ArticlePloS one2014
Media reporting of neuroscience depends on timing, topic and newspaper type.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- From developmental neuroscience to policy: A novel framework based on participatory research.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2024Review
- From Mary Shelley to Netflix: a Pan-European perspective on public communication of neuroscience and neurotechnology.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Neuroscience literacy in educators' training programs in Asia: A call to action.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2023Article
- The dissemination of brain imaging guidelines and recommendations.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2022Article
- Draw me a brain: The use of drawing as a tool to examine children's developing knowledge about the "black box".Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Systematic Review: Comparison of the Main Variables of Interest in Publications of Canine Bite Accidents in the Written Press, Gray and Scientific Literature in Chile and Spain, between the Years 2013 and 2017.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Review
- Making a murderer: Media renderings of brain injury and Aaron Hernandez as a medical and sporting subject.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2020Article
- Responsible Research and Innovation as a Novel Approach to Guide Educational Impact of Mind, Brain, and Education Research.Mind, brain and education : the official journal of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society · 2019Article
- Article
- The Teenage Brain: Public Perceptions of Neurocognitive Development during Adolescence.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2019Article
- A Translational Framework of Educational Neuroscience in Learning Disorders.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2018Review
- Readability of the 100 Most-Cited Neuroimaging Papers Assessed by Common Readability Formulae.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2018Article
- Neuroimaging of learning and development: improving ecological validity.Frontline learning research · 2018Article
- How the Public Engages With Brain Optimization: The Media-mind Relationship.Science, technology & human values · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid developments in neuroscientific techniques raise high expectations among the general public and therefore warrant close monitoring of the translation to the media and daily-life applications. The need of empirical research into neuroscience communication is emphasized by its susceptibility to evoke misconceptions and polarized beliefs. As the mass media are the main sources of information about (neuro-)science for a majority of the general public, the objective of the current research is to quantify how critically and accurately newspapers report on neuroscience as a function of the timing of publication (within or outside of periods of heightened media attention to neuroscience, termed "news waves"), the topic of the research (e.g. development, health, law) and the newspaper type (quality, popular, free newspapers). The results show that articles published during neuroscience news waves were less neutral and more optimistic, but not different in accuracy. Furthermore, the overall tone and accuracy of articles depended on the topic; for example, articles on development often had an optimistic tone whereas articles on law were often skeptical or balanced, and articles on health care had highest accuracy. Average accuracy was rather low, but articles in quality newspapers were relatively more accurate than in popular and free newspapers. Our results provide specific recommendations for researchers and science communicators, to improve the translation of neuroscience findings through the media: 1) Caution is warranted during periods of heightened attention (news waves), as reporting tends to be more optimistic; 2) Caution is also warranted not to follow topic-related biases in optimism (e.g., development) or skepticism (e.g., law); 3) Researchers should keep in mind that overall accuracy of reporting is low, and especially articles in popular and free newspapers provide a minimal amount of details. This indicates that researchers themselves may need to be more active in preventing misconceptions to arise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.