editorships
Handbook of Standardized Content Analysis: Applied Designs to Research Fields of Communication Science
Oehmer, F., Kessler, S. H., Humprecht, E., Sommer, K., & Castro Herrero, L. (2022). Handbook of Standardized Content Analysis: Applied Designs to Research Fields of Communication Science. Wiesbaden: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-36179-2
Im vorliegenden Open-Access Handbuch wird der Status Quo standardisierter, inhaltsanalytischer Forschung in der Kommunikationswissenschaft identifiziert, systematisiert und für Forschende und Studierende zugänglich gemacht. Es behandelt Themen- und Forschungsbereiche des Nachrichtenjournalismus, der fiktionalen Inhalte sowie der Kommunikation von professionellen und LaienkommunikatorInnen. Der Fokus liegt auf den zentralen Fragestellungen und Forschungsdesigns unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der verwendeten Konstrukte/Variablen. In der dazugehörigen Datenbank „Database of Variables for Content Analysis – DOCA“ werden Variablenbeschreibungen zusammengetragen und recherchierbar gemacht. Das Handbuch bietet hierfür den kontextuellen Rahmen. Zusammen bilden sie die Grundlage zur Vereinheitlichung und damit Vergleichbarkeit inhaltsanalytischer Studien.
Special Issue on Mis- and Disinformation about Covid-19: Challenges for Health Communication
in European Journal of Health Communication
Kessler, S. H., & Schmid, P. (University of Erfurt). Link
Misinformation and disinformation pose major challenges to effective health communication around the globe during the Covid-19 pandemic. In this special issue, we present research on mis- and disinformation about Covid-19 in the European context and describe challenges and potential solutions for health communication. More specifically, the special issue features articles that analyse (a) the prevalence of mis- and disinformation beliefs about Covid-19 and their impact on individuals, as well as the drivers of these beliefs and (b) the effectiveness of potential prebunking and debunking interventions to combat mis- and disinformation. The articles demonstrate the relevance of political attitudes and media use as significant predictors of belief in health misinformation and tested a variety of effective interventions– from pausing to think critically to detailed debunking. Together, the collection of articles serves to support the evidence-based efforts of international organisations, governments, social media technology companies, and major academic institutions to address the problem of health mis- and disinformation.
Database of Variables for Content Analysis - DOCA
Oehmer, F., Kessler, S. H., Humprecht, E., Sommer, K., & Castro Herrero, L. (2022). Database of Variables for Content Analysis - DOCA. Link
The open access database compiles, systematizes and evaluates relevant content-analytical variables of communication and political science research areas and topics. The database offers a starting point for the operationalization of content-analytical questions and thus, provides a basis for standardization (where possible and useful) and also comparability of content analytic studies. Furthermore, the database aims to contribute to equal opportunities between all researchers in this field by providing free access to important resources. Operationalizations were selected that were timely, relevant (indicator: citation frequency, expert opinion), accessible, and/or reported quality indicators (reliability). Doca uses editorial and peer review.
Science communication between risk and (un)certainty
Ruhrmann, G., Kessler, S. H. & Guenther, L. (2016). Wissenschaftskommunikation zwischen Risiko und (Un)Sicherheit. [Science communication between risk and (un) certainty]. Köln: Herbert von Halem.
[The press, radio and online media are increasingly reporting on science, technology and their consequences. Recently, the scientific (in)safety of the underlying research has become the focus of public attention. Not only researchers are talking about it, but also the press, television and the internet are reporting on it. Risks are then quickly mentioned.
Not only in medical and natural science research, but also in social and behavioural science research, there is a struggle to achieve scientific results that are as evidenced as possible. This is often associated with a complex methodological debate about research designs and the empirical results achieved in each case. It forms an essential core of every discipline and also indicates the respective scientific progress. However, the broad, non-scientifically educated public often perceives this discussion prevailing in science as a controversy, even as a dispute between scientists, and consequently also as a risk. Scientific results are not infrequently presented by journalists in an absolutely assured, one-sided and thus unreflected or unfiltered manner. This happens not least so that they appear more exciting for the audience and can be consumed more easily.
What is the task and role of journalism in communicating science and its findings? How do journalists deal with scientific uncertainty and evidence? Can public relations work ensure more sustainable acceptance of basic research, but also of its possible consequential risks? How is scientific evidence, uncertainty and risk communicated in the mass media, both in writing and in pictures? How do different representations affect the recipients? What journalistic quality can be attributed to the respective contributions and reports? Can changes in the quality of science communication be detected? These are questions that this volume addresses in detail. It presents selected contributions from the 2nd Annual Conference of the Ad Hoc Group on Science Communication of the German Society for Journalism and Communication Studies (DGPuK). It took place in 2015 at the Friedrich Schiller University of Jena with the participation of numerous representatives from science, journalism and public relations.]
Book review: