Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Communication Inquiry
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Petersen, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Portrayal of Research into Genetic-Based Differences of Sex and Sexual Orientation: A Study of "Popular" Science Journals, 1980 to 1997

Alan Petersen

Genetic explanations of human differences became increasingly popular in the 1980s and 1990s. Unfortunately, there has been relatively little analysis of how the media portray the findings of genetic research and how this is likely to affect the public's perceptions of genetics and people's responses to those who are defined as genetically different. This study is based on a discourse analysis of articles reporting research on genetic-based differences of sex and sexual orientation that appeared in a selection of "popular" (i.e., mass circulation) science journals published between 1980 and 1997. The study uncovered a number of enduring images of genetic research and genetic differences that underlie shifts in research foci evident during this period. The article discusses the nature of these images and implicit gender and heterosexist biases and argues the case for further analysis of how the media portrays genetic difference.

Journal of Communication Inquiry, Vol. 23, No. 2, 163-182 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0196859999023002005
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
A. Petersen, A. Anderson, S. Allan, and C. Wilkinson
Opening the black box: scientists' views on the role of the news media in the nanotechnology debate
Public Understanding of Science, September 1, 2009; 18(5): 512 - 530.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
R. Dingwall and M. Aldridge
Television wildlife programming as a source of popular scientific information: a case study of evolution
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 131 - 152.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
B. R. Bates
Public culture and public understanding of genetics: a focus group study
Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2005; 14(1): 47 - 65.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 CMAJHome page
T. M. Bubela and T. A. Caulfield
Do the print media "hype" genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers
Can. Med. Assoc. J., April 27, 2004; 170(9): 1399 - 1407.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Men and MasculinitiesHome page
A. Petersen
Research on Men and Masculinities: Some Implications of Recent Theory for Future Work
Men and Masculinities, July 1, 2003; 6(1): 54 - 69.
[Abstract] [PDF]