Broer Tineke, Pickersgill Martyn, Deary Ian J
Usher Institute for Population Health Sciences and Informatics, Edinburgh Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG UK.
Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Neuroethics. 2016;9:159-171. doi: 10.1007/s12152-016-9259-6. Epub 2016 Apr 28.
Media reporting of science has consequences for public debates on the ethics of research. Accordingly, it is crucial to understand how the sciences of the brain and the mind are covered in the media, and how coverage is received and negotiated. The authors report here their sociological findings from a case study of media coverage and associated reader comments of an article ('Does bilingualism influence cognitive aging?') from Annals of Neurology. The media attention attracted by the article was high for cognitive science; further, as associates/members of the Centre where it was produced, the authors of the research reported here had rare insight into how the scientists responsible for the Annals of Neurology article interacted with the media. The data corpus included 37 news items and 228 readers' comments, examined via qualitative thematic analysis. Media coverage of the article was largely accurate, without merely copying the press release. Analysis of reader comments showed these to be an important resource for considering issues of import to neuroethics scholars, as well as to scientists themselves (including how science communication shapes and is shaped by ethical, epistemic, and popular discourse). In particular, the findings demonstrate how personal experiences were vital in shaping readers' accounts of their (dis)agreements with the scientific article. Furthermore, the data show how scientific research can catalyse political discussions in ways likely unanticipated by scientists. The analysis indicates the importance of dialogue between journalists, laboratory scientists and social scientists in order to support the communication of the messages researchers intend.
媒体对科学的报道会影响公众对研究伦理的讨论。因此，了解媒体如何报道大脑与心智科学，以及报道是如何被接受和解读的至关重要。作者在此报告他们的社会学研究结果，该结果来自对一篇发表于《神经学年鉴》的文章（《双语能力会影响认知衰老吗？》）的媒体报道及相关读者评论的案例研究。这篇文章在认知科学领域吸引了高度的媒体关注；此外，作为该研究成果产生机构的成员，本文的作者对《神经学年鉴》文章的作者与媒体的互动情况有难得的深入了解。数据语料库包括37篇新闻报道和228条读者评论，通过定性主题分析进行研究。媒体对该文章的报道基本准确，并非只是照搬新闻稿。对读者评论的分析表明，这些评论是思考对神经伦理学学者以及科学家自身都很重要的问题的重要资源（包括科学传播如何塑造以及如何被伦理、认知和大众话语所塑造）。具体而言，研究结果表明个人经历在塑造读者对他们与科学文章的（不）认同方面至关重要。此外，数据显示科学研究能够以科学家可能未曾预料到的方式引发政治讨论。分析表明记者、实验室科学家和社会科学家之间对话的重要性，以便支持传达研究人员想要传达的信息。
