Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Public Understanding of Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Turner, J. Z.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

I don't want to see the pictures: science writing and the visibility of animal experiments

J. Z. Turner

Crystallography Department, Birkbeck College, London WC1E 7HX, UK, j.turner{at}mail.cryst.bbk.ac.uk

The use of animals in research and development is one of the areas of science (human reproductive research and technology is perhaps another) where the fact that current practices are sanctioned in legislation does not prevent them from being controversial. This article examines the visibility of this issue in terms of the way science writers and scientific research papers report research that involves animals. Three journals with a scientific readership (Nature, Science, and New Scientist) and two journals with a mixed scientist/nonscientist readership (The Economist and The Times Higher Education Supplement) were examined. I have looked at the frequency of reports, the amount of experimental detail given, and the use of language, illustrations, and humor. Common features of these reports are the paucity of detail about the procedures carried out on the animals, their welfare and living conditions, and the numbers of animals used. However, there are significant differences between the journals with a "scientist" readership and those with a "mixed" readership in their readiness to debate the moral issue involved in human uses of animals. From these data the conclusion can be drawn that public debate might be improved by increasing the visibility of the animals themselves in reports of research involving their use.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 7, No. 1, 27-40 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/096366259800700103


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?