Funding

This research is funded by the Ministry of Education (Singapore) under the Academic Research Fund (Acrf) programme Tier 1 (reference: FY2021-FRC2-001).

Research Overview

This research aims to understand science 'hype' from the receivers' point of view The aim of this project is to explore the effects that hype in scientific communication has on audiences. We explore this topic with 3 audiences in mind: the general public, journalists and scientists. We will look at hype specifically in the areas of artificial intelligence, health communication, quantum physics and misinformation.

Project Rationale

In scientific communication, 'hype' is defined as simplified, exaggerated, and sensationalised science produced by R+D actors at all the stages of the research process to motivate support for research and obtain funding and socio-political capital (Roberson, 2020). Scientific 'hype' is also defined as the adoption of visions articulated through optimistic expectations about a desirable future to work towards or pessimistic expectations about undesirable future to work against (Roberson, 2019). The more common forms of hype on science news are exaggeration or distortion of facts (Auch, 2018).

'Hype' has become commonplace in science. Indeed, it appears to be an unavoidable constituent of scientific communication (Nerlich & McLeod, 2016). However, there are authors who warn about its negative consequences. For instance, Auch (2018) and Powers (2012) consider that 'hype' could potentially undermine the public trust on scientific work and the value of science. On the contrary, there are researchers who see positive aspects in the use of 'hype'. For example, Roberson (2019, 2020) believes 'hype' is an effective communicative device that fosters engagement in science and technology, contributes to shaping the future and expands the public discussions about science.

The most prolific way of approaching hype within communication adopts a perspective centred in how 'hype' propagates. These studies define 'hype' as media storms or news waves (i.e., Boydstun et al., 2014; van Atteveldt et al., 2018) to which the intensity of media coverage is a fundamental aspect (i.e., Wien, 2018). A second perspective observes 'hype' as a promotional, marketing, or advertising genre (Powers, 2012). Within this perspective, the necessity of turning to the receiver to understand 'hype' has been recently identified: Smith (2020) states that 'hype' requires audience research, Auch (2018) insists that a full account of scientific 'hype' must explain how media covers stories while evaluating the judgements of them, and Powers (2012) considers the fundamentals to explain what people think when facing a 'hype'.

This research aims to understand science 'hype' from the receivers' point of view. By adopting a mixed-methods approach, it seeks to advance knowledge on the impact of using hype as a mechanism for reporting scientific discovery to the responses of different audiences towards the message, source, science, and the perceived importance of the research topic for policy making. The study also will observe to what extent those variables impact on the perceived well-being of the individuals and the reputation of science institutions and media.

The results of this research will inform science communication research. They will explain the meaningful variables for processing scientific news in the current media landscape, while nurturing future research conducted in different applied contexts by different disciplines. They are also valuable for science institutions and scientists because it will advance knowledge on the repercussions of 'hype' on their reputation. Also, the results of this research might inspire communication strategies, policies or discussions about 'hype' in science communication. Finally, these results will also have an impact on the media industry and journalists. They will inform audiences about valuable variables to achieve efficacy of media message in a saturated communicative landscape.

Methodology

This research adopts a mixed-method approach (qualitative and quantitative). It will apply a combination of data collection techniques: surveys, focus groups and experimental procedures.

Research Team

Dr. María Teresa Soto-Sanfiel

Principal Investigator

Principal Researcher at Center for Trusted Internet and Community (CTIC-NUS).

Associate Professor in the Department of Communications and New Media.

Dr. José Ignacio Latorre

Investigator

Director of the NUS Centre for Quantum Technologies.

Professor and Provost's Chair in the Department of Physics.

Chong Chin-Wen

Research Assistant

Center for Trusted Internet and Community (CTIC-NUS).

Department of Communications and New Media.