On November 15, the Federation of Behavioral, Psychological, and Cognitive Sciences hosted a Forum on Research Management meeting (FORM) to discuss the current state of the relationship between behavioral scientists and media and ways to improve the quality of that relationship. 

Summary of Event

Howard Egeth, Ph.D, Vice President of the Federation, moderated this event and made introductory comments stating that we need to work to have the public gain a positive opinion of the behavioral sciences, especially since most people still seem to think that psychology is mostly “common sense” and/or based in psychoanalysis.  He suggested that working with reporters in effective ways may usher in a new, and more accurate, view of the field.

Philip Zimbardo, Ph.D., based his presentation on the theme of “giving psychology away to the public” and suggested that researchers make it a priority to get interesting work out to the media.  He has had a wealth of experience with the media and suggested that others are resistant to talk to the media for these reasons: 1) Too modest 2) Fear the negative connotation of doing “pop psychology” 3) Don’t know how to approach the media, 4) Receive no credit for doing so in academia, and 5) Fear the media will get it wrong.  He suggested that you can also think of the internet as a form of media and noted his website (www.prisonexp.org) is visited very frequently.

Mary Hanson pointed out that news programs tend to focus strongly on topics like sex and violence, leaving researchers feeling that they shouldn’t even bother to publicize their work.  She said that NSF needs to be accountable to the public because it is a federal agency.  Hanson also echoed Egeth’s earlier comments:  Since people feel they don’t understand the life and physical sciences, they are cautious about what they claim to know.  However, people feel “sure” that they know and understand psychological principles, which can hurt us in a number of ways.  For that reason, the behavioral sciences present a unique media challenge.

Hanson talked about the recent series that the TV program Good Morning America (GMA) did entitled, “You Paid for It”, in which they targeted research funded by federal agencies that GMA felt was a waste of money.   Some of the criticism was directed at behavioral science work funded by NSF.  The principal investigator of targeted research was contacted by GMA but declined the interview; NSF was alerted to the series after it was about to go on the air.  She showed us a tape of NSF’s Social Psychology Program Director Steve Breckler, who, after the series was over, accepted an interview and attempted to set the record straight and raise awareness of the importance of funding the behavioral sciences.  Breckler’s interview gave NSF a chance to be heard and to refute the opinions voiced by the groups criticizing the research.  She said, about approaching the media, “it’s risky and hard but it’s the right thing to do.”

Michael Purdy discussed his role as mediator between university researchers and the media.  He suggested that any researcher with interesting results should approach the university public relations office first to get guidance.  He said that the typical researcher worries that the media will oversimplify results, that they will want the story quickly instead of caring if it’s accurate, and that they are too quick to assign someone expert status to get a story deadline met.  Purdy noted that while a researcher may find it unseemly to be a part of a panel of “crack pots”, at least that researcher can serve as the one voice of reason.  He also noted that science news is not necessarily interesting news – it is potentially important news.  Finally, he said that university public affairs offices wished that they were overwhelmed with researchers trying to publicize their work but that, in fact, the staff has to be aggressive in finding researchers willing to share their work.

Rhea Farberman began by saying that news happens, whether we like it or not, and that we can make the decision to help shape the news or let it go as is.  Media-initiated inquires can move rapidly; the media will want an expert to explain something at what is likely to be a bad time but it’s important to be responsive because without any expert advice, the story won’t be as accurate as it could be.  Farberman agreed that it can be intimidating to agree to talk to the press but that a helpful conversation can make a big difference in levels of accuracy on a breaking story.  If you would like to investigate becoming a media expert for the APA, you can visit this link http://www.apa.org/releases/mrs.html

Joyce Winslow said that polls reveal that people view researchers as the most credible group of individuals.  She reminded those present to keep in mind that it takes many years of focused work to obtain a Ph.D. and that a journalist has to learn to understand a particular area of research in the space of a few days.  Reporters may call several sources, and because time is of the essence, it is important to call the reporter back as soon as possible to get the interview.  Finally, she said that ethically, if a researcher says something is off the record, the reporter is required to not use that information.  If information is to be given off the record, it is important to clearly communicate that.

Peggy Girshman stated that National Public Radio (NPR) always tries to present respectable data and avoids the approach of “asking three people on the street.”  She said that she is relatively sure that NPR has the largest science desk of any media group, with three reporters who hold Ph.D.s and can talk easily to scientists as well as laypersons. Girshman noted that they use http://www.scribe.com and http://www.newswise.com to get their information because institutions (primarily universities) post information there.

She noted that radio is very different from the other media because there is no visual component, leaving the reporter to paint a mental picture.  If they can’t get someone to talk to them, there is no story to report. If a researcher publicizes a finding and leaves the country, they have to wait for that person to be available to talk to the radio interviewer in order to cover the finding.  Despite the fact that it may appear that NPR devotes a lot of airtime for stories, she said that they still feel they can’t do a story justice (the newspaper, for example, can print a fuller treatment on items of interest).  She noted also that people tune in and out, making it difficult to keep their attention.  If you have commentaries on stories you hear on NPR, feel free to contact Girshman – send a paragraph or longer via email – and she will review them.  Also if you have story ideas, feel free to contact her.

Elizabeth Ruksznis noted that the relationship between the reporter and the researcher is very important – both sides hope for trust to develop so that both will “win.”  Dateline NBC is a “news magazine” and, as such, they can expand a story and show many sides to an issue.  She said flexibility is high for them – they can do breaking news like 9/11 or they can slowly build a story until it’s just right.  It is not “live” broadcasting and in many ways that is a strong advantage for accuracy and checking of facts.  Ruksznis said that Dateline is the only news-show that she is aware of with a distinct psychology unit, and they have a Ph.D. in that unit. 

Ira Allen has worn many hats as a media representative (including covering the White House for UPI) and noted that stories on behavior are not normally front-page news.  He said that the topics that are most in demand currently are those involving: sex, animals, children, and controversial political figures..  Allen emphasized that when a reporter closes a notebook, it does not mean the interview is over –  rather, everything is on the record unless otherwise stated.  He felt that we need to show the information that we have not just to the press but also to use the information to inform public policy.  Researchers are best served when they come forward with information.

In conclusion, it should be noted that not everyone can or should talk to the media but it is better to have the information communicated to the public.  If you have something of interest to communicate, ask someone to help you or have someone else convey the information for you.  If you decide that you want to work with the media, try to develop a rapport with the reporter and check out our box of suggestions.

Related Docs: Agenda | Speaker Bios | Tips