Cargando…

Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis

Based on the decision-theoretical conditions underlying the selection of events for news coverage in science journalism, this article uses a novel input-output analysis to investigate which of the more than eight million scientific study results published between August 2014 and July 2018 have been...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lehmkuhl, Markus, Promies, Nikolai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7657513/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33175868
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241376
_version_ 1783608518184534016
author Lehmkuhl, Markus
Promies, Nikolai
author_facet Lehmkuhl, Markus
Promies, Nikolai
author_sort Lehmkuhl, Markus
collection PubMed
description Based on the decision-theoretical conditions underlying the selection of events for news coverage in science journalism, this article uses a novel input-output analysis to investigate which of the more than eight million scientific study results published between August 2014 and July 2018 have been selected by global journalism to a relevant degree. We are interested in two different structures in the media coverage of scientific results. Firstly, the structure of sources that journalists use, i.e. scientific journals, and secondly, the congruence of the journalistic selection of single results. Previous research suggests that the selection of sources and results follows a certain heavy-tailed distribution, a power law. Mathematically, this distribution can be described with a function of the form C*x(-α). We argue that the exponent of such power law distributions can potentially be an indicator to describe selectivity in journalism on a high aggregation level. In our input-output analysis, we look for such patterns in the coverage of all scientific results published in the database Scopus over four years. To get an estimate of the coverage of these results, we use data from the altmetrics provider Altmetric, more precisely their Mainstream-Media-Score (MSM-Score). Based on exploratory analyses, we define papers with a score of 50 or above as Social Impact Papers (SIPs). Over our study period, we identified 5,833 SIPs published in 1,236 journals. For both the distribution of the source selection and the distribution of the selection of single results, an exponentially truncated power law is a better fit than the power law, mostly because we find a steeper decline in the tail of the distributions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7657513
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76575132020-11-18 Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis Lehmkuhl, Markus Promies, Nikolai PLoS One Research Article Based on the decision-theoretical conditions underlying the selection of events for news coverage in science journalism, this article uses a novel input-output analysis to investigate which of the more than eight million scientific study results published between August 2014 and July 2018 have been selected by global journalism to a relevant degree. We are interested in two different structures in the media coverage of scientific results. Firstly, the structure of sources that journalists use, i.e. scientific journals, and secondly, the congruence of the journalistic selection of single results. Previous research suggests that the selection of sources and results follows a certain heavy-tailed distribution, a power law. Mathematically, this distribution can be described with a function of the form C*x(-α). We argue that the exponent of such power law distributions can potentially be an indicator to describe selectivity in journalism on a high aggregation level. In our input-output analysis, we look for such patterns in the coverage of all scientific results published in the database Scopus over four years. To get an estimate of the coverage of these results, we use data from the altmetrics provider Altmetric, more precisely their Mainstream-Media-Score (MSM-Score). Based on exploratory analyses, we define papers with a score of 50 or above as Social Impact Papers (SIPs). Over our study period, we identified 5,833 SIPs published in 1,236 journals. For both the distribution of the source selection and the distribution of the selection of single results, an exponentially truncated power law is a better fit than the power law, mostly because we find a steeper decline in the tail of the distributions. Public Library of Science 2020-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7657513/ /pubmed/33175868 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241376 Text en © 2020 Lehmkuhl, Promies http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lehmkuhl, Markus
Promies, Nikolai
Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis
title Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis
title_full Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis
title_fullStr Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis
title_full_unstemmed Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis
title_short Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis
title_sort frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: an input–output analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7657513/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33175868
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241376
work_keys_str_mv AT lehmkuhlmarkus frequencydistributionofjournalisticattentionforscientificstudiesandscientificsourcesaninputoutputanalysis
AT promiesnikolai frequencydistributionofjournalisticattentionforscientificstudiesandscientificsourcesaninputoutputanalysis