Readers weigh in on framing

Readers weigh in on framing The results from our online poll are in. Here's the most up-to-date information on what you think about framing in science 1. First, a bit about you. How would you describe yourself? Response Percent Response Count A practicing scientist in the lab 41.0% 166 A former scientist in the lab or science graduate 34.1% 138 A non-scientist 24.9% 101 Responses from practicing scientists in the lab: Science in the media The media does a good job of informing the public about important or sensitive science issues. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 0.0% (0) 23.8% (31) 46.9% (61) 28.5% (37) 0.8% (1) 3.05 130 The best media for reaching the public are science sections in mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times science section, BBC news, or NPR's Science Friday. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 16.2% (21) 46.2% (60) 26.2% (34) 6.2% (8) 5.4% (7) 2.24 130 The best media for reaching the public are science-based publications such as Nature, Scientific American, The Scientist, or New Scientist. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 9.2% (12) 17.7% (23) 48.5% (63) 24.6% (32) 0.0% (0) 2.88 130 Public understanding of science If the public had a better understanding of embryonic stem cells, current restrictions on research would be lifted. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 14.6% (19) 43.1% (56) 33.1% (43) 5.4% (7) 3.8% (5) 2.30 130 If scientists were more effective at communicating the science behind climate change, governments would be more likely to support measures to combat it. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 15.4% (20) 42.3% (55) 33.8% (44) 6.9% (9) 1.5% (2) 2.33 130 If scientists were more effective at communicating the evidence for evolution, fewer people would believe that creationism should be taught in science classes. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 17.7% (23) 36.2% (47) 34.6% (45) 10.0% (13) 1.5% (2) 2.38 130 If the public had a better understanding of science, governments would increase their funding for science. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 34.6% (45) 40.8% (53) 15.4% (20) 3.1% (4) 6.2% (8) 1.86 130 Science would be better off today if we had more scientists like Carl Sagan. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 20.8% (27) 36.2% (47) 11.5% (15) 4.6% (6) 26.9% (35) 2.00 130 The role of scientists in the media Scientists do a good job of communicating complex technical issues to the public. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 0.0% (0) 14.6% (19) 60.8% (79) 23.8% (31) 0.8% (1) 3.09 130 In public, scientists should only comment on the technical details of their work and not discuss the ethical or policy implications of research. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 3.8% (5) 6.2% (8) 55.4% (72) 33.1% (43) 1.5% (2) 3.20 130 Research needs to be explained to lay audiences in all its complexities, no matter the type of media outlet or the nature of the audience. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 13.8% (18) 29.2% (38) 40.8% (53) 14.6% (19) 1.5% (2) 2.57 130 When scientists communicate with the public, the most important thing is technical accuracy. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 10.8% (14) 31.5% (41) 41.5% (54) 13.8% (18) 2.3% (3) 2.60 130 When scientists communicate with the public, the most important thing is accommodating their message to suit the audience. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 20.8% (27) 42.3% (55) 26.9% (35) 8.5% (11) 1.5% (2) 2.23 130 Communications training and research Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count Graduate students in the sciences should receive formalized training in public communication. 42.3% (55) 47.7% (62) 6.9% (9) 1.5% (2) 1.5% (2) 1.67 130 Scientific organizations should conduct systematic research in order to better understand which messages are most likely to promote public interest and understanding. 25.4% (33) 46.9% (61) 19.2% (25) 3.8% (5) 4.6% (6) 2.02 130 Scientists who make a major impact as communicators deserve as much recognition for their contributions as leading researchers. 40.8% (53) 33.8% (44) 15.4% (20) 5.4% (7) 4.6% (6) 1.85 130 Funding agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health should prioritize funding for research and programs devoted to science communication. 26.9% (35) 38.5% (50) 26.9% (35) 4.6% (6) 3.1% (4) 2.10 130 Responses from former lab scientists or science graduates: Science in the media Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count The media does a good job of informing the public about important or sensitive science issues. 0.9% (1) 21.7% (23) 45.3% (48) 29.2% (31) 2.8% (3) 3.06 106 The best media for reaching the public are science sections in mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times science section, BBC news, or NPR's Science Friday. 8.5% (9) 51.9% (55) 34.9% (37) 3.8% (4) 0.9% (1) 2.34 106 The best media for reaching the public are science-based publications such as Nature, Scientific American, The Scientist, or New Scientist. 2.8% (3) 10.4% (11) 52.8% (56) 34.0% (36) 0.0% (0) 3.18 106 Public understanding of science If the public had a better understanding of embryonic stem cells, current restrictions on research would be lifted. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 9.4% (10) 38.7% (41) 39.6% (42) 8.5% (9) 3.8% (4) 2.49 106 If scientists were more effective at communicating the science behind climate change, governments would be more likely to support measures to combat it. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 14.2% (15) 50.0% (53) 26.4% (28) 7.5% (8) 1.9% (2) 2.28 106 If scientists were more effective at communicating the evidence for evolution, fewer people would believe that creationism should be taught in science classes. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 26.4% (28) 35.8% (38) 29.2% (31) 7.5% (8) 0.9% (1) 2.18 106 If the public had a better understanding of science, governments would increase their funding for science. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 18.9% (20) 46.2% (49) 24.5% (26) 4.7% (5) 5.7% (6) 2.16 106 Science would be better off today if we had more scientists like Carl Sagan. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 17.0% (18) 40.6% (43) 15.1% (16) 3.8% (4) 23.6% (25) 2.07 106 The role of scientists in the media Scientists do a good job of communicating complex technical issues to the public. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 0.9% (1) 9.4% (10) 59.4% (63) 29.2% (31) 0.9% (1) 3.18 106 In public, scientists should only comment on the technical details of their work and not discuss the ethical or policy implications of research. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 3.8% (4) 9.4% (10) 49.1% (52) 37.7% (40) 0.0% (0) 3.21 106 Research needs to be explained to lay audiences in all its complexities, no matter the type of media outlet or the nature of the audience. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 11.3% (12) 26.4% (28) 39.6% (42) 19.8% (21) 2.8% (3) 2.70 106 When scientists communicate with the public, the most important thing is technical accuracy. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 13.2% (14) 24.5% (26) 51.9% (55) 8.5% (9) 1.9% (2) 2.57 106 When scientists communicate with the public, the most important thing is accommodating their message to suit the audience. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 20.8% (22) 52.8% (56) 17.0% (18) 8.5% (9) 0.9% (1) 2.13 106 Communications training and research Graduate students in the sciences should receive formalized training in public communication. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 36.8% (39) 47.2% (50) 11.3% (12) 0.9% (1) 3.8% (4) 1.75 106 Scientific organizations should conduct systematic research in order to better understand which messages are most likely to promote public interest and understanding. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 23.6% (25) 51.9% (55) 17.0% (18) 4.7% (5) 2.8% (3) 2.03 106 Scientists who make a major impact as communicators deserve as much recognition for their contributions as leading researchers. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 36.8% (39) 47.2% (50) 9.4% (10) 5.7% (6) 0.9% (1) 1.84 106 Funding agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health should prioritize funding for research and programs devoted to science communication. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 32.1% (34) 44.3% (47) 17.0% (18) 3.8% (4) 2.8% (3) 1.92 106 Responses from non-scientists: Science in the media The media does a good job of informing the public about important or sensitive science issues. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 4.5% (3) 20.9% (14) 40.3% (27) 32.8% (22) 1.5% (1) 3.03 67 The best media for reaching the public are science sections in mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times science section, BBC news, or NPR's Science Friday. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 13.4% (9) 43.3% (29) 31.3% (21) 10.4% (7) 1.5% (1) 2.39 67 The best media for reaching the public are science-based publications such as Nature, Scientific American, The Scientist, or New Scientist. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 6.0% (4) 28.4% (19) 40.3% (27) 23.9% (16) 1.5% (1) 2.83 67 Public understanding of science If the public had a better understanding of embryonic stem cells, current restrictions on research would be lifted. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 19.4% (13) 38.8% (26) 26.9% (18) 9.0% (6) 6.0% (4) 2.27 67 If scientists were more effective at communicating the science behind climate change, governments would be more likely to support measures to combat it. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 19.4% (13) 41.8% (28) 28.4% (19) 6.0% (4) 4.5% (3) 2.22 67 If scientists were more effective at communicating the evidence for evolution, fewer people would believe that creationism should be taught in science classes. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 25.4% (17) 31.3% (21) 29.9% (20) 10.4% (7) 3.0% (2) 2.26 67 If the public had a better understanding of science, governments would increase their funding for science. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 26.9% (18) 58.2% (39) 10.4% (7) 3.0% (2) 1.5% (1) 1.89 67 Science would be better off today if we had more scientists like Carl Sagan. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 23.9% (16) 38.8% (26) 10.4% (7) 0.0% (0) 26.9% (18) 1.82 67 The role of scientists in the media Scientists do a good job of communicating complex technical issues to the public. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 6.0% (4) 10.4% (7) 56.7% (38) 23.9% (16) 3.0% (2) 3.02 67 In public, scientists should only comment on the technical details of their work and not discuss the ethical or policy implications of research. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 7.5% (5) 13.4% (9) 43.3% (29) 35.8% (24) 0.0% (0) 3.07 67 Research needs to be explained to lay audiences in all its complexities, no matter the type of media outlet or the nature of the audience. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 14.9% (10) 25.4% (17) 35.8% (24) 22.4% (15) 1.5% (1) 2.67 67 When scientists communicate with the public, the most important thing is technical accuracy. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 13.4% (9) 28.4% (19) 46.3% (31) 10.4% (7) 1.5% (1) 2.55 67 When scientists communicate with the public, the most important thing is accommodating their message to suit the audience. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 28.4% (19) 35.8% (24) 22.4% (15) 10.4% (7) 3.0% (2) 2.15 67 Communications training and research Graduate students in the sciences should receive formalized training in public communication. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 43.3% (29) 47.8% (32) 4.5% (3) 0.0% (0) 4.5% (3) 1.59 67 Scientific organizations should conduct systematic research in order to better understand which messages are most likely to promote public interest and understanding. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 28.4% (19) 47.8% (32) 17.9% (12) 1.5% (1) 4.5% (3) 1.92 67 Scientists who make a major impact as communicators deserve as much recognition for their contributions as leading researchers. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 40.3% (27) 34.3% (23) 19.4% (13) 0.0% (0) 6.0% (4) 1.78 67 Funding agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health should prioritize funding for research and programs devoted to science communication. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion Rating Average Response Count 31.3% (21) 46.3% (31) 17.9% (12) 1.5% (1) 3.0% (2) 1.89 67 Related Articles The Future of Public Engagement • The Typology of Frames Specific to Science-Related Issues • Here's what you think • How to start? • Our Reader's Thoughts

Readers weigh in on framing

Become a Member of

Meet the Author

Matthew Nisbet

Dietram A. Scheufele

Published In

October 2007

Related Research Resources

Bunsen Burners and Bad Hair Days

Research Resources

Podcasts

Webinars

Videos

Infographics

eBooks

Characterizing Immune Memory to COVID-19 Vaccination

Meet Honeybun and Breeze Through Viscometry in Formulation Development

Taking the Guesswork Out of Quality Control Standards

PFAS: The Forever Chemicals

Products

Product News

Metrion Biosciences launches NaV1.9 high-throughput screening assay to strengthen screening portfolio and advance research on new medicines for pain

Biotium Unveils New Assay Kit with Exceptional RNase Detection Sensitivity

Atelerix signs exclusive agreement with MineBio to establish distribution channel for non-cryogenic cell preservation solutions in China

Thermo Scientific™ Centrifuges with GreenCool Technology