Motivated Processing: How People Perceive News Covering Novel or Contradictory Health Research Findings

Science Communication

Volumn 37, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 602-634

  Chang, Chingching ^a  

^a NATIONAL CHENGCHI UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

attitudes toward research; contradictory news; health behaviors; news evaluations; novel news; uncertainty

Indexed keywords

EID: 84941135401     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547015597914     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. W.A.AfifiJ.L.Weiner (2004). Toward a theory of motivated information management. Communication Theory, 14, 167-190.
2. M.AngellJ.P.Kassirer (1994). Clinical research: What should the public believe?New England Journal of Medicine, 331, 189-90.
3. C.K.AtkinS.W.SmithC.McFetersV.Ferguson (2008). A comprehensive analysis of breast cancer news coverage in leading media outlets focusing on environmental risks and prevention. Journal of Health Communication, 13, 3-19. doi:10.1080/10810730701806912
4. D.W.BellV.M.Esses (2002). Ambivalence and response amplification: A motivational perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1143-1152.
5. W.L.Bennett (2009). News: The politics of illusion. White Plains, NY: Longman
6. D.E.Brashers (2001). Communication and uncertainty management. Journal of Communication, 51, 477-497.
7. J.BrechmanC.J.LeeJ.N.Cappella (2009). Lost in translation? A comparison of cancer-genetics reporting in the press release and its subsequent coverage in the press. Science Communication, 30, 453-474.
8. J.BrechmanC.J.LeeJ.N.Cappella (2011). Distorting genetic research about cancer: From bench science to press release to published news. Journal of Communication, 61, 496-513.
9. M.BrodieE.C.HamelD.E.AltmanR.J.BlendonJ.M.Benson (2003). Health news and the American public: 1996-2002. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 28, 927-951. doi:10.1215/03616878-28-5-927
10. T.M.BubelaT.A.Caulfield (2004). Do the print media hype genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 170, 1399-1407. doi:10.1503/cmaj.1030762
11. E.P.Bucy (2003). Media credibility reconsidered: Synergy effects between on air and online news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80, 247-264.
12. C.Chang (2011a). Enhancing self-referencing to health messages: Implications for public health campaigns. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 45, 147-164.
13. C.Chang (2011b). Feeling ambivalent about going green: Implications for green advertising processing. Journal of Advertising, 40(4), 19-32.
14. C.Chang (2012). Ambivalent attitudes in a communication process: An integrated model. Human Communication Research, 38, 332-359.
15. C.Chang (2013). Men’s and women’s responses to two-sided health news coverage: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Health Communication, 18, 1326-1344.
16. C.Chang (2014). Responses to conflicting information in computer-mediated communication: Gender difference as an example. New Media & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1461444814535344
17. C.Chang (2015). Inaccuracy in health research news: A typology and predictions of scientists’ perceptions of the accuracy of research news. Journal of Health Communication, 20, 177-186.
18. G.Churchill (1987). Marketing research: Methodological foundations. Chicago, IL: Dryden Press.
19. J.N.Clarke (2008). A question of balance: The autism-vaccine controversy in the British and American elite press. Science Communication, 30, 77-107. doi:10.1177/1075547008320262
20. J.N.ClarkeM.M.Everest (2006). Cancer in the mass print media: Fear, uncertainty and the medical model. Social Science & Medicine, 62, 2591-2600. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.021
21. C.P.CooperM.BurgoonD.L.Roter (2001). An expectancy-value analysis of viewer interest in television prevention news stories. Health Communication, 13, 227-240. doi:10.1207/S15327027HC1303_1
22. M.D.CozzensN.S.Contractor (1987). The effect of conflicting information on media skepticism. Communication Research, 14, 437-451. doi:10.1177/009365087014004004
23. J.W.Dearing (1995). Newspaper coverage of maverick science: Creating controversy through balancing. Public Understanding of Science, 4, 341-361. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/4/4/002
24. S.Dentzer (2009). Communicating medical news: Pitfalls of health care journalism. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(1), 1-3. doi:10.1056/NEJMp0805753
25. H.De VreeseP.JochenA.HolliC.Semetko (2001). Framing politics at the launch of the Euro: A cross-national comparative study of frames in the news. Political Communication, 18, 107-122.
26. G.N.DixonC.E.Clarke (2012). Heightening uncertainty around certain science: Media coverage, false balance, and the autism-vaccine controversy. Science Communication, 35, 358-382. doi:10.1177/1075547012458290
27. E.R.DorseyJ.de RouletJ.P.ThompsonJ.I.ReminickA.ThaiZ.White-StellatoC.A.BeckH..Moses (2010). Funding of US biomedical research, 2003-2008. Journal of the American Medical Association, 303, 137-143.
28. C.GazianoK.McGrath (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism Quarterly, 63, 451-462.
29. J.P.Goldberg (1992). Nutrition and health communication: The message and the media over half a century. Nutrition Reviews, 50, 71-77. doi:10.1111/j.1753-4887.1992.tb01272.x
30. J.P.GoldbergJ.P.Hellwig (1997). Nutrition research in the media: The challenge facing scientists. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 16, 544-550. doi:10.1080/07315724.1997.10718718
31. J.P.GoldbergS.A.Sliwa (2011). Getting balanced nutrition messages across communicating actionable nutrition messages: Challenges and opportunities. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 70, 26-37. doi:10.1017/S0029665110004714
32. A.GreinerK.C.SmithE.Guallar (2010). Something fishy? News media presentation of complex health issues related to fish consumption guidelines. Public Health Nutrition, 13, 1786-1794. doi:10.1017/S1368980010000923
33. P.K.J.HanR.P.MoserW.P.Klein (2007). Perceived ambiguity about cancer prevention recommendations: Associations with cancer-related perceptions and behaviours in a US population survey. Health Expectations, 10, 321-336. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00456.x
34. J.HartzR.Chappell (1997). Worlds apart: How the distance between science and journalism threatens America’s future. Nashville, TN: The First Amendment Center.
35. A.L.HolbrookM.C.GreenJ.A.Krosnick (2003). Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires: Comparisons of respondent satisficing and social desirability response bias. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(1), 79-125. doi:10.1086/346010
36. F.HounE.E.HuertaS.Lemon (1995). The association between alcohol and breast cancer: Popular press coverage of research. American Journal of Public Health, 85, 1082-6. doi:10.2105/AJPH.85.8_Pt_1.1082
37. Y.HuS.S.Sundar (2010). Effects of online health sources on credibility and behavioral intentions. Communication Research, 37, 105-132. doi:10.1177/0093650209351512
38. R.J.HurleyK.A.KosenkoD.Brashers (2011). Uncertain terms: Message features of online cancer news. Communication Monographs, 78, 370-390. doi:10.1080/03637751.2011.565061
39. S.Jackson (1992). Message effects research: Principles of design and analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
40. J.D.Jensen (2008). Scientific uncertainty in news coverage of cancer research: Effects of hedging on scientists’ and journalists’ credibility. Human Communication Research, 34, 347-369. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00324.x
41. J.D.JensenN.CarcioppoloA.J.KingJ.K.BernatL.DavisR.YaleJ.Smith (2011). Including limitations in news coverage of cancer research: Effects of news hedging on fatalism, medical skepticism, patient trust, and backlash. Journal of Health Communication, 16, 486-503. doi:10.1080/10810730.2010.546491
42. J.D.JensenR.J.Hurley (2010). Conflicting stories about public scientific controversies: Effects of news convergence and divergence on scientists’ credibility. Public Understanding of Science, 21, 689-704. doi:10.1177/0963662510387759
43. J.D.JensenC.M.MoriartyR.J.HurleyJ.E.Stryker (2010). Making sense of cancer news coverage trends: A comparison of three comprehensive content analyses. Journal of Health Communication, 15, 136-151.
44. T.Johnson (1998). Medicine and the media. New England Journal of Medicine, 339(2), 87-92. doi:10.1056/NEJM199807093390206
45. W.L.Johnson-TaylorA.L.YarochS.Krebs-SmithA.B.Rodgers (2007). What can communication science tell us about promoting optimal dietary behavior?Journal of Nutrition Education Behavior, 39(2 Suppl.), S1-S4. doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2006.05.011
46. Z.Kunda (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480-498.
47. L.H.Kushi (1999). Vitamin E and heart disease: A case study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 69, 1322S-1329S. Retrieved from http://ajcn.nutrition.org/
48. M.S.LauerF.S.Collins (2010). Using science to improve the nation’s health system: NIH’s commitment to comparative effectiveness research. Journal of American Medical Association, 303, 2182-2183.
49. T.K.MacDonaldM.P.Zanna (1998). Cross-dimensional ambivalence toward social groups: Can ambivalence affect intentions to hire feminists?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 427-441.
50. M.MailleJ.Saint-CharlesM.Lucotte (2010). The gap between scientists and journalists: The case of mercury science in Quebec’s press. Public Understanding of Science, 19(1), 70-79.
51. A.Mazur (1981). Media coverage and public opinion on scientific controversies. Journal of Communication, 31, 106-115. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1981.tb01234.x
52. R.B.McCall (1988). Science and the press: Like oil and water. American Psychologist, 43(2), 87-94.
53. K.A.McComasC.W.Trumbo (2001). Source credibility in environmental health-risk controversies: Application of Meyer’s credibility index. Risk Analysis, 21, 467-480. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.213126
54. J.R.MeszarosD.A.AschJ.BaronJ.C.HersheyH.KunreutherJ.Schwartz-Buzaglo (1996). Cognitive processes and the decision of parents to forego pertussis vaccination for their children. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49, 697-703. doi:10.1016/0895-4356(96)00007-8
55. P.Meyer (1988). Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 567-574.
56. J.D.Miller (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 273-294. doi:10.1177/0963662504044908
57. F.Molitor (1993). Accuracy in science news reporting by newspapers: The case of aspirin for the prevention of heart attacks. Health Communication, 5, 209-224. doi:10.1207/s15327027hc0503_4
58. M.J.Monteith (1996). Contemporary forms of prejudice-related conflict: In search of a nutshell. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 461-473.
59. A.Morgan (1998). Improving public understanding: Guidelines for communicating emerging science on nutrition, food safety, and health. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 90, 194-199. doi:10.1093/jnci/90.3.194
60. R.H.Nagler (2014). Adverse outcomes associated with media exposure to contradictory nutrition messages. Journal of Health Communication, 19, 24-40. doi:10.1080/10810730.2013.798384
61. M.C.NisbetD.A.Scheufele (2009). What’s next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. American Journal of Botany, 96, 1767-1778.
62. L.F.NordgrenF.van HarreveldJ.van der Plight (2006). Ambivalence, discomfort, and motivated information processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 252-258.
63. R.E.PattersonM.L.Neuhouser (2001). Is there a consumer backlash against the diet and health message?Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 101, 37-41. doi:10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00010-4
64. M.G.Pellechia (1997). Trends in science coverage: A content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Understanding of Science, 6, 49-68. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/6/1/004
65. K.J.PreacherA.F.Hayes (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717-731.
66. C.Russell (1999). Living can be hazardous to your health: How the news media cover cancer risks. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 25, 167-170.
67. A.C.SaguyR.Almeling (2008). Fat in the fire? Science, the news media, and the obesity epidemic. Sociological Forum, 23, 53-83. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2004.00399.x-i1
68. J.Shanahan (2003). Biotech communication in New York: Report 1: Opinion and support for bio-technology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
69. K.C.SmithE.E.KrommA.C.Klassen (2010). Print news coverage of cancer: What prevention messages are conveyed when screening is newsworthy?Cancer Epidemiology, 34, 434-441. doi:10.1016/j.canep.2010.02.006
70. J.E.Stryker (2002). Reporting medical information: Effects of press releases and newsworthiness on medical journal articles’ visibility in the news media. Preventive Medicine, 35, 519-530. doi:10.1006/pmed.2002.1102
71. J.E.VardemanL.Aldoory (2008). A qualitative study of how women make meaning of contradictory media messages about the risks of eating fish. Health Communication, 23, 282-291. doi:10.1080/10410230802056396
72. M.Voss (2003). Why reporters and editors get health coverage wrong: Health journalists need and want special training. Nieman Reports, 57, 46-48.
73. Z.WangW.Gantz (2007). Health content in local television news. Health Communication, 21, 213-221. doi:10.1080/10410230701307527
74. Z.WangW.Gantz (2010). Health content in local television news: A current appraisal. Health Communication, 25, 230-237. doi:10.1080/10410231003698903
75. P.WilliamsA.Drolet (2005). Age-related differences in responses to emotional advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 343-354.
76. S.WoloshinL.M.Schwartz (2002). Press releases: Translating research into news. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287, 2856-2858. doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2856.