Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Science Communication
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1075547008319434v1
30/1/48    most recent
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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Illman, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Clark, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Visibility of Team Science

A Case Study of Media Coverage of the NSF Science and Technology Centers

Deborah L. Illman

University of Washington, illman{at}u.washington.edu

Fiona Clark

University of Washington

There is a growing trend toward interdisciplinary research, with team science often touted as key to the creation of new knowledge and capabilities important to solving societal problems. But the balance between the funding of team efforts versus smaller grants is an issue that continues to be debated nationally. We analyzed media coverage of 17 active U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) Science and Technology Centers (STCs) from 2000 to 2006. Research received the greatest coverage (49.5 percent), followed by institutional news (24.4 percent). A center name appeared in 35 percent of the items, and the NSF and STC program were less visible, at 31 percent and 10 percent, respectively. Surprisingly, no significant differences were found between hard news and feature stories in mentions of centers, NSF, or STC. Thus, even with the greater length and flexibility of a feature, the STC model and nature of team science remains essentially invisible to the public through the lens of the media.

Key Words: team science • interdisciplinary • center • STC • NSF • content analysis • feature

This version was published on September 1, 2008

Science Communication, Vol. 30, No. 1, 48-76 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1075547008319434
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?