Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Science in motion: A qualitative analysis of journalists’ use and perception of preprints

View ORCID ProfileAlice Fleerackers, View ORCID ProfileLaura Moorhead, View ORCID ProfileLauren A. Maggio, Kaylee Fagan, View ORCID ProfileJuan Pablo Alperin
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.02.03.479041
Alice Fleerackers
1Interdisciplinary Studies, Simon Fraser University, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Alice Fleerackers
Laura Moorhead
2Journalism, College of Liberal and Creative Arts, San Francisco State University, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Laura Moorhead
Lauren A. Maggio
3Department of Medicine, Uniformed Services University, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Lauren A. Maggio
Kaylee Fagan
4Journalism, College of Liberal and Creative Arts, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Juan Pablo Alperin
5Publishing Program, Simon Fraser University, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Juan Pablo Alperin
  • For correspondence: jalperin@sfu.ca
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

This qualitative study explores how and why journalists use preprints — unreviewed research papers — in their reporting. Through thematic analysis of interviews conducted with 19 health and science journalists in the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, it applies a theoretical framework that conceptualizes COVID-19 preprint research as a form of post-normal science, characterized by high scientific uncertainty and societal relevance, urgent need for political decision-making, and value-related policy considerations. Findings suggest that journalists approach the decision to cover preprints as a careful calculation, in which the potential public benefits and the ease of access preprints provided were weighed against risks of spreading misinformation. Journalists described viewing unreviewed studies with extra skepticism and relied on diverse strategies to find, vet, and report on them. Some of these strategies represent standard science journalism, while others, such as labeling unreviewed studies as preprints, mark a departure from the norm. However, journalists also reported barriers to covering preprints, as many felt they lacked the expertise or the time required to fully understand or vet the research. The findings suggest that coverage of preprints is likely to continue post-pandemic, with important implications for scientists, journalists, and the publics who read their work.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Funding This research is supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) insight grant, Sharing health research (#453-2020-0401). AF is supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Joseph Bombardier Doctoral Fellowship (#767-2019-0369).

  • Disclaimer The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

  • https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/KK6T86

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted February 04, 2022.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Science in motion: A qualitative analysis of journalists’ use and perception of preprints
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Science in motion: A qualitative analysis of journalists’ use and perception of preprints
Alice Fleerackers, Laura Moorhead, Lauren A. Maggio, Kaylee Fagan, Juan Pablo Alperin
bioRxiv 2022.02.03.479041; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.02.03.479041
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Science in motion: A qualitative analysis of journalists’ use and perception of preprints
Alice Fleerackers, Laura Moorhead, Lauren A. Maggio, Kaylee Fagan, Juan Pablo Alperin
bioRxiv 2022.02.03.479041; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.02.03.479041

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Scientific Communication and Education
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4672)
  • Biochemistry (10340)
  • Bioengineering (7658)
  • Bioinformatics (26300)
  • Biophysics (13501)
  • Cancer Biology (10672)
  • Cell Biology (15413)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (8487)
  • Ecology (12806)
  • Epidemiology (2067)
  • Evolutionary Biology (16831)
  • Genetics (11382)
  • Genomics (15469)
  • Immunology (10603)
  • Microbiology (25182)
  • Molecular Biology (10210)
  • Neuroscience (54383)
  • Paleontology (399)
  • Pathology (1667)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2889)
  • Physiology (4334)
  • Plant Biology (9235)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1586)
  • Synthetic Biology (2555)
  • Systems Biology (6773)
  • Zoology (1461)