![]() ![]() Reference Garza, Stover, Ohlhorst, Field, Steinbrook, Rowe, Woteki and Campbell2019). ![]() Reference Evans, Meslin, Marteau and Caulfield2011 Caulfield Reference Caulfield2018), biobanking and personalized medicine (Petersen Reference Petersen2009 Marcon, Bieber, and Caulfield Reference Caulfield2018) and nutrition (Garza et al. Reference Caulfield, Rachul, Zarzeczny and Walter2010), nanotechnology (Maynard Reference Maynard2007), genetics and genomics research (Evans et al. Numerous empirical studies report finding evidence of hype in a variety of fields, including stem cell research (Mason and Mazotti Reference Mason and Manzotti2009 Caulfield Reference Caulfield2010 Kamenova and Caulfield Reference Kamenova and Caulfield2015), artificial intelligence (Hopgood Reference Hopgood2003 Brennen, Howard, and Nielsen Reference Brennen, Schulz, Howard and Nielsen2019), neuroimaging (Caulfield et al. ![]() Hype, broadly speaking, involves an exaggeration, such as exaggerations about the significance or certainty of research findings the promise, safety, or future application of research programs or technological products or the state of evidence about theories or models. Reference Bubela, Nisbet, Borchelt, Brunger, Critchley, Einsiedel and Geller2009 Besley and Tanner Reference Besley and Tanner2011 Caulfield and Condit Reference Caulfield and Condit2012 Rinaldi Reference Rinaldi2012 Master and Resnik Reference Master and Resnik2013 Weingart Reference Weingart, Jamieson, Kahan and Scheufele2017 Medvecky and Leach Reference Medvecky and Leach2019). Many science studies scholars have claimed that there is a prevalence of “hype” in science communication and that it is problematic (Caulfield Reference Caulfield2004 Bubela Reference Bubela2006 Bubela et al. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |