Using open-ended interviews, researchers identified twelve themes concerning Web and e-mail use by science writers. The Web and e-mail “speed information” between sources, reporters, editors, and audiences. “Skepticism” about information quality leads science writers to urge practices of “good judgment” by Web users. A diagram illustrates ways “speeds information” is changing journalistic work. Suggestions concerning future research on diffusion of information are offered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aborn, M. 1988. Telescience: Scientific communication in the information age. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science495:10-13.
2.
Adams, D. A., and R. R. Nelson. 1992. Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly16 (2): 227-48.
3.
Althaus, S. 1997. Computer-mediated communication in the university classroom: An experiment with on-line discussions. Communication Education46 (3): 158-74.
4.
Boyatzis, R. E. 1998. Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Bunting, S., and C. Russell. 1998. Use of electronic mail for concept synthesis: An international collaborative project. Qualitative Health Research8 (1): 128.
6.
Cassell, M. M., C. Jackson, and B. Cheuvront. 1998. Health communication on the Internet: An effective channel for health behavior change? Journal of Health Communication3 (1): 71-78.
7.
Cerf, V. 2000. Cerf’s up into the new millennium. Available from http://www.wcom.com/about_the_company/cerfs_up/.
8.
Chamberlain, M. A. 1996. Health communication: Making the most of new media technologies—An international overview. Journal of Health Communication1 (1): 43-50.
9.
Cochran, W. 1997. Journalism’s new geography: How electronic tools alter the culture and practice of newsgathering. Electronic Journal of Communication 7 (2). Available from http://www.cios.org/getfile\COCHRAN_V7N297.
10.
Conrad, P. 1999. Uses of expert sources, quotes and voice in the reporting of genetics in the news. Public Understanding of Science8 (4): 285-302.
11.
Crowther, G., and G. Goldhaber. 2001. Face-to-face or e-mail: The medium makes a difference. Communication World18 (5): 23-26.
12.
Davenport, L., F. Fico, and D. Weinstock. 1996. Computers in newsrooms of Michigan’s newspapers. Newspaper Research Journal17 (3/4): 14-29.
13.
Dimmick, J., S. Kline, and L. Stafford. 2000. The gratification niches of personal e-mail and the telephone: Competition, displacement, and complementarity. Communication Research27 (2): 227-48.
14.
Dorman, S. 1998. Using e-mail to enhance instruction. Journal of School Health68 (6): 260.
15.
Duke, S. 2002. Wired science: Use of World Wide Web and e-mail in science public relations. Public Relations Review28 (3): 311-24.
16.
Dutton, W. H., E. M. Rogers, and S. H. Jun. 1987. Diffusion and social impacts of personal computers. Communication Research14 (2): 219-50.
17.
Esrock, S. L., and G. B. Leichty. 1998. Social responsibility and corporate Web pages: Self presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review24 (3): 305-19.
18.
Ey, C. 1995. Message is clear: E-mail use skyrocketing. Business Journal (Phoenix)16 (5): 25-26.
19.
Flaherty, L. M., K. J. Pearce, and R. B. Rubin. 1998. The Internet and face-to-face communication: Not functional alternatives. Communication Quarterly46 (3): 250-68.
20.
Garrison, B. 1995. On-line services as reporting tools: Daily newspaper use of commercial databases in 1994. Newspaper Research Journal16 (4): 74-86.
21.
———. 1997. On-line services, Internet in 1995 newsrooms. Newspaper Research Journal18 (3/4): 79-93.
22.
———. 2000. Journalists’ perceptions of online information gathering problems. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly77 (3): 500-14.
23.
Garton, L., and B. Wellman. 1995. Social impacts of electronic mail in organizations: A review of the research literature. Communication Yearbook18:434-53.
24.
Gefen, D., and D. W. Straub. 1997. Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly21 (4): 389-401.
25.
Graves, B. 2000. Gathering context and contacts. Nieman Reports54 (4): 63.
26.
Grupp, R., and W. Margaritis. 2000. Face off: Who should own the Web site? Public Relations Strategist5 (4): 30-35.
27.
Harris, L. M., ed. 1995. Health and the new media. Technologies transforming personal and public health. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
Houston, B. 1999. Computer-assisted reporting: A practical guide. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
29.
Howard, P. E. N., L. Raine, and S. Jones. 2001. Days and nights on the Internet: The impact of a diffusing technology. American Behavioral Scientist45 (3): 383-404.
30.
Hunter, J., and M. Allen. 1992. Adaptation to electronic mail. Journal of Applied Communication Research20 (3): 254-74.
31.
Johnson, M. 1997. Public relations and technology: Practitioners’ perspectives. Journal of Public Relations Research9 (3): 213-36.
32.
Kerlinger, F., and H. Lee. 2000. Foundations of behavioral research. 4th ed. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt College Publishers.
33.
Ketterer, S. 1998. Teaching students how to evaluate and use online resources. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly52 (4): 4-14.
34.
Kiesler, S., J. Siegel, and T. McGuire. 1984. Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist39 (10): 1123-34.
35.
Lievrouw, L., and K. Carley. 1990. Changing patterns of communication among scientists in an era of telescience. Technology in Society12 (4): 457-77.
36.
Marlow, E. 1996. Electronic public relations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
37.
McMillan, S. 1999. Health communication and the Internet: Relations between interactive characteristics and the medium and site creators, content and purpose. Health Communication11 (4): 375-90.
38.
Meadows, J. 1986. The growth of science popularization: A historical sketch. Impact of Science on Technology36:341-46.
39.
Middleberg/Ross. 2000. The seventh annual Middleberg/Ross survey of media in the wired world. Available from http://www.middleberg.com/.
40.
Minsky, B. D., and D. B. Marin. 1999. Why faculty members use e-mail: The role of individual differences in channel choice. Journal of Business Communication36 (2): 194-217.
41.
Morse, J. M. 1994. Emerging from the data: The cognitive processes of analysis in qualitative inquiry. In Critical issues in qualitative research methods, edited by J. M. Morse, 23-43. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42.
Nelkin, D. 1995. Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. New York: Freeman.
43.
Nielsen/Net Ratings. 2002. Hot off the Net. Available from http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/.
44.
Patton, M. Q. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
45.
Phillips, S., and E. Eisenberg. 1993. Strategic uses of electronic mail in organizations. Electronic Journal of Communication 3 (2). Available from http://www.cios.org/getfile\PHILLIPS_V3N293.
46.
Poindexter, P. M., and M. E. McCombs. 2000. Research in mass communication. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
47.
Reagan, J. 1989. New technologies and news use: Adopters vs. nonadopters. Journalism Quarterly66:871-87.
48.
———. 1991. Technology adoption: Is satisfaction the best predictor? Journalism Quarterly68:325-32.
49.
Rice, R. E., and D. Case. 1983. Computer-based messaging in the university: A description of use and utility. Journal of Communication33:131-52.
50.
Rogers, C. 2000. Making the audience a key participant in the science communication process. Science and Engineering Ethics6:553-57.
51.
Rogers, E. M. [1983] 1995. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
52.
Schaefermeyer, M. J., and E. H. Sewell. 1988. Communicating by electronic mail. American Behavioral Scientist32 (2): 112-23.
53.
Schmitz, J., and J. Fulk. 1991. Organizational colleagues, media richness, and electronic mail. Communication Research18 (4): 487-523.
54.
Selnow, G. 1988. Using interactive computer to communicate scientific information. American Behavioral Scientist32 (2): 124-35.
55.
Singer, J. 2001. The metro wide web: Change in newspapers’ gate keeping role online. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly78 (1): 65-80.
56.
Splichal, S. 1993. How Florida newspapers are dealing with access to computerized government information. Newspaper Research Journal13/14 (4/1): 73-83.
57.
Sproull, L., and S. Kiesler. 1991. Computers, networks, and work. Scientific American265 (3): 116-23.
58.
Steinfield, C. 1983. Communicating via electronic mail: Patterns and predictors of use in organizations. Ph.D. diss., University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
59.
———. 1986a. Computer-mediated communication in an organizational setting: Explaining task-related and socioemotional uses. In Communication yearbook, vol. 9, edited by M. L. McLaughlin, 777-804. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
60.
———. 1986b. Computer-mediated communication systems. In Annual review of information science and technology, vol. 21, edited by M. E. Williams, 167-202. White Plains, NY: Knowledge Industry.
61.
Stempel, G., and R. Stewart. 2000. The Internet provides both opportunities and challenges for mass communication researchers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly77 (3): 541-48.
62.
Sundar, S., S. Narayan, R. Obregon, and C. Uppal. 1998. Does Web advertising work? Memory for print vs. online media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly75 (4): 822-35.
63.
Sundar, S., and C. Nass. 2001. Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication51 (1): 52-72.
64.
Thomsen, S. 1995. Using online databases in corporate issues management. Public Relations Review21 (2): 103-22.
65.
Trumbo, C., K. Sprecker, R. Dumlao, G. Yun, and S. Duke. 2001. Use of e-mail and the Web by science writers. Science Communication22 (4): 347-78.
66.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 2000. Falling through the Net: Toward digital inclusion. Available from http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/digitaldivide/index.html.
67.
Walsh, J. P., S. Kucker, N. G. Maloney, and S. Gabbay. 2000. Connecting minds: Computer-mediated communication and scientific work. Journal of the American Society for Information Science51 (14): 1295-1305.
68.
Weise, E. 1997. Does the Internet change news reporting? Media Studies Journal11 (2): 159-63.
69.
Wendland, M. 1996. Using the Internet: A crucial skill for journalists. RTNDA Communicator50 (9): 38-44.
