Science TV News Exposure Predicts Science Beliefs

The authors attempt here to address a dilemma faced in recent investigation of science and health communication effects: the difficulty of assessing exposure impact in situations beyond the laboratory. Based on social representation theory, we posit that TV news exposure, especially for stories framed as relevant to the everyday lives of individual audience members, can affect people’s beliefs about science and that such exposure also should interact with interpersonal conversation to jointly predict beliefs. To assess these relationships in a real world setting, we integrated market-level and individual-level data from a science TV news project funded by the National Science Foundation and employed multilevel modeling to predict beliefs about science. This move allowed us to combine information about TV Designated Market Areas with responses from a national Internet-based survey and permitted a model that included both market-level and individual-level variables. Results indicate both main effects and interaction effects. Presence of relevant science stories in a TV market, for example, positively predicted subsequent beliefs about the general accessibility of science among audience members in that market even after controlling for individual-level variables.

[1]  Dietram A. Scheufele,et al.  Democracy for some? How political talk both informs and polarizes the electorate , 2001 .

[2]  J. Gill.  Hierarchical Linear Models , 2005 .

[3]  Dietram A. Scheufele,et al.  Examining Differential Gains From Internet Use: Comparing the Moderating Role of Talk and Online Interactions , 2005 .

[4]  Joanne Cantor,et al.  Using Television to Foster Children's Interest in Science , 1999 .

[5]  J. Besley,et al.  Media Attention and Exposure in Relation to Support for Agricultural Biotechnology , 2005 .

[6]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[7]  Martin W. Bauer,et al.  Towards a Paradigm for Research on Social Representations , 1999 .

[8]  Jason W. Osborne,et al.  Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation Advantages of Hierarchical Linear Modeling Advantages of Hierarchical Linear Modeling , 2022 .

[9]  J. Gregory,et al.  Science in Public: Communication, Culture and Credibility , 2000 .

[10]  Andrew F. Hayes,et al.  A Primer on Multilevel Modeling , 2006 .

[11]  Brian G. Southwell,et al.  The Roles of Interpersonal Communication in Mass Media Campaigns , 2007 .

[12]  M. Slater,et al.  Effects of alcohol advertising exposure on drinking among youth. , 2006, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[13]  Jan de Leeuw,et al.  Introducing Multilevel Modeling , 1998 .

[14]  D. P. Fan,et al.  The Impact of Press Coverage on Social Beliefs , 1995 .

[15]  V. Price,et al.  Cross-Level Challenges for Communication Research , 1991 .

[16]  S. Moscovici.  La psychanalyse, son image et son public , 2004 .

[17]  S. Moscovici.  Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology , 2000 .

[18]  L. Delbeke.  Quasi-experimentation - design and analysis issues for field settings - cook,td, campbell,dt , 1980 .

[19]  Nicky Hayes,et al.  Everyday Discourse and Common Sense , 2005 .

[20]  Miles Hewstone,et al.  Attribution Theory: Social and Functional Extensions , 1984 .

[21]  Brian G. Southwell,et al.  Connecting Interpersonal and Mass Communication: Science News Exposure, Perceived Ability to Understand Science, and Conversation , 2006 .

[22]  Dietram A. Scheufele,et al.  Examining Differential Gains from Mass Media and their Implications for Participatory Behavior , 2002, Commun. Res..

[23]  Chris Mooney,et al.  Framing Science , 2007, Science.

[24]  W. Wagner,et al.  Collective symbolic coping with new technology: Knowledge, images and public discourse. , 2002, The British journal of social psychology.

[25]  Isobel Stewart,et al.  Social representations as a diagnostic tool for identifying cultural and other group differences , 2005 .

[26]  Matthew C. Nisbet,et al.  Understanding citizen perceptions of science controversy: bridging the ethnographic—survey research divide , 2007 .

[27]  R. Hornik,et al.  Using Theory to Design Evaluations of Communication Campaigns: The Case of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. , 2003, Communication theory : CT : a journal of the International Communication Association.

[28]  Nicky Hayes,et al.  Everyday Discourse and Common Sense: The Theory of Social Representations , 2005 .

[29]  L. Snyder,et al.  The Media Can Have More Than an Impersonal Impact: The Case of AIDS Risk Perceptions and Behavior , 1995 .

[30]  Dietram A. Scheufele,et al.  The Influence of Knowledge and Deference toward Scientific Authority: A Media Effects Model for Public Attitudes toward Nanotechnology , 2006 .

[31]  Wolfgang Wagner,et al.  Vernacular science knowledge: its role in everyday life communication , 2007 .

[32]  Yoori Hwang,et al.  Avian Influenza and US TV News , 2006, Emerging infectious diseases.

[33]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[34]  William R. Elliott,et al.  Media Exposure and Beliefs About Science and Technology , 1987 .

[35]  Jack M. McLeod,et al.  Multilevel Analysis in Mass Communication Research , 1991 .

[36]  A. D. Rosa,et al.  Social representations and the Genesis of Social Knowledge , 1992 .

[37]  Gender differences in attitudes toward science in Switzerland , 2004 .

[38]  D. P. Fan,et al.  THE IMPACT OF THE NEWS MEDIA ON PUBLIC OPINION: AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 1987–1988 , 1989 .

[39]  J H GADDUM,et al.  The effects of alcohol. , 1954, Lectures on the scientific basis of medicine.

[40]  Cynthia-Lou Coleman.  The Influence of Mass Media and Interpersonal Communication on Societal and Personal Risk Judgments , 1993 .

[41]  Dominique Brossard,et al.  Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Low Information Public: Understanding U.S. Opinion on Agricultural Biotechnology , 2006 .