When danger strikes: A linguistic tool for tracking America's collective response to threats.

In today's vast digital landscape, people are constantly exposed to threatening language, which attracts attention and activates the human brain's fear circuitry. However, to date, we have lacked the tools needed to identify threatening language and track its impact on human groups. To fill this gap, we developed a threat dictionary, a computationally derived linguistic tool that indexes threat levels from mass communication channels. We demonstrate this measure's convergent validity with objective threats in American history, including violent conflicts, natural disasters, and pathogen outbreaks such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, the dictionary offers predictive insights on US society's shifting cultural norms, political attitudes, and macroeconomic activities. Using data from newspapers that span over 100 years, we found change in threats to be associated with tighter social norms and collectivistic values, stronger approval of sitting US presidents, greater ethnocentrism and conservatism, lower stock prices, and less innovation. The data also showed that threatening language is contagious. In all, the language of threats is a powerful tool that can inform researchers and policy makers on the public's daily exposure to threatening language and make visible interesting societal patterns across American history.

When election expectations fail: Polarized perceptions of election legitimacy increase with accumulating evidence of election outcomes and with polarized media.

The present study, conducted immediately after the 2020 presidential election in the United States, examined whether Democrats' and Republicans' polarized assessments of election legitimacy increased over time. In a naturalistic survey experiment, people (N = 1,236) were randomly surveyed either during the week following Election Day, with votes cast but the outcome unknown, or during the following week, after President Joseph Biden was widely declared the winner. The design unconfounded the election outcome announcement from the vote itself, allowing more precise testing of predictions derived from cognitive dissonance theory. As predicted, perceived election legitimacy increased among Democrats, from the first to the second week following Election Day, as their expected Biden win was confirmed, whereas perceived election legitimacy decreased among Republicans as their expected President Trump win was disconfirmed. From the first to the second week following Election Day, Republicans reported stronger negative emotions and weaker positive emotions while Democrats reported stronger positive emotions and weaker negative emotions. The polarized perceptions of election legitimacy were correlated with the tendencies to trust and consume polarized media. Consumption of Fox News was associated with lowered perceptions of election legitimacy over time whereas consumption of other outlets was associated with higher perceptions of election legitimacy over time. Discussion centers on the role of the media in the experience of cognitive dissonance and the implications of polarized perceptions of election legitimacy for psychology, political science, and the future of democratic society.

Measuring the news and its impact on democracy.

Since the 2016 US presidential election, the deliberate spread of misinformation online, and on social media in particular, has generated extraordinary concern, in large part because of its potential effects on public opinion, political polarization, and ultimately democratic decision making. Recently, however, a handful of papers have argued that both the prevalence and consumption of "fake news" per se is extremely low compared with other types of news and news-relevant content. Although neither prevalence nor consumption is a direct measure of influence, this work suggests that proper understanding of misinformation and its effects requires a much broader view of the problem, encompassing biased and misleading-but not necessarily factually incorrect-information that is routinely produced or amplified by mainstream news organizations. In this paper, we propose an ambitious collective research agenda to measure the origins, nature, and prevalence of misinformation, broadly construed, as well as its impact on democracy. We also sketch out some illustrative examples of completed, ongoing, or planned research projects that contribute to this agenda.

Misinformation in and about science.

Humans learn about the world by collectively acquiring information, filtering it, and sharing what we know. Misinformation undermines this process. The repercussions are extensive. Without reliable and accurate sources of information, we cannot hope to halt climate change, make reasoned democratic decisions, or control a global pandemic. Most analyses of misinformation focus on popular and social media, but the scientific enterprise faces a parallel set of problems-from hype and hyperbole to publication bias and citation misdirection, predatory publishing, and filter bubbles. In this perspective, we highlight these parallels and discuss future research directions and interventions.

The ideological divide in confidence in science and participation in medical research.

In the United States, the wide ideological divergence in public confidence in science poses a potentially significant problem for the scientific enterprise. We examine the behavioral consequences of this ideological divide for Americans' contributions to medical research. Based on a mass survey of American adults, we find that engagement in a wide range of medical research activities is a function of a latent propensity to participate. The propensity is systematically higher among liberals than among conservatives. A substantial part of this ideological divide is due to conservative Americans' lower confidence in science. These findings raise important issues for the recruitment of subjects for medical studies and the generalizability of results from such studies.

[Chloroquine for COVID-19: a hype or not?] / Chloroquine bij covid-19.

In March the CEO of Tesla, Elon Musk, posted a Tweet about the possible effects of chloroquine for COVID-19. Celebrities and mainstream media joined the discussion and promoted (hydroxy-)chloroquine to a true hype and the miracle cure for COVID-19. Police surveillance was needed to protect the producer of chloroquine in the Netherlands. Was (hydroxy-)chloroquine just a hype? The first European study had many methodological issues, a misleading conclusion and was published without the peer review process. It took several weeks before better designed studies showed that (hydroxy-)chloroquine was not effective for COVID-19, after which the use of this medicine was no longer recommended. It is understandable that in a pandemic there is a high need for an effective cure, but physicians should have waited until effectiveness was demonstrated. In our opinion, the use of (hydroxy-)chloroquine for COVID-19 was indeed a hype.

[The French "pill scare": Did women go to a gynecologist more often to have an easier access to the IUD?] / La « crise des pilules ¼ en France : les femmes ont-elles davantage consulté un.e gynécologue afin d'accéder plus facilement au DIU ?

BACKGROUND: In December 2012, a media controversy about negative side-effects of oral contraceptives on women's health, also called "pill scare", broke out in France. While several analyses highlighted a change in women's contraceptive practices following this media controversy, no analysis has been conducted to determine the possible changes in their choices of health professionals and its repercussions on their contraceptive use. METHODS: Our study is based on data from three population-based cross-sectional surveys conducted in 2010, 2013 and 2016 (Fecond 2010, Fecond 2013 and Baromètre Santé 2016) that collected information on women's contraceptive practices and the specialties of the health professionals having prescribed the methods they were using. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2016, women went to a gynecologist or a midwife more often than to a general practitioner for prescription of a reversible contraceptive method. However, their changes in visiting prescribers did not explain the changes in their contraceptive practices observed over the period. In 2016, access to health professional remained largely dependent on women's socio-demographic characteristics: older ones and those from a more privileged social background or living in urban areas were more likely to consult a gynecologist for prescription of their contraceptive method. On the other hand, consultations of midwives for contraceptive prescription were more frequent among women with children and among those who relied on public health insurance alone. CONCLUSION: Following the "pill scare" that occurred in France in December 2012, the decision by some women to use the IUD instead of the pill led them to change health professionals, and also led practitioners to change their prescribing practices.

Ethical Issues Raised by the Media Portrayal of Adolescent Transplant Refusals.

Cases of adolescents in organ failure who refuse solid organ transplant are not common, but several have been discussed in the media in the United States and the United Kingdom. Using the framework developed by Buchanan and Brock for surrogate decision-making, I examine what role the adolescent should morally play when deciding about therapy for life-threatening conditions. I argue that the greater the efficacy of treatment, the less voice the adolescent (and the parent) should have. I then consider how refusals of highly effective transplant cases are similar to and different from refusals of other lifesaving therapies (eg, chemotherapy for leukemia), which is more commonly discussed in the media and medical literature. I examine whether organ scarcity and the need for lifelong immunosuppression justify differences in whether the state intervenes when an adolescent and his or her parents refuse a transplant. I argue that the state, as parens patriae, has an obligation to provide the social supports needed for a successful transplant and follow-up treatment plan, although family refusals may be permissible when the transplant is experimental or of low efficacy because of comorbidities or other factors. I conclude by discussing the need to limit media coverage of pediatric treatment refusals.

An Organ for My Child: Public Appeals for Limited Resources.

The case of Jamie Fiske and subsequent public appeals for particular children by President Ronald Reagan represent classic cases in pediatric bioethics in which parents or others publicly appealed for a donor organ for a particular child. These raise questions about the appropriate boundaries for public appeals for a limited resource for a particular child and how the press and medical community should respond to such appeals. Public appeals by parents to advocate for their child to receive a limited resource above others promote rationing by morally irrelevant factors and shift the public focus from the national shortage of organs for transplant to the needs of a particular child. Yet these appeals are understandable and will likely continue. Recognizing this, we consider appropriate responses by the media, transplant community, hospitals, and individual clinicians.

Medical conspiracy theories: cognitive science and implications for ethics.

Although recent trends in politics and media make it appear that conspiracy theories are on the rise, in fact they have always been present, probably because they are sustained by natural dispositions of the human brain. This is also the case with medical conspiracy theories. This article reviews some of the most notorious health-related conspiracy theories. It then approaches the reasons why people believe these theories, using concepts from cognitive science. On the basis of that knowledge, the article makes normative proposals for public health officials and health workers as a whole, to deal with conspiracy theories, in order to preserve some of the fundamental principles of medical ethics.

A dangerous balancing act: On matters of science, a well-meaning desire to present all views equally can be an Trojan horse for damaging falsehoods.

Journalistic impartiality is a laudable aim, but overly rigid application of unbiased reporting may do more harm than good. The issue of false balance in science reporting has severe consequences for health and the environment.

Effectiveness of a Workshop Intervention on Responsible Reporting on Suicide Among Swiss Media Professionals.

Objective: There is limited knowledge about the effects of a workshop intervention on responsible reporting on suicide (RRS) by media professionals. The study aimed to test how a workshop can shape reporting-relevant attitudes and beliefs among media professionals. Method: A pre-postintervention survey of Swiss media professionals (N = 26, 55.7% male, Mage = 38.1, SDage = 12.8, all Swiss nationals) was conducted. All participants received the same intervention and survey questions. The analytical focus was on within-person changes caused by the workshop intervention. Results: Among media professionals, the workshop intervention increased perceived knowledge sufficiency about RRS, raised awareness that RRS can save lives, decreased insecurities related to RRS, and reduced the misperception that there are no clear recommendations about RRS. Limitations: Despite the missing randomization of workshop participants, the repeated measures design allows to speak to the short-term changes in RRS. Conclusion: An RRS workshop intervention has multifaceted positive effects on media professionals. The study found no evidence for unintended effects of the intervention.

Media reporting of suicide and adherence to media guidelines.

BACKGROUND: International research consistently shows evidence for an association between sensationalised and detailed media reporting, and suicidal behaviour. AIM: This study examined the quality of media reporting of suicide and adherence to media guidelines in Ireland. METHODS: In accordance with the criteria outlined in the media guidelines for reporting suicide, 243 media articles were screened and analysed for quality of reporting of two high-profile cases of suicide and two cases of suicide that became high profile following a period of intense media coverage that occurred between September 2009 and December 2012. RESULTS: A minority of articles breached the media guidelines in relation to sensationalised language (11.8%), placement of reports on the front page of the newspaper (9.5%), publishing of inappropriate photographs (4.2%) and mention of location of suicide (2.4%), while no articles disclosed the contents of a suicide note. However, in the majority of articles analysed, journalists did not refer to appropriate support services for people vulnerable to, and at risk of suicide (75.8%) or mention wider issues that are related to suicidal behaviour (53.8%). Overemphasis of community grief (48.3%) was also common. Nearly all articles (99.2%) breached at least one guideline and 58.9% of articles breached three or more guidelines. CONCLUSION: Overall, adherence to media guidelines on reporting suicide in Ireland improved in certain key areas from September 2009 until December 2012. Nonetheless, important challenges remain. Increased monitoring by media monitoring agencies, regulators and government departments is required. Implementation should be conducted using a pro-active approach and form part of the curriculum of journalists and editors. The inclusion of guidelines for the reporting of suicidal behaviour in press codes of conduct for journalists warrants consideration.

Ivan Illich's Medical Nemesis and the 'age of the show': On the Expropriation of Death.

What Ivan Illich regarded in his Medical Nemesis as the 'expropriation of health' takes place on the surfaces and in the spaces of the screens all around us, including our cell phones but also the patient monitors and (increasingly) the iPads that intervene between nurse and patient. To explore what Illich called the 'age of the show', this essay uses film examples, like Creed and the controversial documentary Vaxxed, and the television series Nurse Jackie. Rocky's cancer in his last film (submitting to chemo to 'fight' cancer) highlights what Illich along with Petr Skrabanek called the 'expropriation of death'. In contrast to what Illich denotes as 'Umsonstigkeit' - grace or gift, given undeservedly, i.e., gratuitously - medical science tends to be tempted by what Illich terms scientistic 'black magic', taking over (expropriating) the life and the death of the patient in increasingly technological ways, a point underscored in the concluding section on the commercial prospects of xenotransplants using factory farm or mass-produced human-pig mosaics or chimeras.

Enthusiastic portrayal of 3D bioprinting in the media: Ethical side effects.

There has been a surge in mass media reports extolling the potential for using three-dimensional printing of biomaterials (3D bioprinting) to treat a wide range of clinical conditions. Given that mass media is recognized as one of the most important sources of health and medical information for the general public, especially prospective patients, we report and discuss the ethical consequences of coverage of 3D bioprinting in the media. First, we illustrate how positive mass media narratives of a similar biofabricated technology, namely the Macchiarini scaffold tracheas, which was involved in lethal experimental human trials, influenced potential patient perceptions. Second, we report and analyze the positively biased and enthusiastic portrayal of 3D bioprinting in mass media. Third, we examine the lack of regulation and absence of discussion about risks associated with bioprinting technology. Fourth, we explore how media misunderstanding is dangerously misleading the narrative about the technology.

Psychosurgery, ethics, and media: a history of Walter Freeman and the lobotomy.

At the peak of his career, Walter J. Freeman II was a celebrated physician and scientist. He served as the first chairman of the Department of Neurology at George Washington University and was a tireless advocate of surgical treatment for mental illness. His eccentric appearance, engaging personality during interviews, and theatrical demonstrations of his surgical techniques gained him substantial popularity with local and national media, and he performed more than 3000 prefrontal and transorbital lobotomies between 1930 and 1960. However, poor patient outcomes, unfavorable portrayals of the lobotomy in literature and film, and increased regulatory scrutiny contributed to the lobotomy's decline in popularity. The development of antipsychotic medications eventually relegated the lobotomy to rare circumstances, and Freeman's reputation deteriorated. Today, despite significant advancements in technique, oversight, and ethical scrutiny, neurosurgical treatment of mental illness still carries a degree of social stigma. This review presents a historical account of Walter Freeman's life and career, and the popularization of the lobotomy in the US. Additionally, the authors pay special attention to the influence of popular literature and film on the public's perception of psychosurgery. Aided by an understanding of this pivotal period in medical history, neurosurgeons are poised to confront the ethical and sociological questions facing psychosurgery as it continues to evolve.

Media Messages and Perception of Risk for Ebola Virus Infection, United States.

News media have been blamed for sensationalizing Ebola in the United States, causing unnecessary alarm. To investigate this issue, we analyzed US-focused news stories about Ebola virus disease during July 1-November 30, 2014. We found frequent use of risk-elevating messages, which may have contributed to increased public concern.