Transparent und evident? Qualitätskriterien in der Gesundheitsberichterstattung und die Problematik ihrer Anwendung am Beispiel von Krebs

Grimm, Michael; Wahl, Stefanie

doi:10.1007/978-3-658-02427-7_4

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Journalists who adhere to the criteria of high-quality journalism (Grimm and Wahl, 2014; for a critical discussion, see Maier, Rothmund, Retzbach, Otto, and Besley, 2014) are expected to describe research gaps and controversial opinions in public communication about science (Schneider, 2010) without overstating, downplaying, or dramatizing facts (Guenther, Froehlich, and Ruhrmann, 2015), for example, by pointing out the limitations of case studies or unsystematic summaries (Bromme, Prenzel, and Jäger, 2014). Nonetheless, research has shown that media often neglect uncertainty in their coverage (e.g., Ashe, 2013;Cooper, Lee, Goldacre, and Sanders, 2012;Heidmann and Milde, 2013;Stocking and Holstein, 2009).…”

Section: How Scientists Journalists and Audiences Deal With Scientimentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating scientific evidence: scientists’, journalists’ and audiences’ expectations and evaluations regarding the representation of scientific uncertainty

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although uncertainty is inherent in scientific research, it is an often neglected topic in public communication. In this article, we analyze how scientists and journalists think they should communicate about the uncertainty of scientific evidence in public, and whether their real-world communication meets laypersons’ demands and expectations. For scientists and journalists, our analyses are based theoretically on an expectancy-value model and empirically on two representative surveys. Laypersons’ expectations and evaluations are analyzed using qualitative in-depth interviews. Results show that scientists and journalists widely agree that scientific uncertainty should be pointed out in their communication. Nonetheless, while scientists show a clear inclination toward the media and hope that uncertainties will not be dramatized or misused, journalists on the other hand have a strong audience orientation and hope to stimulate critical reflection on scientific findings. For audiences, however, media coverage about scientific uncertainty is of less interest. They clearly expect fact-oriented information on the use of technology in everyday life.

show abstract