Abstract
ABSTRACT This project analyzed the impact of a 2.5-day science training boot camp for political reporters on their use of scientific sources in published reporting. Results showed that immediately following the boot camp, most survey respondents indicated they would try to incorporate more scientific material into future stories. We used both automated text analysis and human-coded analysis to examine if actual changes in reporting behavior occurred. Automated text analysis revealed that while journalists did not use more explanatory language overall in the 6 months following the training, they wrote with greater certainty and less tentativeness in their published articles compared to before the training. The more targeted content analysis of articles revealed that journalists had modest increases for including scientific material overall, and peer-reviewed studies and scientists’ quotes in particular. We discuss the implications of these findings for science training, journalism, and reporting.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
