Skip to content

So you want to be a science journalist? Here’s a bibliograpy

March 23, 2010
The bibliography that goes along with the article ‘Tips for young science journalists: A crash course on the major issues in the field.
  1. Schäfer, Mike S. “From Public Understanding to Public Engagement: An Empirical Assessment of Changes in Science Coverage”. Science Communication. 30. 4 (2009): 475-505.
  2. Brossard, Dominique. “Media, scientific journals and science communication: examining the construction of scientific controversies”. Public Understanding of Science. 18. 3 (2009): 258-274.
  3. Olausson, Ulrika. “Global warming, global responsibility? Media frames of collective action and scientific certainty”. Public Understanding of Science. 18. (2009): 421-436.
  4. Gisler, Priska and Kurath, Monika. “Informing, involving or engaging? Science communication, in the ages of atom-, bio- and nanotechnology”. Public Understanding of Science. 18. 5 (2009): 559-573.
  5. Holstein, Lisa W. and Stocking, S. H. “Manufacturing doubt: journalists’ roles and the construction of ignorance in a scientific controversy”. Public Understanding of Science. 18. (2009): 23-42.
  6. Haran, Joan and Kitzinger, Jenny. “Modest witnessing and managing the boundaries between science and the media: A case study of breakthrough and scandal”. Public Understanding of Science. 18. 6 (2009): 634-652.
  7. Priest, Susanna. “Curiouser and Curiouser”. Science Communication. 3. 1 (2009): 3-5.
  8. Davies, Sarah et al. “Discussing dialogue: perspectives on the value of science dialogue events that do not inform policy”. Public Understanding of Science. 18. 3 (2009): 338-353.
  9. Whitmarsh, Lorraine. “What’s in a name? Commonalities and differences in public understanding of “climate change” and “global warming””. Public Understanding of Science. 18. (2009): 401-420.
  10. Moore, Andrew. “Bad science in the headlines”. EMBO reports. 7. 12 (2006). 1193-1196.
  11. Augenbraun, Eliene et al. “Adult Science Learning from Local Television Newscasts”. Science Communication. 28. 2 (2006). 216-242.
  12. Nisbet, Matthew C. and Scheufele, Dietram A. “What’s next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions”. American Journal of Botany. 96. 10 (2009): 1767-1778.
3 Comments leave one →
  1. March 23, 2010 7:26 am

    I can recommend these two (tho v expensive, for libraries).
    Bucchi, M. and Trench, B. (eds) Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (London: Routledge, 2008).
    Bauer, Martin & Bucchi, Massimiano (eds) Journalism, Science & Society (New York: Routledge)

    That said, Nelkin’s Selling Science (1995) is still a classic.

    Similarly, this (2003) report covers a lot of key issues:

    As does this (from 2004)

    There is a Sage Encyclopedia of Sci Com’n out next year. I’m looking forward to seeing if they’ve edited out my reference to Ben Goldacre’s underpants in the entry on popular science I wrote for them.


  1. So you want to be a science journalist? Well here’s a crash course « CMBR
  2. When is “Science” Truly Science? | Dirt to Dinner

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: