Factores y rutinas profesionales que influyen en la visibilidad de las mujeres científicas en los medios digitales

  1. Maider Eizmendi 1
  1. 1 UPV-EHU
Journal:
Feminismo/s
  1. Gutiérrez Almazor, Miren (coord.)

ISSN: 1696-8166,  1989-9998

Year of publication: 2023

Issue: 42

Pages: 189-220

Type: Article

DOI: 10.14198/FEM.2023.42.07 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Feminismo/s

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

Studies on the image of women scientists in the media have focused on content analysis. This article examines the work routines of science journalists, as well as the perspective of science that prevails in the newsrooms, because it is an effective approach for a better understanding of the mechanisms that contribute to the media treatment of these professionals. The objective of our research is to find out what factors affect in the elaboration of the message that the digital media transmits about women scientists, and how they affect this. Based on a qualitative methodology, the study was carried out through nine semi-structured interviews with website managers and experts in the field of communication, science, and gender. The methodological design also included a group interview with seven journalists who deal with scientific issues. The results indicate that the current working speed in newsrooms does not contribute to a slow and thoughtful search for sources of information, and that this process is also influenced by the mediation of the press offices and by the preponderance of STEM areas. The study also identifies three specific aspects to encourage an adequate treatment of women scientists: promoting their knowledge and transmitting the situation of women in science through specific contents; promoting their visibility both quantitatively and in terms of their status as scientists; and promoting a treatment based on normality. The aim of these guidelines is to overcome the difficulties journalists report when trying to find female sources, as well as contributing to reduce stereotypes and focus on the professional role of women

Bibliographic References

  • Amarasekara, I., y Grant, W. (2019). Exploring the YouTube science communication gender gap: A sentiment analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 28(1), 68-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662518786654
  • Brossard, D. (2013). New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 14096-14101. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212744110
  • Campos-Rueda, M., y Herrera-Damas, S. (2021). Bases de datos de mujeres expertas: escenario global y situación en España. Profesional de la Información, 30(2). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.mar.07
  • Carli, L., Alawa, L., Lee, Y., Zhao, B., y Kim, E. (2016). Stereotypes about gender and science: Women≠scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2), 244- 260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315622645
  • Casero-Ripollés, A. (2020). Impacto del Covid-19 en el sistema de medios. Consecuencias comunicativas y democráticas del consumo de noticias durante el brote. Profesional de la Información, 29(2), e290223. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.mar.23
  • Cassidy, A. (2021). Communicating the social sciences and humanities: Challenges and insights for research communication. En M. Buchi y B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (pp. 198-213). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003039242-12-12
  • Chambers, A., y Thompson, S. (2020). Women, Science and the Media. En K. Ross (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Gender, Media, and Communication (pp. 1562-1569). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119429128.iegmc304
  • Chimba, M., y Kitzinger, J. (2010). Bimbo or boffin? Women in science: An analysis of media representations and how female scientists negotiate cultural contradictions. Public Understanding of Science, 19, 609-624. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662508098580
  • Clavijo, A. (2021). Trayectorias de producción científica y conciliación familiar de mujeres investigadoras en Quito. Brazilian Journal of Education, Technology and Society, 14, 45-60. https://doi.org/10.14571/brajets.v14.se1.2021
  • Cortiñas, S., y Alonso-Marcos, F. (2014). The decline of the science section in traditional media. Analysis of its causes from the dominant paradigms of the contemporary thought. Prisma Social, 12, 402-435.
  • De Semir, V. (2010). El mutatis mutandis de la comunicación científica en la era de internet. ArtefaCToS, 3(1), 49-79.
  • Deryugina, T., Shurchkov, O., y Stearns, J. (2021, enero). COVID-19 Disruptions Disproportionately Affect Female Academics (NBER, Working Paper No. 28360). https://www.nber.org/papers/w28360
  • Díaz-Martínez, C., y Dema-Moreno, S. (2013). Las mujeres y la ciencia. La escasez de mujeres en la academia. Un caso de histéresis social. 100cias@uned, 6, 149-156.
  • Diviu, C., y Cortiñas S. (2021). Lost opportunities for science communication in Spanish universities. Communication papers: media literacy & gender studies, 10(20), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.33115/udg_bib/cp.v10i20.22610
  • Duch, J., Zeng, X., Sales-Pardo, M., Radicchi, F., Otis, S., Woodruff, T., y Nunes- Amaral, L. (2012). The possible role of resource requirements and academic career-choice risk on gender differences in publication rate and impact. PloS one, 7(12), e51332. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051332
  • Dunwoody, S. (2008). Science journalism. En M. Bucchi y B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (pp. 15-26). Routledge.
  • Dunwoody, S., y Ryan, M. (1987). The credible scientific source. Journalism Quarterly, 64(1), 21-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908706400103
  • Eisenegger M., Oehmer F., Udris L., y Vogler D. (2020). Die Qualität der Medienberichterstattung zur Corona-Pandemie. Forschungszentrum Öffentlichkeit und Gesellschaft (fög). https://www.media.uzh.ch/dam/jcr:000340ac-3993-4854-a5e9-38aa03f6e14b/200731_Studie%20Leitmedien%20Corona.pdf
  • Eizmendi M., y Peña, S. (2021). Fewer and Later: Women as Experts in TED Talks about COVID-19. Journalism and Media, 2(4), 808-818. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia2040046
  • Eizmendi M., y Peña, S. (2023). Gender Stereotypes Make Women Invisible: The Presence of Female Scientists in the Media. Social Sciences, 12(30), 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12010030
  • Elías, C. (2008). Fundamentos de periodismo científico y divulgación mediática. Alianza Editorial.
  • European Commission. (2019). She Figures 2018. European Commission.
  • Fahy, D., y Nisbet, M.C. (2011). The science journalist online: Shifting roles and emerging practices. Journalism, 12(7), 778-793. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911412697
  • Fernández-Rius, L. (2008). Género, ciencia, ¿paridad es equidad? Arbor, 184 (733), 817-826. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2008.i733.226
  • Flick, U. (2011). Introducing research methodology: A beginners’ guide to doing a research project. Sage.
  • Francescutti, P. (2018). La visibilidad de las científicas españolas. Cuadernos Fundación Antoni Esteve.
  • Franquet-Calvet, R., Luzón-Fernández, V., y Ramajo, N. (2007). La información en los principales medios de comunicación on line. Estudiar la representación de género. ZER: Revista De Estudios De Comunicación=Komunikazio Ikasketen Aldizkaria, 12(22), 267-282. https://doi.org/10.35742/rcci.2007.12(0).12-22
  • García-Nieto, M.T. (2015). Mujeres y hombres en la ciencia española. Un desequilibrio preocupante. En M.T. García Nieto (Eds.), Mujeres, ciencia e información (pp. 31-50). Editorial Fundamentos.
  • Granado, A. (2011). Slaves to journals, serfs to the web: The use of the internet in newsgathering among European science journalists. Journalism, 12(7), 794-813. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911412702
  • Hunt, J. (2016). Why do women leave science and engineering? ILR Review, 69(1), 199-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793915594597
  • Husu, L., y Tainio, L. (2016). Representations of Women Researchers in Finnish Print Media: Top Researchers, Multi-Talents and Experts. Investigaciones Feministas, 7(2), 203-224. https://doi.org/10.5209/INFE.53796
  • López-Cantos, F., Cortiñas-Rovira, S., y Rodríguez, M. I. (2020). Comunicación del Conocimiento Científico en la Era de la Postverdad. Retos y Oportunidades. Revista Prisma Social, 31, 1-5.
  • López-Pérez, L., y Olvera-Lobo, M.D. (2015). Tratamiento de la información científica en las ediciones digitales de los periódicos españoles. Profesional de la información, 24(6), 766-777. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2015.nov.08
  • Lorenzo-Rial, M. A., Álvarez-Lires, F.J., Álvarez-Lires, M., y Serrallé-Marzoa, J.F. (2016). La amenaza del estereotipo: elección de estudios de ingeniería y educación tecnocientífica. Opción: Revista de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales, 9, 54-76.
  • Mitchell, M., y McKinnon, M. (2019). «Human» or «objective» faces of science? Gender stereotypes and the representation of scientists in the media. Public understanding of science, 28(2), 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662518801257
  • Morgan, D. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984287.n4
  • Mueller, C., Gaudilliere, D., Kin, C., Menorca, R., y Girod, S. (2016). Gender disparities in scholarly productivity of US academic surgeons. Journal of Surgical Research, 203(1), 28-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.03.060
  • Myers, K., Tham, W., Yin, Y., Cohodes, N., Thursby, J., Thursby, M., y Wang, D. (2020). Unequal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists. Nature human behaviour, 4(9), 880-883. https://doi.org//10.1038/s41562-020-0921-y
  • Niemi, M., y Pitkänen, V. (2017). Gendered use of experts in the media: Analysis of the gender gap in Finnish news journalism. Public Understanding of Science, 26(3), 355-368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515621470
  • Orbe, T. (2021). El rol del periodismo científico en la nueva normalidad Pandémica. En A.P. Escobat (Coord.), Pandemia y nuevas realidades para la comunicación en Ecuador (pp. 123-150). Centro Internacional de Estudios, Superiores de Comunicación para América Latina.
  • Palomar-Verea, C. (2009). Maternidad y mundo académico. Alteridades, 19(38), 55-73.
  • Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Sage.
  • Plaza-Ramos, J.A., Primo-Peña, E., Bojo Canales, C., y Molina, P. (2020). Difusión y comunicación de la ciencia. Instituto de Salud Carlos III. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación. https://www.conprueba.es/difusion-y-comunicacion-de-la-ciencia
  • Powell, R., y Single, H. (1996). Focus groups. International Journal of Quality in Health Care, 8(5), 499-504. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/8.5.499
  • Rivera-Rossi, J. (2017). Cultura científica y fuentes periodísticas: estudio de caso en España y México desde la perspectiva de género [Tesis doctoral]. Universidad de Salamanca.
  • Schafer, M. (2017). How changing media structures are affecting science news coverage. En K. Jamieson, D. Kahan y D. Scheufele (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the science of science communication (pp. 51-58). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190497620.013.5
  • Shachar, O. (2000). Spotlighting women scientists in the press: tokenism in science journalism. Public Understanding of Science, 9(4), 347-358. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/9/4/301
  • Trumbo, C., Sprecker, K., Dumlao, R., Yun, G., y Duke, S. (2001). Use of e-mail and the web by science writers. Science Communication, 22(4), 347-378. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547001022004001
  • UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2018). Women in Science (FS/2018/SCI/51). http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/fs51-women-in-science-2018-en.pdf
  • Vallés, M. (1997). Técnicas de investigación social: Reflexión metodológica y práctica profesional. Síntesis.
  • Wimmer, R., y Dominick, J. (1996). La investigación científica de los medios de comunicación. Una introducción a sus métodos. Bosch Comunicación.
Data source: Dialnet