ethical decision making in environmental communication. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 13, 219-231.
88. van Exel, J., & de Graaf, G. (2005). Q methodology: A sneak preview. Retrieved fromhttp://www.qmethodology.net/PDF/Q-methodology%20-%20A%20sneak%20preview.pdf.
89. Wallsten, K. (2007). Agenda setting and the blogosphere: An analysis of the relationship between mainstream media and political blogs. Review of Policy Research, 24, 567-587.
90. Weaver, D.H., Beam, R.A., & Brownlee, B.J. (2006). The American journalist in the 21st century: U.S. news people at the dawn of a new millennium. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
91. Webler, T., Tuler, S., & Danielson, S. (2009). Using Q method to reveal social perspectives in environmental research (SERI Rep. No. 09-001). Greenfield, MA: Social and Environmental Research Institute.
92. Wilkins, L., & Patterson, P. (1987). Risk analysis and the construction of news. Journal of Communication, 37, 80-92.
93. Wilkins, L., & Patterson, P. (1991). Risky business: Communicating issues of science, risk, and public Policy. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
94. Wilson, K.M. (2000). Drought, debate, and uncertainty: Measuring reporters' knowledge and ignorance about climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 1-13.
95. Wyss, B. (2008). Covering the environment: How journalists work the green beat. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
96. Yang, J.H. (2004). Constraints on environmental news production in the U.S.: Interview with American journalists. Journal of International and Area Studies, 11, 89-105.