The Impact of Cancer Therapy Media Presentation On the Audience: A Framing Analysis

Theoretical Background and research questions/hypothesis:  Mass media in general and television in particular are an important source of health information for the public. Since journalists translate medical knowledge for the audience in different presentation formats, it is relevant to have a look on the depiction of medical issues in the media and their effects on the recipients. Journalists provide an individual construction of arguments to give a specific opinion about an issue; this corresponds to the framing approach. A frame can be defined as a network of judgments/ a central idea; it medially occurs by means of selection and salience of issues, words, ideas and arguments, with simultaneously ignoring other facts (Entman, Matthes, & Pellicano, 2008). The research field shows that the framing of media messages evokes an impact on the audience. The depiction of risks and benefits, as well as negative and positive judgments has an effect on recipients, they adopt opinions presented by the media (Shen, and Dillard 2007; Rivers et al, 2005; Donovan, and Jalleh 2000). The aim of the presentation is to show what effects two different framed video clips of cancer research have on the audience.

Methods:  The two different frames were tested in a three-week online panel on 338 recipients (two experimental groups (EG1= 167; EG2= 171) for the two frames, one film clip per week). In the study the media frames are the independent variable, the audience frames the dependent variable. The frames were selected on basis of a content analysis with 303 film clips about molecular medicine in German science TV shows. This content analysis helped to identify different frames, such as “Social debate about medical risks” dealing with a lot of risks, negative judgments and future prospects. The three film clips about cancer research belonging to this frame discuss preventive medical checkups on cancer and negotiate their success. The second frame is called “Scientific-medical benefits of basic research” and shows benefits and positive aspects. The three video clips representing this frame deal with new therapeutic options like nanotechnology to combat brain tumors. The participants were questioned about their perception of therapeutic options. In particular they answered questions about frame elements like problems, causal attributions, judgments and future prospects. To analyze the recipient frames a content analysis of all answers will be used and the answers of EG1 and EG2 compared.

Results:  Preliminary analysis occupy that the majority of the participants take over the media frames. It emerges that the first frame dealing with risks and negative aspects of cancer research evokes negative judgments of the recipients, whereas recipients of the second frame will gain a positive view on cancer research and therapies. Covariates such as the scientific knowledge, involvement and socio-demographic characteristics will be tested.

Conclusions:  Different journalistic presentation formats evoke different opinions on the recipients’ side. Especially in the important field of cancer research and their therapeutic options, mass media content can develop an influence on the behavior of the affected persons.

Implications for research and/or practice: The way the media presents medical issues is important and evokes effects on recipients.