The Influence of News Frames and Science Background on Attributions About Embryonic and Adult Stem Cell Research: Frames as Heuristic/ Biasing Cues

Science Communication

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 86-114

  Stewart, Craig O ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS   (United States)

Author keywords

controversial; framing; psychology of communication; quantitative analysis; science; stem cells

Indexed keywords

EID: 84872732897     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547012440517     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Brossard D.,Nisbet M. C.Deference to scientific authority among a low information public: Understanding U.S. opinion on agricultural biotechnology.International Journal of Public Opinion Research. 2006;19:24-52.
2. BushG. W. (2001, August9). President discusses stem cell research. Retrieved from http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-2.html.
3. Chaiken S.,Maheswaran D.Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1994;66:460-473.
4. Cohen J.Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988:.
5. Critchley C. R.Public opinion and trust in scientists: The role of the research context, and the perceived motivations of stem cell researchers.Public Understanding of Science. 2008;17:309-327.
6. Dahinden U.Biotechnology in Switzerland: Frames in a heated debate.Science Communication. 2002;24:184-197.
7. Dahmen N. S.Newspapers focus on conflict in stem cell coverage.Newspaper Research Journal. 2008;29:50-64.
8. D'Angelo P.News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to Entman.Journal of Communication. 2002;52:870-888.
9. Entman R. M.Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm.Journal of Communication. 1993;43 (4): 51-58.
10. Fahmy S.,Relly J. E.,Wanta W.President's power to frame stem cell views limited.Newspaper Research Journal. 2010;31:64-74.
11. Gogolin L.,Swartz F.A quantitative and qualitative inquiry into the attitudes toward science of nonscience college students.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 1992;29:487-504.
12. Gregory J.,Miller S.Science in public: Communication, culture, and credibility. New York, NY: Plenum; 1998:.
13. Ho S. S.,Brossard D.,Scheufele D. A.Effects of value predispositions, mass media use, and knowledge on public attitudes toward embryonic stem cell research.International Journal of Public Opinion. 2008;20:171-192.
14. Igartua J.-J.,Cheng L.Moderating effect of group cue while processing news on immigration: Is the framing effect a heuristic process?.Journal of Communication. 2009;59:726-749.
15. Kitzinger J.,Williams C.Forecasting science futures: Legitimising hope and calming fears in the embryo stem cell debate.Social Science & Medicine. 2005 2005;61:.
16. Ko D. M.,Kim M. S.Message framing and defensive processing: A cultural examination.Health Communication. 2010;25:61-68.
17. Lee N.-J.,McLeod D. M.,Shah D. V.Framing policy debates: Issue dualism, journalistic frames, and opinions on controversial policy issues.Communication Research. 2008;35:695-718.
18. Liu H.,Priest S.Understanding public support for stem cell research: Media communication, interpersonal communication and trust in key actors.Public Understanding of Science. 2009;18:704-718.
19. Lynch J.Making room for stem cells: Dissociation and establishing new research objects.Argumentation & Advocacy. 2006;42:143-156.
20. Nisbet M. C.Public opinion about stem cell research and human cloning.Public Opinion Quarterly. 2004;68:131-154.
21. Nisbet M. C.Communicating science. Kahlor L.Stout P. A., ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2010:40-67.
22. Nisbet M. C.,Brossard D.,Kroepsch A.Framing science: The stem cell controversy in an age of press/politics.Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 2003;8:36-70.
23. Nisbet M. C.,Goidel R. K.Understanding citizen perceptions of science controversy: Bridging the ethnographic-survey research divide.Public Understanding of Science. 2007;16:421-440.
24. Nisbet M. C.,Lewenstein B. V.Biotechnology and the American media: The public policy process and the elite process.Science Communication. 2002;23:359-391.
25. Nisbet M. C.,Moony C.Framing science.Science. 2007;316:56.
26. Nisbet M. C.,Scheufele D. A.The future of public engagement.The Scientist. 2007;21 (10): 39-44.
27. ObamaB. H. (2009, March9). Remarks of President Barack Obama: As prepared for delivery-Signing of Stem Cell Executive Order and Scientific Integrity Presidential Memorandum. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-of-the-President-As-Prepared-for-Delivery-Signing-of-Stem-Cell-Executive-Order-and-Scientific-Integrity-Presidential-Memorandum.
28. O'Keefe D. J.Persuasion: Theory & research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002:.
29. Pardo R.,Calvo F.Attitudes toward embryo research, worldviews, and the moral status of the embryo frame.Science Communication. 2008;30:8-47.
30. Perloff R. M.The dynamics of persuasion. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1993:.
31. Petty R.,Cacioppo J.Communication and persuasion: The central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1986:.
32. Reis R.How Brazilian and North American newspapers frame the stem cell research debate.Science Communication. 2008;29:316-334.
33. Scheufele B. T.,Scheufele D. A.Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives. D'Angelo P.Kuypers J. A., ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2010:110-134.
34. Scheufele D. A.Framing as a theory of media effects.Journal of Communication. 1999;49:103-122.
35. Scott C. T.Stem cell now: A brief introduction to the coming medical revolution. New York, NY: Plume; 2006:.
36. Stewart C. O.Socioscientific controversies: A theoretical and methodological framework.Communication Theory. 2009;19:124-145.
37. Stewart C. O.,Dickerson D. L.,Hathcock S.,Weston J.,Minogue J. Paper to be presented at the American Educational Research Association convention; 2012Vancouver, British Columbia; 2012.
38. Stewart C. O.,Dickerson D. L.,Hotchkiss R.Beliefs about science and news frames in audience evaluations of embryonic and adult stem cell research.Science Communication. 2009;30:427-452.
39. Sturgis P.,Allum N.Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes.Public Understanding of Science. 2004;13:55-74.
40. TarneG.PrenticeD. (2010, August8). Playing politics with stem cells. American Thinker. Retrieved from http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/playing_politics_with_stem_cel.html.
41. TaskerF. (2010, April24). Research into stem cells of adults stirs hopes. The Miami Herald. Retrieved from http://www.miamiherald.com/past_articles/.
42. Todorov A.,Chaiken S.,Henderson M. D.The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice. Dillard J. P.Pfau M., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002:195-211.
43. Williams C.,Kitzinger J.,Henderson L.Envisaging the embryo in stem cell research: Rhetorical strategies and media reporting of the ethical debates.Sociology of Health & Illness. 2003;25:793-814.
44. Yun D.,Nah S.,McLeod D. M.Framing effects of news coverage of the embryonic stem cell controversy: Issue involvement as an effects moderator.Communication Research Reports. 2008;25:312-315.