Science has for centuries been a powerful tool for addressing some of humanity’s problems: disease outbreaks, food crises, pest attacks, and so forth. For the most part, these problems are complex, and so science journalists have the task of ably communicating them in the simplest way possible for the diverse audience to understand.
In this guide, I share some tips on science reporting, which I picked up when I had the opportunity to visit the Videnkab – a Danish science news outlet – as a Danida fellow.
First things first.
You need to understand what scientific evidence is. Science is about reporting facts – and facts are supported by evidence. Collecting evidence is done by skilled person and the findings undergo critical evaluation. Citing evidence in your story is crucial because it strengthens the quality of your reporting.
Scientific evidence can be divided into “high evidence” and “low evidence.”
Right at the apex, the “high evidence” includes the following:
- Review papers: Scientists carrying out rigorous analysis of multiple research studies to reach an evidence-based conclusion.
- Randomised controlled trials: A population is chosen at random from a control group.
- Observation of cohort or population studies: follows a group of people over time to see how their characteristics (such as sex, age group, gender etc.) or exposures relate to future health outcomes.
- Laboratory and case studies: Samples are analysed in a laboratory to monitor situations.
At the base of the pyramid is an “expert opinion” where qualified personnel give information to a journalist based on their professional experience, despite not doing a specific study on the subject.
Tips on science reporting.
- Find the right expert for your story.
- Be careful when selecting the right experts—and avoid self-appointed experts.
- Start with scientists from credible universities or research firms.
- Check if the research is published in a scientific journal
- A university report that has not been peer-reviewed is not a guarantee.
- A single study is not the ultimate truth. Sometimes news outlets publish conflicting studies.
- Solid knowledge is built over decades. A new study is part of a large accumulation of knowledge.
- Generally, the more studies point to the same conclusion, the greater the likelihood it’s correct.
- Ask if the new study is consistent with the previous research.
- Be extra critical if the study points in the opposite direction (from the prior research).
- If the research points to a different direction, which can be confusing, ask the authorities for a recommendation on the study.
- Avoid cherry-picking studies simply because they back your “story angle.” Different groups–like politicians, lobbyists, etc.—may have an agenda.
- Always talk to at least one independent scientist.
- Go beyond a press release.
- Examine any exaggerated claims.
- Share the actual study with an independent researcher for assessment
- Talk to at least one who was not involved in the study.
- Be aware of conflict of interest.
- Scientists and universities may also have biases.
- Reports by organisations may lack objectivity.
- Funder of a particular research is usually stated at the end. Don’t forget that.
- The study should clearly state if there are any potential areas of conflict of interest.
- Avoid false balance.
- Whereas balance and objectivity are basic principles in news reporting, where conflicting parties are equally given the chance to speak, unfortunately, this is not always the case in science reporting. False balance means that a study or scientist is weighted highly as knowledge built over decades.
- In case of conflicting views in research, examine whether one has greater scientific support than the other.
- Make it clear in your story that one scientist speaks based on scientific census while the other conducted a single controversial study that reached a different conclusion
- Beware of common mistakes when using statistics.
- You risk spreading misinformation if you confuse statistical coincidence.
- Statistical coincidence includes correlation, which is the connection between two variables; causal relationship, or causality, is the direct cause-and-effect connection between variables.
- Ask the scientist if there is a likelihood of a causal relationship
- Avoid exaggerating.
- This is common when research involves numbers.
- Know the difference between absolute and relative numbers.
- Absolute number refers to a precise count of an item. Relative numbers are dependent on others numbers; they offer meaningful comparison when the actual quantities are unknown; they also give context.
- Be open about uncertainties.
- Be transparent about uncertainties. It makes your story credible.
- If there are any uncertainties, indicate them in the headlines and not at the bottom. Some people may not read the whole story.
- Ask the scientist behind the study and an independent expert on the uncertainties to be included and what they mean for the conclusion.
- Use the right diction, especially on studies with solid conclusions. Take for instance, you could say “this study suggests…” instead of saying “science says…”
- Choose the right case study—and carefully.
- News consumers mostly remember a character’s personal story, when there is an emotional appeal to it.
- Choose the right case studies in line with the research.
- Make it clear if the case study is an anomaly that is not supported by scientific evidence.
- Ask yourself: What kind of research methods was used?
- Acquaint yourself with various research methods: surveys, field studies and animal experiments.
- Ask the research the strengths and weaknesses of the study that was used.
- Ask these critical questions: How is the data stored? How comprehensive is the study? Can the researcher rule out errors in the study findings? Can they clarify in case there are uncertainties in the study?
John Okot is a journalist and a Danida fellow. Credit: Videnkab
