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 (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1075547009332649v1
30/4/453    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Brechman, J.
Right arrow Articles by Cappella, J. N.
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?

Article

Lost in Translation? A Comparison of Cancer-Genetics Reporting in the Press Release and Its Subsequent Coverage in the Press

Jean Brechman*, Chul-joo Lee, and Joseph N. Cappella

University of Pennsylvania

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jbrechman{at}asc.upenn.edu.


  Abstract
Understanding how genetic science is communicated to the lay public is of great import. To address this issue, this study examines the presentation of genetic research relating to cancer outcomes and behaviors (i.e., prostate cancer, breast cancer, colon cancer, smoking and obesity) in both the press release (n = 23) and its subsequent news coverage (n = 71). Data suggest that genetic discoveries are presented in a biologically deterministic and simplified manner 67.5% of the time. The introduction of deterministic language is attributed equally to both press releases and news coverage. Also, there are substantive differences between content introduced in the press release and content presented in subsequent press coverage; in fact, when two sources report on the same scientific discovery, the information is inconsistent more than 40% of the time. These findings suggest that the intermediary press release may serve as a source of distortion in the dissemination of science to the lay public.

First published on March 6, 2009, doi:10.1177/1075547009332649

Science Communication 2009;30:453.

A more recent version of this article appeared on June 1, 2009

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?