Do Policy Statements on Media Effects Faithfully Represent the Science?

Abstract

Professional advocacy associations such as the American Psychological Association (APA) and American Academy of Pediatrics commonly release policy statements regarding science and behavior. Policymakers and the general public may assume that such statements reflect objective conclusions, but their actual fidelity in representing science remains largely untested. For example, in recent decades, policy statements related to media effects have been released with increasing regularity. However, they have often provoked criticisms that they do not adequately reflect the state of the science on media effects. The News Media, Public Education and Public Policy Committee (a standing committee of APA’s Division 46, the Media Psychology and Technology division) reviewed all publicly available policy statements on media effects produced by professional organizations and evaluated them using a standardized rubric. It was found that current policy statements tend to be more definitive than is warranted by the underlying science, and often ignore conflicting research results. These findings have broad implications for policy statements more generally, outside the field of media effects. In general, the committee suggests that professional organizations run the risk of misinforming the public when they release policy statements that do not acknowledge debates and inconsistencies in a field, or limitations of methodology. In formulating policy statements, advocacy organizations may wish to focus less on claiming consensus and more on acknowledging areas of agreement, areas of disagreement, and limitations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 49 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.