The point of the lab was not only to introduce the students to scientific literature, but also to teach them how scientific findings are altered as they make their way though the "media cycle". I am sure that Mary can confirm that even when the scientist is directly interviewed there is still much room for error.
Lets take a look at the cycle, this cartoon is actually pretty accurate! (http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174):
Every university has a press release office. When there is research that may be interesting to the public they often write up a blurb about that study and will also interview the researcher(s) to get some direct quotes (this is the first point at which errors, and misinterpretations can occur). After those articles are posted on the university website they will then be picked up by news wire organizations, such as the associated press. The associated press will then usually post the press release to be made available for other people to see. If a study is really interesting people may start blogging about them on the internet. This becomes a large source of misinterpretations. It is often the case that studies that have no or very little connections with humans are strongly related to humans, and the significance of a finding may be exaggerated. If the study gets enough attention on the internet, then the news channels may start to pick up on them. This is yet another point at which studies can be manipulated, exaggerated, or altered. Since the news channels need to draw in viewers to achieve good ratings, they give their newscast a flashy title. They then use tactics such as fear to be sure that the viewers pay attention.
The study we chose to show the Biology 101 students was about deception tactics used by topi (an animal in Africa similar to an antelope). Dr. Pangle was an author of this paper and it had some very interesting findings. It is currently available to view for free: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/653078.
To sum up the article: Topi grunt to warn predators that they see them and that there is no chance for a surprise attack. This study found that during the mating season the males will have small territories and when they notice a female leaving their territory they will make a "false grunt" making the female think that there is a predator around. She will then move back to the center of the male's territory and the he will them move in and mate with her. So the male is tricking the female to improve his chances to have offspring. A topi is pictured below.
This was a very interesting finding, but as the article made its way through the "blogging world" the main point of deception in the animal world was lost, and replaced with comments focused more towards humans such as "Men are so sneaky!", "Sounds like the average frat party", "Males lie to get laid", etc. So there is a tendency for people to take a study and automatically relate it to humans when it is not always appropriate.
This can sometimes cause problems when people begin to wonder about the funding of these studies. It would be a waste of money to study an animal like topi to learn about the sex lives of humans. Since the focus of this study was lost in many blogs, many readers have really thought that was the case. Of course if you read the article, the real point of the study was to learn about topi behavior, NOT HUMANS.
Learning everything we can about the life history of an organism is becoming more important as humans are having larger impacts and conversation biology comes into play. Therefore, I can see the importance in this study.
So what can be done to minimize this? How can scientists and the media work together to keep the focus, and big picture of the article known and avoid the public from questioning the intentions of scientists?
It may be difficult to find solutions to these problems. Scientists are not the best when it comes to relations with the public, and the media is not very good at understanding how science works.
My hope is that young scientists will recognize this problem and learn how to relate to the media throughout their education so when they finally have a real "adult" job such as a researcher for either a university or corporation, they will be able to convey their findings to the reporters in a way that the public will be able to understand. The same goes for reporters, they need to make sure they listen and understand the main big picture of a study.
So be sure to read "science news" reports with an open mind!
No comments:
Post a Comment