Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Science Communication
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by KIERNAN, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Ingelfinger, Embargoes, and Other Controls on the Dissemination of Science News

VINCENT KIERNAN

University of Maryland, College Park

Scholarly journals exert considerable influence over how and whether scientists disseminate information about their research through the news media to the general public. Many journals use variants of the "Ingelfinger rule" to restrain scientists from disclosing research to journalists prior to publication. To allow reporters to develop stories before a journal article is printed, however, many journals distribute advance copies under an embargo system. Journal editors argue that these practices foster peer review and more accurate public dissemination of research findings. This article considers whether journal editors may also be using these controls on information flow to enhance the status of their publications, with an eye toward attracting better scientific papers, expanding circulation, and luring advertising.

Science Communication, Vol. 18, No. 4, 297-319 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/1075547097018004002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
D. Brossard
Media, scientific journals and science communication: examining the construction of scientific controversies
Public Understanding of Science, May 1, 2009; 18(3): 258 - 274.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Science CommunicationHome page
V. Kiernan
Diffusion of News about Research
Science Communication, September 1, 2003; 25(1): 3 - 13.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
O. Shachar
Spotlighting women scientists in the press: tokenism in science journalism
Public Understanding of Science, October 1, 2000; 9(4): 347 - 358.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
V. Kiernan
The Mars Meteorite: A case study in controls on dissemination of science news
Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2000; 9(1): 15 - 41.
[Abstract] [PDF]