Science in the Media

Popular Images and Public Perceptions

Paul R Brewer, Barbara L Ley

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000461909
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Philosophy
• Subtopic: Philosophy & Ethics in Science

This timely and accessible text shows how portrayals of science in popular media—including television, movies, and social media—influence public attitudes around messages from the scientific community, affect the kinds of research that receive support, and inform perceptions of who can become a scientist.

The book builds on theories of cultivation, priming, framing, and media models while drawing on years of content analyses, national surveys, and experiments. A wide variety of media genres—from Hollywood blockbusters and prime-time television shows to cable news channels and satirical comedy programs, science documentaries and children's cartoons to Facebook posts and YouTube videos—are explored with rigorous social science research and an engaging, accessible style. Case studies on climate change, vaccines, genetically modified foods, evolution, space exploration, and forensic DNA testing are presented alongside reflections on media stereotypes and disparities in terms of gender, race, and other social identities. Science in the Media illuminates how scientists and media producers can bridge gaps between the scientific community and the public, foster engagement with science, and promote an inclusive vision of science, while also highlighting how readers themselves can become more active and critical consumers of media messages about science.

Science in the Media serves as a supplemental text for courses in science communication and media studies, and will be of interest to anyone concerned with publicly engaged science.

1

IMAGES OF SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS

DOI: 10.4324/9781003190721-1

Let's start with a picture.

Before you read any further, find a pen or pencil. Then draw a scientist (you can use the space below or a separate sheet of paper).

When you’re finished, turn the page.

FIGURE 1.1The reader's drawing of a scientist

Congratulations! You’ve just completed a test—known, logically enough, as the Draw-A-Scientist Test—that researchers have been using for more than half a century to study what people think scientists look like. The scholar who first developed it, David Wade Chambers, collected drawings of scientists from almost 5,000 elementary school students between 1966 and 1977.¹ Since then, researchers have administered the test to students at every education level, from kindergarten to college, as well as to teachers and teachers-in-training.²

Now let's take a closer look at your drawing. First question: how many of the following features does it include?

• Eyeglasses
• Wild or wacky hair
• A lab coat
• Pencils or pens in a pocket, or a pocket protector
• Beakers, test tubes, or other laboratory equipment

All of these are common features in young people's drawings of scientists.³ The more of them you added to your picture, the closer it is to the “standard image”—or popular stereotype—of a scientist.⁴ Children tend to learn this image over time, with older students including more stereotypical features in their drawings than younger ones do.⁵

Second question: did you draw a woman or man? Of the girls who drew scientists for Chambers, only 1% drew women scientists. Meanwhile, every single boy in his study drew a man. The percentage of students drawing women scientists has increased since the 1970s; even so, children are still more likely to draw men than women.⁶ Beneath this overall trend lies a large gender gap: around half of all girls now draw women scientists, but far fewer boys do.⁷ Another pattern is that older students are more likely than younger ones to draw men, suggesting that as children grow up, they tend to internalize gender stereotypes of scientists.⁸

Next question: what is the race of the scientist you drew? White children overwhelmingly tend to draw white scientists.⁹ Students of color are more likely to draw scientists of color, but many of them draw white scientists, too.¹⁰ Just as young people's pictures sometimes reflect gender stereotypes, these pictures can also reflect stereotypes about race and science.

Three more questions: How old is the scientist you drew? Does this person resemble anyone from real life or fiction? And did you draw a scientist with any visible disabilities? Many students draw older scientists. Some draw scientists based on specific people, with Albert Einstein serving as an especially popular model.¹¹ Few draw disabled scientists.¹²

The student drawing in Figure 1.2 includes every aspect of the popular stereotype of a scientist as captured by five decades of research. It depicts a man with wild hair and glasses, wearing a lab coat with a pocket protector and standing next to a table of beakers and flasks. He appears to be white. He is relatively old (judging by his hairline), bears something of a resemblance to Albert Einstein (with his mustache and hair), and has no visible disabilities. To many young people, this is what a scientist looks like.

FIGURE 1.2A stereotypical drawing of a scientist (an anonymous student's drawing)

So, who teaches students to stereotype—or, in some cases, not stereotype—scientists? For that matter, who shapes all the other perceptions that children and adults hold about science? Take a moment to consider whether you would agree with the following statements, and why:

• Scientists tend to be odd and peculiar people.
• Scientific work is dangerous.
• Scientists will probably bring an extinct species back to life by 2050.
• Most scientists agree that the earth is getting warmer because of human activity.
• Women who work in science are likely to experience bias based on their gender.
• Forensic DNA testing is a reliable form of evidence in criminal investigations.
• Paranormal investigators are scientific.

A host of messengers—including parents, schools, peers, politicians, religious leaders, and scientists themselves—could influence what we think about such topics. Given how much time most of us spend consuming media, however, our views of science may also mirror portrayals of it in Hollywood movies and prime time television; on cable news and satirical comedy programs; in science documentaries and children's cartoons; in Instagram selfies and YouTube videos.

The results of a national survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2017 illustrate the extent to which Americans depend on the media for whatever information they receive about science.¹³ A majority of those polled (54%) said they learned about science from general news outlets, and almost half (45%) said the same of documentary science programs or videos. Moreover, half (49%) of the respondents watched science fiction movies or television programs. By comparison, only a third (33%) learned about science from family members, friends, or acquaintances, and far fewer learned about it from museums (11%), government agencies (10%), or advocacy organizations (6%). These patterns highlight the potential for messages from a variety of media sources to shape how the public perceives science.

As a case in point, media influence could help account for why so many young people draw white, male, lab coat-wearing scientists. After all, we can find this same stereotype in films ranging from early classics such as Frankenstein (featuring the misguided Dr. Henry Frankenstein) to late 20th century blockbusters such as Back to the Future (featuring the zany Dr. Emmett Brown) to recent box office hits such as Captain America: The First Avenger (featuring the weaselly Dr. Arnim Zola). We can find it on science fiction television programs such as Fringe (featuring the troubled Dr. Walter Bishop). We can even find it in children's television cartoons such as The Powerpuff Girls (featuring the good-natured Professor Utonium) and Phineas and Ferb (featuring the hapless Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz).

In this book, we explore the links between media portrayals of science and public perceptions of it. We look at many types of media, though we focus on the most popular ones of the early 21st century: movies, television, and social media. We also examine a wide range of perceptions, from estimates of the gender balance in astronomy to beliefs about “fringe” science topics such as extra-sensory perception (ESP) and ghost hunting. To understand why and how the media might shape public perceptions of science, we draw on four major theories of media effects. To capture what messages about science the media present, we combine case studies with “big picture” data. To test whether people's views reflect these portrayals, we use polls and experiments. Along the way, we consider how shifts in media messages could reshape public perceptions of science and scientists—as well as how audience members might go about assessing the messages they encounter.

Why Public Perceptions of Science and Scientists Matter

But first, we should explain why it's so important to understand people's perceptions of science and scientists. The short version is that these perceptions help set the stage for what scientific research takes place, who conducts it, who participates in it, and how it affects both public policy and individual behaviors.

To begin with, people's beliefs about science shape how willing they are to support scientific endeavors, including public funding for science.¹⁴ Many university-based scientific projects depend on grants from governmental agencies such as the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institute for Health (NIH). Numerous federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), conduct extensive research of their own, as well. In light of this, scientists and everyone else who values science should care about public support for it—particularly given efforts by some political leaders to slash federal funding for scientific research. To defend science, organizations such as the Union of Concerned Scientists and activist movements such as the March for Science have taken their cases directly to the public. So have federal agencies; for example, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) public relations efforts include everything from consulting on Hollywood films to posting photographs on Instagram.

Beyond funding, the image of science influences public opinion about a host of important policy issues. For example, trust in scientists—or the lack thereof—shapes people's beliefs about whether global warming is happening, whether the health benefits of vaccines outweigh their risks, whether humans evolved from other forms of life, whether genetically modified foods are safe to eat, and whether social distancing is necessary during pandemics.¹⁵ Elected officials and other policymakers, in turn, sometimes (though not always) take public opinion into account when making decisions such as whether to take action on climate change, require that children receive vaccinations, mandate the teaching of evolution in schools, require labels for genetically modified foods, or mandate mask-wearing to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.¹⁶

On a more personal scale, perceptions of science matter for whether—and, if so, how—ordinary people rely on it in their everyday lives. Americans’ views of science shape their own actions across many areas, including choices about whether to vaccinate their children, buy energy-efficient vehicles, and wear face masks during a pandemic.¹⁷ Likewise, Americans’ perceptions of science guide their participation on a range of issues that affect their own communities, from protecting local water supplies to choosing sites for nuclear reactors.¹⁸

The success of the growing drive for “citizen science” also depends on public perceptions of the scientific community. Recent years have witnessed a push for a model of science in which laypeople help produce scientific knowledge and engage in civic action alongside scientists.¹⁹ Citizens who believe that scientists care about justice and listen to laypeople may welcome the chance to take part in scientific research and science-based decision-making.²⁰ By contrast, people who view scientists as distant or condescending may shy away from opportunities to participate in science.

Last, but not least, the public image of science can shape whether students pursue STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) education and careers. Young people who view science as a force for good in society may decide that they want to grow up to scientists; meanwhile, those who perceive scientific work as dangerous and isolated—and scientists as strange and distant—may avoid a life of science.²¹ Moreover, public perceptions of science could shape who becomes a scientist. For example, gender stereotypes about science may discourage young women from seeing themselves as potential scientists and exacerbate gender-based discrimination within scientific hiring and promotion.²² Similarly, other sorts of stereotypes may create barriers for people of color, LGBTQ people, and disabled people who want to pursue scientific education and careers.²³

What the Public Thinks about Science and Scientists

Against this background, many members of the scientific community worry that science has an “image problem”—one that could erode support for science funding, dampen trust in scientific conclusions, discourage public engagement with science, and hamper efforts to recruit scientists who reflect a diverse population. To be sure, a critical skepticism toward science is healthy for both science and society. As recent “replication crises” in fields such as nutrition and psychology illustrate, the scientific method requires researchers to question findings and retest hypotheses.²⁴ Furthermore, unethical and fraudulent practices on the part of individual researchers and broader scientif...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of Figures
• Acknowledgements
• About the Authors
• 1 Images of Science and Scientists
• 2 Movie Science
• 3 Prime-Time Science
• 4 Documentary Science
• 5 Science News
• 6 Late-Night Science
• 7 Social Media Science
• 8 Forensic Science
• 9 Fringe Science
• 10 Kid Science
• 11 Reshaping Popular Images and Public Perceptions
• Appendix: Surveys
• Index