science journalism

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    社区参与对于以人为本的发展至关重要,成功的疫苗接种计划。多样化的疫苗接种接受研究网络(VARN)社区汇集了来自整个免疫生态系统的跨学科专业人士,他们在疫苗接种接受中发挥着至关重要的作用。需求,和交付。在VARN2023会议的过程中,研究人员和从业人员都分享了想法和经验,重点是在社区和卫生系统之间建立信任以增加疫苗接种公平性的战略和方法。卫生专业人员和社区成员必须在设计和提供以社区为中心的免疫服务方面具有同等价值,虽然主要疫苗接种决策者也必须考虑社区经验,关注,以及方案设计和决策方面的专业知识。因此,社区参与和培养社区信任的策略对于任何免疫计划的成功至关重要。此外,卫生工作者需要额外的技能,支持,和资源来有效地传达有关免疫的复杂信息,包括打击错误信息的有效策略。本文总结了VARN2023会议上提供的三个技能建设会议,专注于以人为本的设计,动机性面试,并与记者接触以利用社区的声音。这些会议提供了实用的,可供从业者使用的跨地理和社会环境使用的基于证据的工具,研究人员,和其他利益相关者,以增加其社区的疫苗接种需求和吸收。
    Community engagement is vital to the development of people-centered, successful vaccination programs. The diverse Vaccination Acceptance Research Network (VARN) community brings together interdisciplinary professionals from across the immunization ecosystem who play a crucial role in vaccination acceptance, demand, and delivery. Over the course of the VARN2023 conference, researchers and practitioners alike shared ideas and experiences focused on strategies and approaches to building trust between communities and health systems to increase equity in vaccination. Health professionals and community members must have equal value in the design and delivery of community-centered immunization services, while key vaccination decision-makers must also consider community experiences, concerns, and expertise in program design and policymaking. Therefore, strategies for community engagement and cultivating trust with communities are crucial for the success of any immunization program. Furthermore, health workers need additional skills, support, and resources to effectively communicate complex information about immunization, including effective strategies for countering misinformation. This article summarizes three skills-building sessions offered at the VARN2023 conference, focused on human-centered design, motivational interviewing, and engaging with journalists to leverage the voices of communities. These sessions offered practical, evidence-based tools for use across geographic and social settings that can be used by practitioners, researchers, and other stakeholders to increase vaccination demand and uptake in their communities.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    科学新闻是公众了解科学发现并从中受益的重要途径。这种新闻塑造了公众对当前科学状况的看法,并使专家合法化。记者只能引用和引用有限的消息来源,他们可能会在研究中发现谁,包括其他科学家的建议。任何一个过程中的偏见都可能影响谁被识别并最终被纳入来源。为了研究科学新闻中的潜在偏见,我们分析了《自然》发表的22,001篇非研究文章,并将这些文章与《自然》发表的研究文章进行了预测的性别和姓名来源的比较。我们提取了引用的作者的名字和引用的演讲者的名字。虽然一篇文章中的引用和引用并不反映整个信息收集过程,它们可以提供对可见来源的人口统计学的洞察。然后,我们预测了被引用作者和演讲者的性别和姓名来源。我们将文章与比较器组进行了比较,比较器组由《自然》的主要研究文章中的第一位和最后一位作者以及同一时期的SpringerNature文章的子集组成。在我们的分析中,我们在自然科学新闻中发现了引用男性的倾向。然而,在学术出版中,报价比作者率更快地趋向于平等代表性。《自然》语录中的性别差异取决于文章类型。在摘录和期刊引文中,我们发现具有预测的凯尔特人/英语起源的名称存在明显的过度表示,而具有预测的东亚起源的名称存在不足,但在引文中却有所减弱。
    Science journalism is a critical way for the public to learn about and benefit from scientific findings. Such journalism shapes the public\'s view of the current state of science and legitimizes experts. Journalists can only cite and quote a limited number of sources, who they may discover in their research, including recommendations by other scientists. Biases in either process may influence who is identified and ultimately included as a source. To examine potential biases in science journalism, we analyzed 22,001 non-research articles published by Nature and compared these with Nature-published research articles with respect to predicted gender and name origin. We extracted cited authors\' names and those of quoted speakers. While citations and quotations within a piece do not reflect the entire information-gathering process, they can provide insight into the demographics of visible sources. We then predicted gender and name origin of the cited authors and speakers. We compared articles with a comparator set made up of first and last authors within primary research articles in Nature and a subset of Springer Nature articles in the same time period. In our analysis, we found a skew toward quoting men in Nature science journalism. However, quotation is trending toward equal representation at a faster rate than authorship rates in academic publishing. Gender disparity in Nature quotes was dependent on the article type. We found a significant over-representation of names with predicted Celtic/English origin and under-representation of names with a predicted East Asian origin in both in extracted quotes and journal citations but dampened in citations.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Review
    促进心理健康是一项重大的全球挑战。正念冥想应用程序可以帮助维持和恢复良好的心理健康,重要的是要了解媒体如何描述其功效和安全性。这项研究系统地评估了学术研究的证据是否用于传达两种流行的正念应用程序对健康的影响。冷静和微笑的头脑。范围审查映射了16篇相关文章的研究结果,媒体分析检查了新闻报道中使用的证据类型。分析了105篇新闻文章,发现98%的人没有使用基于应用程序的冥想的学术研究证据来支持健康主张。只有28.5%的文章包含健康专家的建议,9.5%的人提到潜在风险和替代治疗.需要对正念应用程序的健康影响进行更严格的循证报告,以使人们能够为自己的健康和福祉做出更明智的决定。
    Promoting mental health is a major global challenge. As mindfulness meditation apps can help maintain and restore good mental health, it is important to understand how their efficacy and safety are portrayed in the media. This study systematically evaluates whether evidence from academic research is used to communicate the health effects of two popular mindfulness apps, Calm and Smiling Mind. A scoping review mapped research findings from 16 relevant articles, and a media analysis examined the types of evidence used in news reporting. Analysing 105 news articles revealed that 98% did not use evidence from academic research on app-based meditation to support health claims. Only 28.5% of articles included advice from a health expert, and 9.5% mentioned potential risks and alternative treatments. Stronger evidence-based reporting on the health effects of mindfulness apps is needed to enable people to make more informed decisions for their health and wellbeing.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    媒体在向我们通报我们对海洋的理解和提高对海洋可持续性的认识方面的新发展方面发挥着重要作用。然而,媒体对海洋问题的报道似乎不多,与海洋在我们生活中的重要性相比。在这项研究中,我们研究科学记者的工作环境,动机,以及写欧洲海洋的困难。我们对26名记者进行了半结构化采访,他们为来自13个欧洲国家的优质报纸撰稿。我们发现,最近有关海洋问题的新闻新闻的制作主要受报纸工作环境的制约,记者的个人和专业兴趣,以及撰写新闻的可用资源。需要更多的研究来比较我们的发现,包括欧洲以外的其他地区。
    The media play an important role in informing us about new developments in our understanding of the sea and raising awareness about its sustainability. However, press coverage of marine issues seems to be modest, compared with the importance oceans have in our lives. In this study, we examine science journalists\' working contexts, motivations, and difficulties in writing about the sea in Europe. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 26 journalists who write for quality newspapers from 13 European countries. We found that the recent production of press news on marine issues is mainly conditioned by working contexts in newspapers, the personal and professional interests of journalists, and the available resources to write news. More studies are needed to compare our findings, including with other regions outside Europe.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在COVID-19大流行时,过去和现在比以往任何时候都更需要科学专业知识。科学“专家”是记者和社会的重要信息来源。我们的研究分析,与其他大流行相比,哪些专家有机会在德国关于COVID-19的新闻报道中发表讲话,所选专家的多样性以及如何评估他们的科学专业知识。我们的研究结果表明,COVID-19的覆盖率由政治执行官的行为者主导,低于科学专家以前的大流行。此外,冠状病毒辩论的特点是专家声音更加多样化,而新闻选择的科学专家偏向于那些拥有高科学专业知识的人。平均而言,与以前关于流行病的辩论相比,COVID-19的报道似乎更明显地偏向于声誉良好的科学专家。
    At the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, scientific expertise was and is more in demand than perhaps ever before. Scientific \"experts\" serve as an important source of information for journalists and for society. Our study analyzes, which experts get a chance to speak in German news coverage of COVID-19 compared to other pandemics, how diverse the spectrum of selected experts is and how their scientific expertise is to be assessed. Our findings show that the COVID-19 coverage is dominated by actors from the political executive and less than in previous pandemics by scientific experts. In addition, the coronavirus debate is characterized by a greater diversity of expert voices and the journalistic selection of scientific experts is biased in favor of those who have a high scientific expertise. On average, COVID-19 coverage seems to be biased more pronouncedly in favor of reputable scientific experts compared to previous debates on pandemics.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    过去两年(越来越多)的新冠肺炎大流行扰乱了商业,旅行,工作场所,习惯,当然还有健康,世界各地。这项研究旨在捕获来自美国三个城市的27名参与者对COVID-19的认知和误解的快照。通过专题分析和概念图对这些观点进行分析。这样的快照,特别是通过叙事感官理论的视角来看,在这个独特的历史时刻捕捉一个认知样本:进入COVID-19大流行一年多一点。研究结果表明,捕捉到的(错误的)感知主要是通过参与者的个人经历的叙述来传达的,以及对预防措施的态度的主题,不确定性,混乱的科学传播环境普遍存在。这些主题为未来的研究和当前的科学交流提出了几个突出的目标,比如关注基本的解释器,疫苗接种的安全性和有效性以及科学实践中不确定性的必要性。
    The COVID-19 pandemic of the last 2 years (and counting) disrupted commerce, travel, workplaces, habits, and-of course-health, the world over. This study aimed to capture snapshots of the perceptions and misperceptions of COVID-19 among 27 participants from three US municipalities. These perspectives are analyzed through thematic analyses and concept maps. Such snapshots, particularly as viewed through the lens of narrative sense-making theory, capture a sample of cognitions at this unique moment in history: a little over 1 year into the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings suggest that the (mis)perceptions captured are predominantly conveyed via narratives of participants\' personal experiences, and that the themes of attitudes toward precautionary measures, uncertainty, and the muddied science communication environment are prevalent. These themes suggest several salient targets for future research and current science communication, such as a focus on basic explainers, vaccinations\' safety and effectiveness and the necessity of uncertainty in the practice of science.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    预印本在科学发现的传播中占有重要地位。COVID-19大流行加强了这一发展,这仍然需要快速传播新的科学信息。然而,由于预印本通常没有经过同行评审,他们缺乏严格的其他科学出版物,如期刊文章。这对负责在全球大流行期间巨大不确定性的背景下让公众了解最新科学发展的新闻媒体提出了挑战。本研究报告调查了南非四家在线媒体发布的与COVID-19相关的新闻文章中确定的80篇新闻文章中的预印本的科学信息报道。我们的结果表明,尽管媒体发布了关于预印本的报道指南,关于新闻媒体明智地使用预印本中的科学信息,还有一段路要走。
    Preprints have gained prominence in the dissemination of scientific findings. This development has been reinforced by the COVID-19 pandemic, which continues to require the rapid dissemination of new scientific information. However, since preprints usually have not undergone peer review, they lack the rigour of other scientific publications such as journal articles. This presents a challenge for the news media tasked with keeping the public informed about the latest scientific developments in the context of great uncertainty during a global pandemic. This research note investigates the reporting of scientific information from preprints in 80 news articles identified in news articles related to COVID-19 published in four South African online media outlets. Our results show that despite the publication of guidelines for reporting on preprints in the media, there is still a way to go regarding the judicious use of scientific information from preprints by the news media.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    As the demand for science communication proficiency is growing and post-secondary science communication courses and programs are launched or redesigned, it is paramount to understand who takes these courses and why. Based on a convergent mixed methods approach, this article explores the characteristics and self-reported motivations of students enrolled in an online science communication course at Université Laval, Canada, from 2009 to 2018. Results show that the typical science communication student is a woman with a career-orientated motivation pattern, mostly seeing science communication skills as an asset for a career in communication, science, or health. Be it career-driven, interest-driven, or online education-driven, motivation pattern differences emerge depending on the students\' gender or field of study. Those patterns offer new paths of research, such as exploring the impact of science communication program design or of advertising strategies on enrollment.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    像《对话》这样的科学放大器平台在不断变化的媒体生态系统中越来越受欢迎,在这个生态系统中,记者的传统角色受到侵蚀,科学家们被敦促与社会接触。对话构成了科学交流的融合,公共科学传播和科学新闻,以及科学和新闻专业领域的融合。在这项研究中,我们调查了这个平台以非洲为重点的版本的性质和影响,对话非洲我们分析了自2015年发布以来5年的文章(N=5392)。来自南非的内容主导了这个平台,但是其他非洲国家的捐款正在增加。关于《非洲对话》作为媒体间议程制定者的作用,主流媒体更经常转载与政治或经济有关的故事,而关于教育等社会问题的故事,保护和艺术更经常在社交媒体上分享。
    Science amplifier platforms such as The Conversation have gained popularity in a changing media ecosystem in which the traditional roles of journalists are eroded, and scientists are urged to engage with society. The Conversation constitutes a blend of scientific communication, public science communication and science journalism, and a convergence of the professional worlds of science and journalism. In this study, we investigated the nature and impact of the Africa-focussed edition of this platform, The Conversation Africa. We analysed articles published over a 5-year period since its launch in 2015 (N = 5392). Contents from South Africa dominate the platform, but contributions from other African countries are increasing. Regarding the role of The Conversation Africa as an inter-media agenda setter, mainstream media more often republished stories related to politics or economics, while stories about social issues such as education, conservation and art were more often shared on social media.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    冠状病毒大流行造成了一种情况,病毒学和流行病学科学在政治上变得高度相关,但不确定且支离破碎。这就提出了一个问题,即科学如何为社会危机管理的决策和公开辩论提供信息。根据对年龄代表的德国人(N=1513)的在线调查,性别,教育,和居住地,我们调查公民对科学之间关系的规定性观点,决策,和媒体。观点因其信息需求和认知信念而异。人们需要明确的信息,并且认为科学知识是静态的,他们希望科学家主导决策,而记者则提供有关冠状病毒的明确信息。有信息需要构建自己观点的人希望记者质疑政策和科学建议。此外,他们拒绝了科学家主导决策的想法。参考科学和民主理论讨论结果。
    The coronavirus pandemic created a situation in which virological and epidemiological science became highly politically relevant but was uncertain and fragmented. This raises the question as to how science could inform policymaking and public debate on societal crisis management. Based on an online survey of Germans (N = 1513) representative for age, gender, education, and place of residence, we investigate citizens\' prescriptive views of the relationships between science, policymaking, and the media. Views differ depending on their informational needs and epistemic beliefs. People with a need for definite information and a view of scientific knowledge as static wanted scientists to dominate policymaking and journalists to deliver definite information about the coronavirus. People with an informational need to construct their own opinions wanted journalists to question policy and scientific advice. Furthermore, they rejected the idea of scientists dominating policymaking. Results are discussed with reference to theories of science and democracy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号