Review of Communication Research

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION                                                                                                

Title & Authors

How Stereotypes Are Shared Through Language: A Review and Introduction of the Social Categories and Stereotypes Communication (SCSC) Framework

Camiel J. Beukeboom (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, NL)

Christian Burgers (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, NL)

Highlights

 

• Based on an integrative review we propose the SCSC framework that explicates the linguistic processes through which social-category stereotypes are consensualized..

• We discuss how biases in language use both result from and maintain perceived category entitativity, stereotype content, and essentialism.

We distinguish biases in both the content and linguistic form of social-category labels.

• We distinguish biases in both communication content and linguistic form in descriptions of behaviors and characteristics of categorized individuals.

• Our integrative framework allows for a better understanding of stereotype maintaining biases in natural language.

 

Abstract

Language use plays a crucial role in the consensualization of stereotypes within cultural groups. Based on integrative review of the literature on stereotyping and biased language use, we propose the Social Categories and Stereotypes Communication (SCSC) framework. The framework integrates largely independent areas of literature, and explicates the linguistic processes through which social-category stereotypes are shared and maintained. We distinguish two groups of biases in language use that jointly feed and maintain three fundamental cognitive variables in (shared) social-category cognition: perceived category entitativity, stereotype content, and perceived essentialism of associated stereotypic characteristics. These are: (1) Biases in linguistic labels used to denote categories, within which we discuss biases in (a) label content and (b) linguistic form of labels; (2) Biases in describing behaviors and characteristics of categorized individuals, within which we discuss biases in (a) communication content (i.e., what information is communicated), and (b) linguistic form of descriptions (i.e., how is information formulated). Together, these biases create a self-perpetuating cycle in which social-category stereotypes are shared and maintained. The framework allows for a better understanding of stereotype maintaining biases in natural language. We discuss various opportunities for further research.

Download

 

open access verde 

 

How Stereotypes Are Shared Through Language: A Review and Introduction of the Social Categories and Stereotypes Communication (SCSC) Framework

Camiel J. Beukeboom and Christian Burgers

Keywords: Stereotypes; prejudice; discrimination; linguistic bias; social categorization; language; communication; entitativity; essentialism.;

 

  Filesize 628.36 KB Download 120

 

 

Content

 

 

Introduction

Goals and Approach

Foundational Considerations and Definitions

The Social Categories and Stereotypes Communication (SCSC) Framework

Input About Target’s Situations

(Shared) Social-Category Cognition: Perceived Category Entitativity, Stereotype Content and Perceived Essentialism

Perceived category entitativity.

Cognitive stereotype content.

Perceived category essentialism.

Mutual relationships among the three variables.

Biased Language Use

(1) Biases in linguistic labeling.

(a) Biases in label content.

(b) Biases in the linguistic form of labels.

Section summary.

The role of biased labeling in the consensualization of social category cognition.

(2) Biases in describing behaviors and characteristics of categorized individuals.

(a) Biases in communication content: What information about categorized individuals is communicated.

Section summary.

(b) Biases in linguistic form of communications about categorized individuals.

Section summary and integration.

General Discussion: Contributions, Implications and Future Directions

Contributions: The Role of Language Use in the Consensualization of Social-Category Stereotypes

Practical implications

Conclusion

Literature

 

 

 

Keywords

Stereotypes; prejudice; discrimination; linguistic bias; social categorization; language; communication; entitativity; essentialism.

 

About the Authors

Authors biographical information:

Personal website: Camiel J. Beukeboom

Personal website: Christian Burgers

MEDIA LITERACY                                                                                                

Title & Authors

Reviewing Media Literacy Intervention Studies for Validity

W. James Potter (University of California at Santa Barbara, USA)

Chan Thai (Santa Clara University, USA)

Highlights

 

• The designs of published studies claiming to test media literacy interventions were analyzed to determine how the conceptual foundation was constructed in each study and whether the study was designed based on those conceptual foundations to determine content and face validity.

• A total of 88 studies were selected after a series of electronic searches of studies that used the term “media literacy intervention” in their keyword lists, titles, and abstracts.

A meaning analysis found that 22 studies (25.0%) provided no conceptual foundation for media literacy, and 21 (23.9%) used an existing definition of media literacy. Despite there being hundreds of definitions for media literacy in the literature, the authors of the remaining 45 studies (51.1%) presented their own definition for media literacy.

• The assessment of validity found that none of the studies presented a test of media literacy that completely captured the elements in their definitions of media literacy, so the content validity of this literature was judged as poor.

• The evaluation of face validity uncovered many problems in a lack of correspondence between what authors intended to measure and what they actually measured.

• The most prevalent discrepancy was with measures of skills where authors frequently measured beliefs about study participants’ levels of skills rather than taking measures of actual performance.

• We pose a series of three questions that illuminate the current nature of the media literacy intervention literature as well as serve to guide future designers of such studies.

Abstract

This study is an examination of validity in published articles that have provided tests of the effectiveness of media literacy interventions. We identified 88 published tests of media literacy interventions then analyzed their content using five coding variables that indicated the degree to which authors of those studies established basic validity. We first conducted a meaning analysis to identify the definitions that authors of those studies presented for media literacy. Then we used those definitions to determine the extent to which those authors provided a complete (content validity) and accurate (face validity) operationalization in the design of their measures.

Download

 

open access verde 

 

Reviewing Media Literacy Intervention Studies for Validity

W. James Potter and Chan Thai

Keywords: Media literacy interventions; validity; meaning analysis; explication; critical analysis;

 

  Filesize 400.67 KB Download 92

 

 

Content

 


I. The Criterion of Validity in Social Science Research
   A. Content Validity

   B. Face Validity

II. Meaning Analysis of Media Literacy

III. Method
   A. Selecting Media Literacy Intervention Studies

   B. Coding Variables
      Media literacy definitions cited
      Focal definition of media literacy
      Definitional elements
      Content validity
      Face validity

   C. Reliability

IV. Results
   A. Presentation of Meaning

   B. Definitional Elements

   C. Content Validity

   D. Face Validity

V. Discussion
   A. Reasonable Standard
      1. Conceptual foundation
      2. Measures of media literacy

   B. Important Questions
      1. Basic research study or evaluation study?
      2. Persuasion or empowerment perspective?
      3. Skills as performances or as beliefs?

VI. Conclusion

 

 

Keywords

Media literacy interventions, validity, meaning analysis, explication, critical analysis.

About the Authors

Authors biographical information:

Personal website: W. James Potter

Personal website: Chan Thai

HEALTH COMMUNICATION                                                                                                

Title & Authors

Communicating Uncertainty During Public Health Emergency Events: A Systematic Review

 

Pradeep Sopory1, Ashleigh M. Day1, Julie M. Novak1, Stine Eckert1, Lillian Wilkins1, Donyale R. Padgett1, Jane P. Noyes2, Fatima A. Barakji1, Juan Liu1, Beth N. Fowler1, Javier B. Guzman-Barcenas1, Anna Nagayko3, Jacob J. Nickell1, Damecia Donahue1, Kimberly Daniels4, Tomas Allen5, Nyka Alexander5, Marsha L. Vanderford5, Gaya M. Gamhewage5

 

1 Wayne State University, Detroit, USA; 2 Bangor University, Bangor, UK; 3 Independent Researcher; 4 George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA; 5 World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland

 

Highlights

• Coverage of published studies, grey literature, media reports from all United Nations languages (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, Spanish).

• Synthesis of findings across four methods: Quantitative-comparison groups; Quantitative-descriptive survey; Qualitative; and Mixed-method and case study.

• Uncertainty is related to multiple facets, and is both uncertainty information conveyed in a message as well as uncertainty experienced.

• Public often experiences uncertainty due to lack of information; for its reduction, it actively seeks information from all available sources.

• Public should receive explicit, consistent, clearly understood uncertainty information speedily from authorities.

• Uncertainty information leads uniformly to desirable results for the public but for some communities it may sometimes cause negative outcomes.

• Vulnerable communities receive messages in uncertainty-filled lives due to poverty and experience uncertainty not just because of an event.

• Stakeholders such as experts, policy makers, medical/healthcare workers, and media professionals experience uncertainty and also can misunderstand uncertainty information.

 

Abstract

To answer the question, What are the best ways to communicate uncertainties to public audiences, at-risk communities, and stakeholders during public health emergency events? we conducted a systematic review of published studies, grey literature, and media reports in English and other United Nations (UN) languages Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian, and Spanish. Almost 2900 English and 8600 other UN languages titles and abstracts were scanned of which 33 English and 13 other UN languages data-based primary studies were selected, which were classified into four methodological streams: Quantitative-comparison groups; Quantitative-descriptive survey; Qualitative; and Mixed-method and case-study. Study characteristics (study method, country, emergency type, emergency phase, at-risk population) and study findings (in narrative form) were extracted from individual studies. The findings were synthesized within methodological streams and evaluated for certainty and confidence. These within-method findings were next synthesized across methodological streams to develop an overarching synthesis of findings. The findings showed that country coverage focused on high and middle-income countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and Oceania, and the event most covered was infectious disease followed by flood and earthquake. The findings also showed that uncertainty in public health emergency events is a multi-faceted concept with multiple components. There is universal agreement, with some exceptions, that communication to the public should include explicit information about event uncertainties, and this information must be consistent and presented in an easy to understand format. Additionally, uncertainty related to events requires a distinction between uncertainty information and uncertainty experience. At-risk populations experience event uncertainty in lives full of uncertainties from other sources. Event uncertainty is experienced and uncertainty information may be understood and misunderstood in the same general ways by the public, experts, and policy makers. Experience of event uncertainty may be a defining feature for media professionals as well due to contradictory and inconsistent information in the environment.

Download

 

open access verde 

 Communicating Uncertainty During Public Health Emergency Events: A Systematic Review

 

 

Pradeep Sopory1, Ashleigh M. Day1, Julie M. Novak1, Stine Eckert1, Lillian Wilkins1, Donyale R. Padgett1, Jane P. Noyes2, Fatima A. Barakji1, Juan Liu1, Beth N. Fowler1, Javier B. Guzman-Barcenas1, Anna Nagayko3, Jacob J. Nickell1, Damecia Donahue1, Kimberly Daniels4, Tomas Allen5, Nyka Alexander5, Marsha L. Vanderford5, Gaya M. Gamhewage5

1 Wayne State University, Detroit, USA; 2 Bangor University, Bangor, UK; 3 Independent Researcher; 4 George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA; 5 World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland

 

 

Keywords: Uncertainty; Risk communication; Disaster communication; Public health emergency events;

 

  Filesize 0 B Download 7

 

 

Content

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.2 Objective

2.0 METHOD

2.1 Process Design for Evidence Synthesis

2.2 Determining Study Methodology of Data-based Primary Studies

2.3 English and Other United Nations Languages

2.4 Information Sources for Literature Search

2.5 Literature Search Strategy, Search Terms, and Search Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

2.6 Article/ Report Selection

2.7 Quality Appraisal of Selected Individual Studies

2.8 Extraction of Data from Selected Individual Studies

2.9 Quality Assurance of Extraction of Data from Individual Studies

2.10 Synthesis of Findings

3.0 RESULTS

3.1 Study Selection

3.2 Study Characteristics

3.3 Quality Appraisal of Individual Studies

3.4 Synthesis of Findings Within Methodological Stream and Evaluation of Certainty and Confidence

3.5 Synthesis of Findings Across Methodological Streams

4.0 DISCUSSION

4.1 Findings from Present Review Vis-a-Vis Findings from Existing Reviews

4.2 Suggestions for Practice

4.3 Research Gaps in the Reviewed Literature

4.4 Implications for Theory

4.5 Limitations of the Present Review

4.6 Conclusion

5.0 REFERENCES

COPYRIGHTS AND REPOSITORIES

 

 

 

Keywords

Uncertainty; Risk communication; Disaster communication; Public health emergency events.

 

About the Authors

Authors biographical information (Authors are listed in article order):

Personal website: Pradeep Sopory

Personal website: Ashleigh M. Day

Personal website: Julie M. Novak

Personal website: Stine Eckert

Personal website: Lillian Wilkins

Personal website: Donyale R. Padgett

Personal website: Jane P. Noyes

Personal website: Fatima A. Barakji

Personal website: Juan Liu

Personal website: Beth N. Fowler

Personal website: Javier B. Guzman-Barcenas

Personal website: Anna Nagayko

Personal website: Jacob J. Nickell

Personal website: Damecia Donahue

Personal website: Kimberly Daniels

Personal website: Tomas Allen

Personal website: Nyka Alexander

Personal website: Marsha Vanderford

Personal website: Gaya M. Gamhewage

 

JoomShaper