LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 3 of total 3

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: Correlations between the selection of topics by news media and scientific journals.

    Leidecker-Sandmann, Melanie / Koppers, Lars / Lehmkuhl, Markus

    PloS one

    2023  Volume 18, Issue 1, Page(s) e0280016

    Abstract: The aim of this study is to reveal a robust correlation between the amount of attention international journalism devotes to scientific papers and the amount of attention scientific journals devote to the respective topics. Using a Mainstream-Media-Score ( ...

    Abstract The aim of this study is to reveal a robust correlation between the amount of attention international journalism devotes to scientific papers and the amount of attention scientific journals devote to the respective topics. Using a Mainstream-Media-Score (MSM) ≥ 100 (which we regard as an indicator for news media attention) from the altmetrics provider Altmetric, we link 983 research articles with 185,166 thematically similar articles from the PubMed database (which we use to operationalize attention from scientific journals). The method we use is to test whether there is a concomitant increase in scientific attention after a research article has received popular media coverage. To do so, we compare the quotient of the number of thematically similar articles published in scientific journals during the period before and after the publication of an MSM ≥ 100 article. Our main result shows that in 59 percent of cases, more thematically similar articles were published in scientific journals after a scientific paper received noteworthy news media coverage than before (p < 0.01). In this context, we neither found significant differences between various types of scientific journal (p = 0.3) nor between scientific papers that were originally published in renowned opinion-leading journals or in less renowned, non-opinion-leading journals (p = 0.1). Our findings indicate a robust correlation between the choice of topics in the mass media and in research. However, our study cannot clarify whether this correlation occurs because researchers and/or scientific journals are oriented towards public relevance (publicity effect) or whether the correlation is due to the parallelism of relevance attributions in quality journalism and research (earmark hypothesis). We infer that topics of social relevance are (more) likely to be picked up by popular media as well as by scientific journals. Altogether, our study contributes new empirical findings to the relationship between topic selection in journalism and in research.
    MeSH term(s) Journal Impact Factor ; Bibliometrics ; Periodicals as Topic ; Mass Media ; Databases, Factual ; Social Media
    Language English
    Publishing date 2023-01-25
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
    ZDB-ID 2267670-3
    ISSN 1932-6203 ; 1932-6203
    ISSN (online) 1932-6203
    ISSN 1932-6203
    DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0280016
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  2. Article ; Online: Selected by expertise? Scientific experts in German news coverage of COVID-19 compared to other pandemics.

    Leidecker-Sandmann, Melanie / Attar, Patrizia / Schütz, Annika / Lehmkuhl, Markus

    Public understanding of science (Bristol, England)

    2022  Volume 31, Issue 7, Page(s) 847–866

    Abstract: 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 ... ...

    Abstract 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.
    MeSH term(s) COVID-19/epidemiology ; Humans ; Mass Media ; Pandemics
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-06-20
    Publishing country England
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 1421272-9
    ISSN 1361-6609 ; 0963-6625
    ISSN (online) 1361-6609
    ISSN 0963-6625
    DOI 10.1177/09636625221095740
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  3. Article: "Visible scientists revisited"

    Lehmkuhl, Markus / Leidecker-Sandmann, Melanie

    Publizistik

    Zum Zusammenhang von wissenschaftlicher Reputation und der Präsenz wissenschaftlicher Experten in der Medienberichterstattung über Infektionskrankheiten

    2019  Volume 64, Issue 4, Page(s) 479–502

    Abstract: Die vorliegende Studie beschäftigt sich mit der Auswahl wissenschaftlicher Experten durch den Journalismus. Aufgeworfen wird die Frage nach dem Zusammenhang zwischen wissenschaftlicher Reputation und medialer Präsenz wissenschaftlicher Akteure. Als ... ...

    Title translation "Visible scientists revisited": On the relationship between scientific reputation and the public presence of scientific experts in mass media coverage of infectious diseases
    Abstract Die vorliegende Studie beschäftigt sich mit der Auswahl wissenschaftlicher Experten durch den Journalismus. Aufgeworfen wird die Frage nach dem Zusammenhang zwischen wissenschaftlicher Reputation und medialer Präsenz wissenschaftlicher Akteure. Als Indikator für wissenschaftliche Reputation wurde das individuelle Zitationsprofil genutzt. In quantitativen Inhaltsanalysen der Medienberichterstattung über drei gesundheitliche Risikophänomene zwischen 1993 und 2015 wurden sämtliche wissenschaftlichen Akteure (N= 378) erhoben, die in den Beiträgen zu Wort kamen. Unsere Analyse zeigt entgegen früheren Befunden, dass die journalistische Auswahl nicht zugunsten von Experten mit geringer wissenschaftlicher Reputation verzerrt ist. Stattdessen spiegelt die Auswahl das Reputationsgefälle innerhalb der Wissenschaft annähernd wider. Jedoch ist die Orientierung an wissenschaftlicher Reputation kein allgemeines journalistisches Auswahlkriterium; sie bleibt begrenzt auf die Wissenschaftsressorts. Darüber hinaus selektieren Nachrichtenmagazine renommiertere Wissenschaftler als z.B. Tageszeitungen. (c) Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
    Keywords Bibliometrics ; Bibliometrie ; Forscherinnen und Forscher ; Infectious Disorders ; Infektionskrankheiten ; Journalistinnen und Journalisten ; Journalists ; Newspapers ; Peer Evaluation ; Peer-Evaluation ; Print Media ; Print-Medien ; Reputation ; Scientific Communication ; Scientists ; Wissenschaftliche Kommunikation ; Zeitungen
    Language German
    Document type Article
    ZDB-ID 2273951-8
    ISSN 1862-2569 ; 0033-4006
    ISSN (online) 1862-2569
    ISSN 0033-4006
    DOI 10.1007/s11616-019-00530-1
    Database PSYNDEX

    More links

    Kategorien

To top