學術產出-Periodical Articles
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 Inaccuracy in Health Research News: A Typology and Predictions of Scientists’ Perceptions of the Accuracy of Research News 作者 張卿卿
Chang, Ching-Ching貢獻者 廣告系 日期 2014 上傳時間 5-Jan-2015 11:37:46 (UTC+8) 摘要 This article introduces an integrated inaccuracy typology to explore the prevalence of inaccurate news coverage of health research. This typology suggests that errors, omissions, and misinterpretations are three common types of inaccuracy; errors and omissions are objective, whereas misinterpretations are subjective. Objective inaccuracy involves errors and omissions in describing the background or substantive information about the research, such as how, when, where, and on whom research was conducted. Subjective inaccuracy entails misinterpretations as a result of a lack of expertise among journalists (e.g., misstating facts, errors in inferences, offering speculations as facts) or media`s interest in profits (e.g., overemphasis on unique findings, overgeneralizations of findings, shifting emphases). For this study, coders analyzed objective inaccuracy, while scientists rated subjective inaccuracy. In turn, it identifies what can account for the variance in scientists` perceptions of inaccuracy in news articles citing their research. Objective and subjective inaccuracy offer significant predictors. Of the different types of objective inaccuracy, omissions of research methods represent a significant factor, whereas of the types of subjective inaccuracy, errors in inferences, overemphasis on uniqueness, and overgeneralizations of findings are all significant predictors. 關聯 Jounral of Health Communication,Volume 20, Issue 2 , pages 177-186 資料類型 article DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2014.917746 dc.contributor 廣告系 - dc.creator (作者) 張卿卿 - dc.creator (作者) Chang, Ching-Ching - dc.date (日期) 2014 - dc.date.accessioned 5-Jan-2015 11:37:46 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 5-Jan-2015 11:37:46 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 5-Jan-2015 11:37:46 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/72591 - dc.description.abstract (摘要) This article introduces an integrated inaccuracy typology to explore the prevalence of inaccurate news coverage of health research. This typology suggests that errors, omissions, and misinterpretations are three common types of inaccuracy; errors and omissions are objective, whereas misinterpretations are subjective. Objective inaccuracy involves errors and omissions in describing the background or substantive information about the research, such as how, when, where, and on whom research was conducted. Subjective inaccuracy entails misinterpretations as a result of a lack of expertise among journalists (e.g., misstating facts, errors in inferences, offering speculations as facts) or media`s interest in profits (e.g., overemphasis on unique findings, overgeneralizations of findings, shifting emphases). For this study, coders analyzed objective inaccuracy, while scientists rated subjective inaccuracy. In turn, it identifies what can account for the variance in scientists` perceptions of inaccuracy in news articles citing their research. Objective and subjective inaccuracy offer significant predictors. Of the different types of objective inaccuracy, omissions of research methods represent a significant factor, whereas of the types of subjective inaccuracy, errors in inferences, overemphasis on uniqueness, and overgeneralizations of findings are all significant predictors. - dc.format.extent 151620 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.relation (關聯) Jounral of Health Communication,Volume 20, Issue 2 , pages 177-186 - dc.title (題名) Inaccuracy in Health Research News: A Typology and Predictions of Scientists’ Perceptions of the Accuracy of Research News - dc.type (資料類型) article en dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.1080/10810730.2014.917746 - dc.doi.uri (DOI) http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2014.917746 -
