IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v71y2010i4p725-733.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contemporary neuroscience in the media

Author

Listed:
  • Racine, Eric
  • Waldman, Sarah
  • Rosenberg, Jarett
  • Illes, Judy

Abstract

Technological innovations in neuroscience have opened new windows to the understanding of brain function and the neuronal underpinnings of brain activity in neuropsychiatric disorders and social behavior. Public interest and support for neuroscience research through initiatives like the Decade of the Brain project and increasingly diverse brain-related initiatives have created new interfaces between neuroscience and society. Against this backdrop of dynamic innovation, we set out to examine how different features of neuroscience are depicted in print media. We used the 'guided news' function of the LexisNexis Academic database with keyword searches to find news articles published between 1995 and 2004 in major U.S. and U.K. English-language news sources. We performed searches on headlines, lead paragraphs, and body terms to maximize search yields. All articles were coded for overall tone of coverage, details on reported studies, presence of ethical, legal, and social discussion as well as the emerging interpretations of neuroscience - in the form of neuro-essentialism, neuro-realism, and neuro-policy. We found that print media coverage of the use of neurotechnology for diagnosis or therapy in neuropsychiatric disorders was generally optimistic. We also found that, even within articles that were identified as research reports, many did not provide details about research studies. We also gained additional insights into the previously identified phenomena of neuro-essentialism, neuro-realism, and neuro-policy showing some profound impacts of neuroscience on personal identity and policy-making. Our results highlight the implications of transfer of neuroscience knowledge to society given the substantial and authoritative weight ascribed to neuroscience knowledge in defining who we are. We also discuss the impact of these findings on neuroscience and on the respective contributions of the social sciences and the biological sciences in contemporary psychiatry and mental health policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Racine, Eric & Waldman, Sarah & Rosenberg, Jarett & Illes, Judy, 2010. "Contemporary neuroscience in the media," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 725-733, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:4:p:725-733
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(10)00416-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy Caulfield, 2004. "The Commercialisation of Medical and Scientific Reporting," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(3), pages 1-1, December.
    2. Racine, Eric & Gareau, Isabelle & Doucet, Hubert & Laudy, Danielle & Jobin, Guy & Schraedley-Desmond, Pamela, 2006. "Hyped biomedical science or uncritical reporting? Press coverage of genomics (1992-2001) in Québec," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(5), pages 1278-1290, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Toma Strle, 2018. "Looping Minds: How Cognitive Science Exerts Influence on Its Findings," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems - scientific journal, Croatian Interdisciplinary Society Provider Homepage: http://indecs.eu, vol. 16(4), pages 533-544.
    2. O'Connor, Cliodhna & Joffe, Helene, 2013. "Media representations of early human development: Protecting, feeding and loving the developing brain," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 297-306.
    3. Gregory, Hollin, 2020. "Making a murderer: Media renderings of brain injury and Aaron Hernandez as a medical and sporting subject," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    4. Kvaale, Erlend P. & Gottdiener, William H. & Haslam, Nick, 2013. "Biogenetic explanations and stigma: A meta-analytic review of associations among laypeople," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 95-103.
    5. Choudhury, Suparna & McKinney, Kelly A. & Merten, Moritz, 2012. "Rebelling against the brain: Public engagement with the ‘neurological adolescent’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(4), pages 565-573.
    6. Nettleton, Sarah & Kitzinger, Jenny & Kitzinger, Celia, 2014. "A diagnostic illusory? The case of distinguishing between “vegetative” and “minimally conscious” states," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 134-141.
    7. Arentshorst, Marlous E. & de Cock Buning, Tjard & Broerse, Jacqueline E.W., 2016. "Exploring responsible innovation: Dutch public perceptions of the future of medical neuroimaging technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 8-18.
    8. Gardner, John & Warren, Narelle & Addison, Courtney & Samuel, Gabby, 2019. "Persuasive bodies: Testimonies of deep brain stimulation and Parkinson's on YouTube," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 44-51.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel M Cook & Elizabeth A Boyd & Claudia Grossmann & Lisa A Bero, 2007. "Reporting Science and Conflicts of Interest in the Lay Press," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(12), pages 1-5, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:4:p:725-733. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.