, Volume 15, Issue 3–4, pp 241–255 | Cite as

The popularization of science II: Patterns of topical coverage

  • J. S. Kidd


Topical coverage by major scientific discipline on the part of six popular monthly magazines is compared to expected values based on the number of doctoral graduates per discipline. A major discrepancy is found in the relatively sparse coverage of chemistry. A case study of advances in catalysis is used to demonstrate that there are newsworthy developments in chemistry that could provide copious source materials. Speculative explanations for the relatively scant attention given to chemistry are advanced. The neglect of chemistry by the popular media is seen as a possible problem area for science educators who may depend on supplementary readings at all levels of instruction including informal adult education.


Catalysis Science Educator Source Material Scientific Discipline Problem Area 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. S. KIDD, The popularization of science: Some basic measures,Scientometrics, 14 (1988) 127.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. NELKIN,Selling Science, NY, W. H. Freeman & Co., 1987, see especially p. 113.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. C. JEROME, Gee Whiz! Is that all there is, in:Scientists and Journalists, S. M. FRIEDMAN, S. DUNWOODY, C. L. ROGERS (Eds), NY, The Free Press, 1986 (Chapter 11).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. E. GRUNIG, Communication of scientific information to nonscientists, in:Progress in Communication Science, B. DERWIN, M. J. VOIGHT (Eds), Norwood, NJ, Ablex Publishing Co., 1980 (Chapter 5).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Publication ofScience Digest has been re-initiated by the same organization that now publishesDiscover. The original pocket-sized format has been restored.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    U.S. DEPARTMENT oF EDUCATION,Digest of Educational Statistics, Washington, DC, USGPO. 1986, p. 124ff.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    E. GARFIELD, (Ed.),SCI Journal Citation Reports, (Vol. 20), Philadelphia, Institute for Scientific Information, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. S. KIDD,.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. V. LEWENSTEIN, Was there really a science ‘boom’?Science, Technology and Human Values, 12 (Spring, 1987) 29.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    See e.g. J. M. LEHN, Supramolecular chemistry: Receptors, catalysts, and carriers,Science, 227 (22 February, 1985), 849, and G. A. SOMARJAI, Surface science and catalysis, ibid.,Science, 902.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. De SOLLA PRICE, Networks of scientific papers,Science, 149 (30 July, 1965), 510. See also D. CRANE,Invisible Colleges, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1972, pp. 12, 80–82.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    See for example, D. J. CRUMP,Creatures Small and Furry, Washington, DC, National Geographic Society, 1983.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. EVERED, M. O'CONNOR (Eds),Communicating Science to the Public, New York, NY, John Wiley and Sons, 1987, (see esp. pp. 19–40).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. E. YAGER, A new focus for school science: S/T/S,School Science and Mathematics, 88 (March 1988), 181, and P. A. RUBBA, The current state of research in pre-college STS education,Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society, 7 (1987) 248.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. NORAAS, The Science Curriculum Improvement Study — Through the eyes of teachers,School Science and Mathematics, 88 (April, 1988) 284.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. S. Kidd
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Library and Information ServicesUniversity of MarylandCollege Park(USA)

Personalised recommendations