|
|
Use of E-Mail and the Web by Science Writers
CRAIG W. TRUMBO
University of Wisconsin-Madison
KIM J. SPRECKER
University of Wisconsin-Madison
REBECCA J. DUMLAO
East Carolina University
GI WOONG YUN
University of Wisconsin-Madison
SHEARLEAN DUKE
Western Washington University
The authors report data from two surveys of the National Association of Science Writers conducted in 1994 and 1999 to investigate e-mail and Web use by science journalists. Results show that task and social e-mail use have expanded dramatically. Also, the Web has become a regular part of science journalism. Enthusiasm for the use of the Web is a function of a positive orientation toward the quality of Web information, trust in the sources behind Web information, and individual characteristics of connectedness. The authors conclude with qualitative interviews with five science writers who provide supporting anecdotal evidence.
Science Communication, Vol. 22, No. 4,
347-378 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/1075547001022004001

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Macedo-Rouet, J.-F. Rouet, I. Epstein, and P. Fayard
Effects of Online Reading on Popular Science Comprehension
Science Communication,
December 1, 2003;
25(2):
99 - 128.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Dumlao and S. Duke
The Web and E-Mail in Science Communication
Science Communication,
March 1, 2003;
24(3):
283 - 308.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Wilkinson, G. Harries, M. Thelwall, and L. Price
Motivations for academic web site interlinking: evidence for the Web as a novel source of information on informal scholarly communication
Journal of Information Science,
February 1, 2003;
29(1):
49 - 56.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Sprecker
How Involvement, Citation Style, and Funding Source Affect the Credibility of University Scientists
Science Communication,
September 1, 2002;
24(1):
72 - 97.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L.-E. Datta
Coming Attractions
American Journal of Evaluation,
September 1, 2001;
22(3):
403 - 408.
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|