790296

research-article2018
QIXXXX10.1177/1077800418790296Qualitative InquiryMolek-Kozakowska

Visibilities of Science
Qualitative Inquiry

Making Biosciences Visible for Popular

2019, Vol. 25(4) 379­–392
© The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
Consumption: Approaching Image–Text sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1077800418790296
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800418790296

Relations in Newscientist.com Through a journals.sagepub.com/home/qix

Critical Multimodal Analysis

Katarzyna Molek-Kozakowska1

Abstract
Salience or visibility of science-related issues can be strategically projected by means of linguistic and visual resources. This
article presents a methodology for examining the relations between the textual properties of popular science discourse
and the visual features of accompanying images. The advantages of this approach are demonstrated through a multimodal
analysis of a sample of biomedical articles from New Scientist, which reveals the frequency and distribution of selected
properties of visual images, typical aspects of layout, attributed functions of the images, and their relation to the text.
Humanization, domestication, and aesthetization are dominant discursive strategies of popularity-driven science journalism.

Keywords
multimodal analysis, science journalism, image–text relations, critical discourse analysis

Introduction This alignment between science reporting and the con-

Historically, the increasing professionalization of scientists
and their reluctance to engage with the general public has
led to a corresponding increase in the importance of science
mediators (Bowler, 2009). Until the advent of social media,
science popularizers had been acquainting the public with
new discoveries through summary reports, interviews, ana-
lyses and commentaries, documentaries, graphics, and visu-
als that aimed to foster a general understanding of scientific
advancements. One of the main vehicles of science popular-
ization is science journalism, which offers a coverage of
scientific and technological developments as well as a
broad-ranging discussion of topics deemed to be of public
interest (e.g., genetic engineering, neuroscience, and cli-
mate change). Primarily, its task is to recast technical infor-
mation in words and images in a way that “accommodates”
science to people who do not have the specialized training
and vocabulary of professional scientists (Fahnestock,
1993; Trumbo, 1999). Indeed, science journalists position
themselves somewhere “between the output of the scientific
group and the supposed public of the particular branch of
media concerned” (Moirand, 2003, p. 179). However, they
also need to be able to make science-related reporting
appealing and visible, for example, by making it seem more
controversial, negative, consequential, extreme, or unex-
pected (Bell, 1991, pp. 53-57).
ventions of market-driven journalism and popular culture
(Dahlgren, 1992; McManus, 1994) serves to engage the
public and may be evidenced by the use of new genres,
story-like accounts and conversational styles, as well as
visual imagery that not only explains but also stimulates
interest and pleasure (Broks, 2006; Newton, 2001).
Newsworthiness is linked to editors’ selecting events that
are recent and can be presented as breaking news (timeli-
ness), wide in scope and scale (impact), and relevant to
readers (proximity). Newsworthy items maximize or
intensify particular aspects of an event (superlativeness),
involve conflict or drama (negativity), and concern indi-
viduals, particularly members of the elite and powerful
institutions (personalization, prominence). News that
attracts interest should be unexpected (novelty/unexpect-
edness), but still relate to the target audience’s experi-
ence, be compatible with standard schemes of coverage,
and bear some kind of cultural relevance (consonance;
Bednarek & Caple, 2012, pp. 40-45). Some scholars argue
1
University of Opole, Poland
Corresponding Author:
Katarzyna Molek-Kozakowska, Institute of English, University of Opole,
Pl. Kopernika 11, 45-040 Opole, Poland.
Email: molekk@uni.opole.pl
380
that entertainment (i.e., human-interest story, humor and
wit in presentation, and esthetic value of imagery) and
media agenda (stories selected to fit the news organiza-
tion’s own political or commercial interests) should also
be recognized as criteria of newsworthiness that drive-up
visibility (Harcup & O’Neill, 2001, p. 279).
However, as discourse analysts have noted, newswor-
thiness is not an intrinsic quality of reported events or tar-
get audiences’ agendas. Salience and visibility can be
strategically constructed in news discourse by means of
linguistic and visual resources that present an event as
more significant or spectacular that might be the case (cf.
Bednarek & Caple, 2012; Molek-Kozakowska, 2013;
Myers, 2003). Also, as linguistic analyses of journalism
have shown, strategies of emotionalization, polarization,
or simplification in news stories are increasingly common
(Machin & Mayr, 2012; Montgomery, 2007).
In this study on the visibility of biosciences, a critical
discursive perspective is also applicable. Arguably, sci-
ence popularization is not only about providing simpler
narratives and visual enhancements that are palatable to
lay audiences, but also about framing scientific work in a
way that largely legitimizes it ideologically (Bauer &
Bucchi, 2010; Calsamiglia, 2003; Eldridge, 1995; Perrault,
2013; Wilke & Hill, 2019). With all due appreciation of
the educational and democratizing effects of science jour-
nalism, the larger question explored here is how to make
science visible without distorting, aggrandizing, or sensa-
tionalizing it (Jensen, 2012).
Following a methodological proposition laid out in the
following section, I explore the webpages of the interna-
tional science magazine New Scientist, focusing specifi-
cally on how criteria of newsworthiness affect the dominant
construction of representations of bioscience in “multi-
modal ensembles” (Kress, 2003). Using the toolkit of mul-
timodal discourse analysis (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996,
2001; Machin, 2008; Machin & Mayr, 2012; Van Leeuwen,
2005), this project aims to identify which images are made
to appear especially salient and visible to lay consumers of
biomedical articles and how they relate to the accompany-
ing texts. Assuming, following Barthes (1977), that the
meaning conveyed by multimodal means is not a sum of its
ingredients, but an added relational meaning, the study
examines the relations between the discursive properties of
science reports on one hand, and the visual features of the
accompanying images on the other. It uses a special-pur-
pose sample of newscientist.com articles related to biotech-
nology and medicine drawn from the magazine’s own
ranking of most-read articles between October 2013 and
December 2014 (cf. appendix). In the analytic section, the
frequency and distribution of visual resources used to frame
bioscience-related news are explored. Using an interpretive
analytical procedure, I describe the properties of sampled
images, identify image–text relations, and discuss the
Qualitative Inquiry 25(4)
dominant functions of the imagery on the basis of selected
examples. The study concludes with reflections on the overt
salience of certain representations of biotechnology and
medicine and the implications of the dominant practices of
visualizing bioscience for popular consumption.
Methodological Framework
Multimodal Analytic Categories for the Study of
Science Popularization
The research problem posed in this project requires a me-
thodological explication, namely how best to examine the
types of relations between the textual properties of science-
related articles (including headline, lead, copy, and caption)
and the features of the accompanying images. By introduc-
ing certain categories, I seek to show how the mechanisms
of multimodal foregrounding that enhance the visibility of
representations of bioscience may be captured. The follow-
ing categories have been identified as variables to code and
classify the material in this study; their adaptation for my
own study will also be explained and discussed. In view of
the narrow aim of this study, multimodality is here under-
stood in a restricted sense of integrating the visual and ver-
bal aspects of meaning mediation, and not as a full sensory
experience that can be derived from consuming media, or as
all the technological affordances inherent in digital com-
munications, such as flexible designs adjusted for consump-
tion via various devices.
There are many “multimodal” categories through which
the meaning of verbal elements and visual images could be
accessed (cf. Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996; Machin, 2008;
Machin & Mayr, 2012; Martinec & Salway, 2005; Van
Leeuwen, 2005). Multimodal analysis attends to how the
combination of graphic, pictorial and textual information
within a composite layout can enhance the meaning poten-
tial of such an ensemble (cf. Bateman, 2008). In the context
of popularity-driven science journalism, it seems obvious
that the layout should not be too complex or equivocal for
fear of alienating readers. By contrast, catchy, stylized
headlines and images are surefire anchors of attention.
Multimodal analysts have noted the significance of
three layout composition aspects such as: (a) salience—
the quality of standing out through the use of size, color,
tone, focus, foregrounding, or overlap, as well as through
“the use of potent cultural symbols” (Machin, 2008, p.
138); (b) information value—the way of introducing and
hierarchizing information in spatial terms, depending on
whether the information is regarded as given (right), new
(left), ideal (top), real (bottom), more important (center),
less important (margin), or related (embedded; Kress &
Van Leeuwen, 1996); and (c) framing—the flow and
degree of interconnecting information through segrega-
tion, separation, contrast, integration, overlap, or rhyme
Molek-Kozakowska
(Van Leeuwen, 2005). More generally, the sense of com-
positional effectiveness or synergy (Royce, 1998),
derived from either connectivity or detachment, cannot
be attributed to particular categories; rather, it is a semi-
otic meaning potentially realized in specific ensembles.
In addition, composition is a derivative of conventional-
ized “layout systems” characterizing particular domains
and genres of discourse, for example, poetry, news arti-
cles, advertising, and official letters. Layout systems are
“grammatical rules” that help to explore text–image rela-
tions and other intersemiotic mechanisms of meaning
representation (Bateman, 2008; Martinec & Salway,
2005; Van Leeuwen, 2005). In science popularization
texts, the headline and the image are the most salient ele-
ments of layout intended for instant processing.
Color is a semiotic resource used not only for composi-
tional purposes but also to (a) construct representations
(denotation, connotation) and hierarchies of information,
(b) establish interpersonal relations (attention-drawing,
alerting/soothing, pleasing/disturbing), and (c) introduce
cohesion in a multimodal ensemble by repetition or coordi-
nation (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2002, pp. 347-349). These
three purposes correspond to communicative metafunctions
of lexico-grammatical resources: ideational, interpersonal,
and textual (O’Halloran, 2008). Thus color is multifunc-
tional and its “grammar” encompasses specific sociocul-
tural conventions in the processes of semiosis, not universal
or ahistorical rules. Color also needs to be combined with
other semiotic modes, as it is not a sufficiently articulated
mode to create meaning on its own (Kress & Van Leeuwen,
2002, p. 351). Machin (2008, pp. 69-81) identifies the fol-
lowing dimensions of color and its consequent meaning
potentials: hue (from warm to cold), differentiation (from
distinct to general), brightness/value (from visible/true to
dark/obscured), saturation (from exuberance to subtlety),
purity (from assertion to uncertainty), modulation (from
realistic to generic), and luminosity (from light-infused to
opaque). Experimental research has shown that saturation,
value, and hue play an important role in bringing visual rel-
evance and purpose to a colored object in a preattentive
stage and constructing it as a cognitive artifact (Puhalla,
2008). When used in illustrative visual material, color can
be made to harmonize, modify, or clash with representa-
tions of the issue in the text. Color psychology uses the gen-
erative potential of the “grammar of color” to identify and
test the sensory or affective potential of the visual mode
(Lacy, 1996). So far, applications of color in science popu-
larization have been studied in the context of academic lit-
eracies that enable the processing of visuals to build new
knowledge (Trumbo, 1999). Kress and Van Leeuwen (2002,
p. 350) note that visuals in science communication, be they
satellite photographs, brain tomographies, or mapping
schemes, use color not only to represent information but
also to affectively and esthetically engage readers.
381
Multimodal analysts look systematically at representa-
tions in images and the meaning relations forged by strategic
choices of iconography: objects, settings, and photogenic
perspectives as well as formal displays (cf. O’Toole, 1994)
and representations of social actors from specific points of
view. In popular science, some objects (vials, surgical
devices) and settings (laboratories) have accrued conven-
tionalized positive connotations, directing recipients to
notions of technology, progress, or control. Meanwhile, the
ways of representing social actors in visual images can be
studied in terms of symbolic distance (long-shot, middle-
range, close-up), projected power relations (angle of view:
high, eye-level, low), implied engagement (frontal, from the
back, from the side), as well as in terms of either collective
or individualistic representations of people to achieve a gen-
eralized or personalized effect (Machin & Mayr, 2012). If
images (or texts) represent humans as social actors, one
could analyze whether they are shown performing actions
and what kinds of actions these are: there are material, ver-
bal, mental, behavioral, relational, and existential action
types with decreasing degrees of “agency” attributed in each
case (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996). In science populariza-
tion, as in many domains of discourse, actions and events
can also be represented with different degrees of certainty,
confidence, or belief, which are textually reflected by means
of various modal verbs, hedges, and modifiers. Although it
is hard to visually express negation or uncertainty, as images
require specific and concrete “epistemological commit-
ments” (Kress, 2003, p. 23), there are visual means of
expressing epistemic modality (e.g., blurring, monochrome,
overlap). According to Machin (2008, p. xvi), “we can ask
which elements are real, which are less than real and which
are more than real,” as we might want to reveal if anything
is “enhanced, concealed or connected” to suit particular
interests or ideologies. For example, in science journalism,
artistic styles (e.g., surreal) are often employed in combina-
tion with abstract scientific concepts, while sci-fi and popu-
lar culture imagery is generally borrowed to increase
audience appeal (Gruber & Dickerson, 2012).
Multimodal analysts note that a large part of visual sig-
nification is rooted in metaphorical associations. As meta-
phor has been proved to be one of the fundamental processes
of human cognition, and not just a narrowly understood fig-
ure of language (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980), there is little
doubt that it operates across semiotic systems and is not
restricted to language alone. Figures are also effective in
generating salience (Giora, 1999). Pictorial metaphors have
been used by artists throughout history, but they have also
come to function as conventional figures in everyday visual
culture (El Refaie, 2003; Forceville, 1996). Metaphorical
associations derive from embodied experience (thickness is
strength and stability), gestural conventions (up is good),
cultural iconicity (red is hot/inflammation/danger), and
social conventions of graphic representation (diagonal
382
upward line is economic growth). As with language, the
visual metaphor’s “transference” from one domain of repre-
sentation to another is the basis for the productivity and
evolution of the repertoires of metaphors we live by (Van
Leeuwen, 2005, p. 30). In science popularization, meta-
phors (both linguistic and visual) require critical examina-
tion, as they could be vehicles of ideological statements that
are not intended to be challenged.
Adapting Typologies of Image–Text Relations for
the Study of Science Popularization
Despite the long tradition of inquiry into image–text inter-
play in print news (Barnhurst, 1994; Bednarek & Caple,
2012; Eldridge, 1995; Newton, 2001; Zelizer, 2010),
research on science popularization genres has focused on
the public reception and understanding of science rather
than on the rhetorical dimensions of multimodal communi-
cation. For the purposes of this study, I will sketch out a
quick overview of some extant typologies of image–text
relations and examine their applicability.
According to a classical study by Barthes (1977), there
are three principal ways through which images and texts
can be related: illustration is when the image is subordinate
to the text as it specifies, clarifies, or concretely defines an
element of textual meaning (as in the press photograph
accompanying a news article); anchorage is when the text
is subordinate to the image and helps to interpret it in a rel-
evant fashion (as in the caption accompanying a photo-
graph); relay is when a mutual reinforcement or enhancement
between the image and the text can be detected. In this way,
Barthesian semiotics stresses that meaning is not only
derivable from (linguistic and visual) signs, but also from
the relations between them. In this study, I adopt a slightly
modified version of this typology to monitor the distribu-
tion of the three types of image–text relations, not their sta-
tus. First, I do not treat them as categories that delimit the
dominance of image or text in determining the meaning of
a multimodal ensemble, but as categories that capture the
directionality in the process of meaning construction. For
example, an illustrated bioscience article uses a visualiza-
tion of one of its themes or motifs (e.g., a drug, a patient) as
an additional, if not superfluous, element in the meaning-
making process, while an anchored article is produced
because specific images of cells, organs, or therapeutic
devices have been obtained. Importantly, as Martinec and
Salway (2005, p. 345) also claim, an anchored text does not
have to be restricted to a description of, or a commentary on
the image only, but may include information on the context,
or a discussion of the implications of the findings. The relay
relation is the most dynamic and two-directional, as it
requires the reader to (repeatedly) refer to the text to con-
struct the meaning of the image, or to (repeatedly) view the
image to follow the text of the article.
Qualitative Inquiry 25(4)
Martinec and Salway (2005, p. 358) propose a complex
typology of possible image–text relations instantiated in
various multimodal ensembles. The system they offer is
applicable to many kinds of registers and genres of medi-
ated communication and covers two fundamental dimen-
sions: the status of the image vis-à-vis the text, and the
logico-semantic relations between identified ranks of the
image and components of the text (i.e., participants, pro-
cesses, and circumstances). With respect to status, under-
stood as directionality of meaning construction outlined
above, the Barthesian labels seem more useful. As regards
logico-semantic relations, their typology is most productive
when the text related to an image is a fairly coherent clause
complex (e.g., an illustrated encyclopedia’s entry, a cap-
tioned political cartoon), and more problematic when an
image is juxtaposed with a textual ensemble (headline, lead,
copy, caption). Nevertheless, for the purposes of this proj-
ect, it is useful to look at how headline–image relation could
be structured in terms of Martinec and Salway’s (2005)
relations of elaboration (with image providing more gen-
eral information than headline), extension (either in the
form of additional information or as a more connotative,
figurative, or symbolic overlay in image), or enhancement
(understood as image qualifying text in terms of spatiotem-
poral circumstances or causal relations). In a study of popu-
larity-driven science journalism, it is important to notice
how images frame science, what slant/spin is given to the
information through visuals, and which additional mean-
ings are superimposed by the logico-semantic links between
the visual and textual planes.
Looking at image–text relations through a more rhe-
torical lens, one can venture to say that, on the whole,
such relations can be either relatively straightforward and
one-dimensional, or more complex and multidimensional,
with imagery particularizing, modifying, and/or impli-
citly evaluating the textual meaning, and the text comple-
menting, narrativizing, contextualizing, or generalizing
the meaning of the image. In their analysis of visuals in
news reporting, Bednarek and Caple (2012) note that
their role can range from the traditional or “mere illustra-
tion” to the more rhetorically oriented description to “key
resources reflecting reality, which gives them the func-
tion of evidence” (p. 112). In addition, in a market-driven
context, images can spark sensation or function as icons:
recognizable symbols that capture critical moments in
history. More recently they have also been viewed as
“functioning evaluatively (carrying emotional appeal)
and aesthetically (showing concern for composition)”
(Bednarek & Caple, 2012, p. 112). On this basis, it can be
assumed that specifically selected or manipulated images
can either open up texts to alternative interpretations (not
projected in the text), or restrict multiple ways of under-
standing the message by foregrounding or framing a par-
ticular interpretation.
Molek-Kozakowska
In our increasingly visual culture “images might in fact
take precedence in the relationship between iconic, lin-
guistic and audio messages by revealing hidden meanings,
amplifying certain ideas, providing interpretative frames,
and priming viewers toward preferred discourse para-
digms” (Wojcieszak, 2009, p. 477). In a journalistic con-
text, while texts are best suited to reporting information
and engendering credibility (logos, ethos), images might
be more effective in engaging viewers affectively (pathos;
cf. El Refaie, 2003; Gruber & Dickerson, 2012; Zelizer,
2010). Sanina (2019) points out that the mobilization of
“political emotions as a motivational force” is today a
visual communicative technique deployed in a broad range
of professional and activist contexts with great routine. I
posit here that image–text relations in science journalism
are dynamic and analyzing them vis-à-vis a preconstructed
typology is not likely to capture the context-bound and
imaginative work of reporters involved in the process of
popularization. However, a framework of analytic catego-
ries, such as the ones discussed above, will certainly help
identify the salient patterns of visualizing science and sub-
ject them to further critical analysis.
A Critical Multimodal Analysis of
Newscientist.com
Design of the Study
This brief survey of aspects of visual and textual communi-
cation provides a coherent, though context-dependent,
framework that is useful in studying multimodal ensembles
in science popularization. There is little doubt that medium
affordances and meaning potentials of text and image may
be combined to facilitate or support certain readings at the
expense of others, or make some representations more
salient or visible than others (cf. Bateman, 2008). This study
focuses on how this salience is achieved by classifying and
critically analyzing the discursive properties of the online
edition of the international science magazine New Scientist
(cf. Molek-Kozakowska, 2016, 2017), whose catchy head-
lines engage readers, lead-ins, and copies report and explain
scientific findings, while column-wide images and witty
captions keep readers entertained. It is worth pointing out
that the images found on newscientist.com are hardly ever
integrated with text (unlike the mode-mixing/overlap char-
acteristic of front pages, posters, or ads), and that the vast
majority are naturalistic (mainly photographs, some draw-
ings, paintings, sketches) rather than abstract (graphs, dia-
grams, maps, tables). This suggests that science journalism
is aligned more with popular conventions of expression than
with the formats characteristic of scientific communication.
The selection procedure for the material for this study
involved the following steps: (a) monitoring newscientist.
com’s listing of most-read articles every week for a period
383
of 15 months (October 2013 to December 2014), (b) com-
piling a corpus of over 400 most-read articles together with
the captioned images that accompanied them, (c) categoriz-
ing the collected articles into thematic sections according to
broad scientific disciplines, and (d) reducing the analytic
material to articles on biotechnology and medicine. The
thematic choice of biosciences was inspired by scholarship
testifying to the journalistic practice of privileging biosci-
ence-related coverage because of its projected newsworthi-
ness (Weitkamp, 2003) and controversial content (Jensen,
2012). The sampled articles report on new research related
to human anatomy and physiology, drug and therapy devel-
opment, neuroscience, human genetic engineering, aging
and pain mechanisms, or longitudinal studies of the diet-
health nexus. The sample excludes articles on the biology of
plants, animals, fungi, and bacteria, on psychiatry and psy-
chotherapy, on biotechnological research related to archeol-
ogy and paleobiology, on bioethical and medical regulations,
health policy, and research methodologies. The downsized
sample (cf. list of headlines in the appendix) consists of 58
multimodal ensembles (14.5% of the original corpus) with
a cumulative text size of over 65,000 words.
Results: Description and Distribution of
Multimodal Properties of the Sample
The images accompanying the 58 articles aggregated for
the analysis have come from two main sources: scientific
(15) and nonscientific (43). Only 12 images were for-
warded to the press by a research center, lab, or academic
institution and include photos of magnified cells and tis-
sues, brain tomography/fMRI, images of therapeutic prod-
ucts or infographics prepared by scientists. Three articles
show photographs of patients who have undergone some
pioneering therapies (these are the only images of identifi-
able individuals with their names in the caption or article).
No portraits of scientists (e.g., authors of studies reported
on in articles) are found, but most names are hyperlinked to
their institutional homepages. A vast majority of the stud-
ied images (43) were sourced from image banks or librar-
ies. The high ratio of nonscientific images accompanying
biotechnological and medical coverage may be due to limi-
tations like availability, competition, privacy, and expense.
However, one could argue that some images are chosen for
the sole purpose of drawing attention through sensation
(e.g., image of a half-naked woman in a report on a finding
that Women’s breasts age faster than the rest of their bod-
ies; image of a white-coated team of coroners removing a
dead body from an African hut in Revealed: how Ebola
paralyses the immune system). In addition, the bank/
library-sourced photos are of high color quality and bal-
anced composition (probably cropped to better suit the edi-
tors’ aims). Some include scenic landscape views,
unconventional angles of view (cf. Figure 1), or special
384
Figure 1. Is a pill to banish phobias too good to be true?
Source. Jun Ahn/Barcroft Media accompanying article “The Therapy Pill:
Forget Your Phobia in Fast Forward” (March 12, 2014). Retrieved from
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129600-500-the-therapy-pill-
forget-your-phobia-in-fast-forward.
Note. Although the image is not related to bioscience per se, the
caption narrows the interpretation to “a woman overcoming her fear of
heights (acrophobia, vertigo).” It uses the urban landscape as a setting
for an unusual composition (in terms of angle, color contrast, depth)
and connotes “being in control” in both a biological and social sense.
It constructs newsworthiness and engagement through a personalized
perspective (seeing the height as the woman does) that facilitates
identification.
effects (e.g., blurring, monochrome), as well as artistic ren-
derings of abstract, surreal, or futuristic settings. Only 12
visuals can be described as dynamic, implying some kind
of movement either in the foreground (pouring a drink,
playing the piano, scratching an itch) or in the background
(ocean waves, passers-by in the street); the remaining
images are strikingly static, as if the representations were
purposefully fixed and participants posed for the readers’
“voyeuristic” pleasure.
As regards iconography, a few patterns of representa-
tion are worth discussing in detail, namely that 20 images
(34%) represent only settings and/or inanimate objects
(including cell clusters), five (9%) include functional mag-
netic resonance imagery (fMRI), brain tomography, or
fetal ultrasonography, while the remaining 33 (57%) pic-
ture at least a fragment of a human body/a person. In this
collection, five photos present more than two people and
could be claimed to render some kind of social action/event
(e.g., an emergency room in “Gunshot Victims to Be
Suspended Between Life and Death,” a street view in “The
Man Who Can Hear Wi-Fi Wherever He Walks,” an open-
air concert in “Nerve Implant Retrains Your Brain to Stop
Tinnitus”). A salient property of science popularization
imagery is thus the sheer number of humans (often only
hands, faces, or other fragments of the body) represented.
This is odd considering the fact that most reports cover
Qualitative Inquiry 25(4)
Figure 2. Coffee helps you remember more.
Source. Jack Simon/Flickr/Getty accompanying article “Drink Two
Espressos To Enhance Long-Term Memory” (January 12, 2014).
Retrieved from https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24855-drink-
two-espressos-to-enhance-long-term-memory/.
Note. This composition, with the reader’s face not shown, represents “an
average coffee consumer whose mental capacities could be improved,”
for example, in the act of reading and remembering more details. The
setting is public, generic space and the balance in composition and color
synchrony has a soothing effect. The engaging mechanism is the eye
contact established with the woman on the book cover synchronizing
with the imperative form of the headline: “Drink . . .”
findings that have to do more with data processing, chemi-
cal processes, physiological reactions, experiments on ani-
mals or information on genes, cells, tissues, drugs, vaccines,
and therapies than with human individuals. Thus, for
example, we can see a person’s hands holding a cup of hot
chocolate in “Can Chocolate Boost Memory? Only in
Insane Amounts” or a receding hairline on a man’s head in
“3D Drops Raise Hopes of Cure for Baldness.” This indi-
cates a tendency to visualize lab work, scientific experi-
ments, and abstract scientific findings as if they were
relevant and related to most individuals’ everyday routines,
interests, and experiences. Abstract bioscientific work is
thus humanized: it is represented as part of the readers’
lifeworld rather than as specialist knowledge belonging to
elite academic institutions or corporate laboratories.
However, it is also worth considering that out of the 33
images involving human participants, only 11 show them
performing some action (parallel to material processes),
nine show human reactions (behavioral), six show individu-
als having a given condition (relational), and six show them
as just being there (existential). The actions presented in the
photos predominately denote (relatively mundane) activi-
ties: choosing a milk brand in a supermarket, drinking a cof-
fee and reading a book (Figure 2), exercising in a gym,
playing the piano, breastfeeding a baby, lighting up a joint,
and reading a blood sugar level. Whenever individuals are
shown, they are visually depersonalized (faces cropped/
Molek-Kozakowska
covered, no eye contact,1 long shot to visualize entire sil-
houettes, close-ups for body parts like fingers and hands).
Excluding the three patient photos mentioned above, all the
individuals are anonymized and could largely be classed as
average people. This type of visual depersonalization can
be a means of effectively interpellating readers, enabling
them to identify with generically pictured persons and
unspecified settings.
Regarding photogenic perspectives in the sampled com-
positions, it is important to note the high number of close-
ups (38%), with middle-range shots and long distance shots
each constituting 20% of the sample. The remaining cases
are either enlarged images of cells or fMRI/tomography/
ultrasonography. Oversized close-ups have the potential of
imbuing the presented objects with salience, as illustrated
with a close shot of a glass of coke in “Sugary Drinks Tinker
with Vital Proteins in the Brain,” or an extreme close-up of
a fragment of an infected face in “Rosacea May Be Caused
By Mite Faeces in Your Pores.” Such images may be said to
have the discursive function of proximization: they not only
enable viewers to see and thus better understand some
issues, but also generate emotional reactions to enhance
their involvement in the report. Fostering affective invest-
ments is likely to be an important function of biomedical
imagery and could well explain the incompatibility or
ambiguity of some image–text relations. In this sample,
projected emotions include anxieties related to disease or
aging, fears of pain/insects/heights, disgust at bodily disfig-
urement, although the images themselves are mostly pleas-
ant and even artistic (e.g., a colorful and elaborate
mandala-like pattern of arranged vegetables and fruit for
the rather scaremongering article “Five a Day Is Not Enough
Fruit and Veg for Best Health”).
The pleasing esthetic experience of processing the
images in the sample can be attributed to the salience-gen-
erating potential of color. Most images (47%) can be
described as having pure, bright, intensely saturated colors,
with some images (tomography, cell/tissue photos) being
additionally tinted for contrast (cf. healthy brain vs.
Alzheimer’s patient’s brain in “Are Alzheimer’s and
Diabetes the Same Disease?” or ovaries in “Number of
Eggs a Woman Has Predicts Heart Attack Risk”). In some
cases, color manipulation makes the attached images seem
more than real (high modality), enabling the reporters to
make strong claims to truth and underscoring the profes-
sionalism of the scientists and validity of the experiments.
Meanwhile, some photos (e.g., those accompanying specu-
latory articles about the origins of metabolism, whether
cannabis alone can kill, or if depression can be explained as
protein deficit) have apparently been purposefully dark-
ened, monochromatized or tinted, indicating a higher degree
of uncertainty and controversy. The low modality of those
images can be interpreted as (a) a lesser commitment to the
claims presented in the article, (b) a mitigating device to
385
justify publishing speculation, or (c) a contrast between
“theories” and practical applications of scientific discover-
ies presented in other articles. In contrast to both high and
low modality, the realism (bordering on naturalism) of the
seven remaining image samples can be treated as an ideo-
logical choice: apparently representing reality “as it is”
without trying to glorify scientific facts. This is the case
with the preliminary findings in “High-Fibre Diet May
Protect Against Allergic Asthma,” which is illustrated with
a close-up photo of a white inhaler placed on a kitchen table
next to a plate with a slice of brown bread. The image does
not seem either carefully composed or enhanced in terms of
color or luminosity, giving a pessimistic impression (as the
life of asthmatics is implied to be).
Most images are simply composed as far as the number
of objects/participants presented is considered, with a cen-
tered, symmetrical layout to facilitate information process-
ing. In addition, many images are designed to help the
audience grasp a particular evaluation (e.g., energetic bright
blue shining against a black backdrop as reflected in some
cellular structure in “Cyborg Gel Implant Fights Diabetes
with Light” to connote a breakthrough therapy, or the
intense red, orange, and purple coloring of the typical
bleach packaging in “Vastly Diluted Bleach May Have
Protective Effect on Skin” announcing a discovery of the
antiseptic potential of chlorine in stemming out dermato-
logical inflammation). The role of comparison or contrast in
multimodal ensembles to achieve salience is also worth not-
ing. Putting two words, icons or colors side by side to indi-
cate difference, change or choice can be an effective
compositional device for explanatory purposes, as with
sugar placed beside sweetener in “Artificial Sweeteners
Linked To Glucose Intolerance,” or old and young hands
joined in a (symbolic) handshake in “Young Blood To Be
Used in Ultimate Rejuvenation Trial” (Figure 3).
A few images can be said to involve special effects aimed
at producing salience. Resources like close-up, centering,
contrast, and color intensity that characterize most of the
images are intensified by devices like embedding (Figure 2),
overlap (a computer-generated human genome sequence
superimposed on a 3D ultrasonography of a fetus in “Meet
Your Unborn Child—Before It’s Even Conceived”), picto-
rial metonymy (a ray of sun for “Spark of Life: Metabolism
Appears in Lab Without Cells”), or metaphor (a red on/off
switch lever of an electric power generator for
“Consciousness On-Off Switch Discovered Deep in
Brain”), including “dead” metaphors (a clock to indicate a
passage of time in “Testicular Time Bomb: Older Dads’
Mutant Sperm” referring to the idiomatic expression that
“one’s biological clock is ticking”).
Regarding the dominant patterns of image–text relations
in the sample, I noted that the text is anchored by the imag-
ery from a laboratory, research facility, or academic institu-
tion in only 10% of the articles. In these cases, the lead
386
Figure 3. Time to give something back.
Source. Annedehaas/Getty accompanying article “Young Blood To Be
Used in Ultimate Rejuvenation Trial” (August 20, 2014). Retrieved from
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329831-400-young-blood-to-
be-used-in-ultimate-rejuvenation-trial/.
Note. The handshake is a culturally established symbol of consent and
co-operation, but the image–text relation forged here is not only of
support, but also of responsibility of the young to the elderly. Through
a cultural icon, the image might mitigate the ideological investments of
projecting the social arrangements onto biomedical demands, which,
by contrast, are foregrounded in the headline that instrumentalizes and
objectifies the donor (“young blood to be used”).
usually announces the exclusive or rare occasion of such an
image being disseminated to the public (e.g., enlarged
images of human stem cells dipped in acid in an experiment
to turn them into potentially multivariate tissues in
“Extraordinary Stem Cell Method Tested in Human Tissue,”
or a bioengineered vagina made in a lab in “Engineered
Vaginas Grown in Women for the First Time”). Totally,
20% of the articles display the relation of relay, since to
process the article, one would probably need to shift from
the text to the image repeatedly to understand the issue or
the nature of the discovery. The relay relation is best illus-
trated in sample material including infographics (e.g.,
“Replacement Artificial Heart Keeps First Patient Alive”),
some fMRIs of the brain (e.g., “Man with Tiny Brain Shocks
Doctors”), as well as some enlarged images of modified tis-
sues whose physiological functions are described in the text
(e.g., “Deaf People Get Gene Tweak to Restore Natural
Hearing”). The vast majority of images (69%) accompany-
ing the articles can be said to illustrate something men-
tioned in the text, as is the case with a report on a new
robotic arm allowing a drummer to play a concert in “Bionic
Arm Gives Cyborg Drummer Superhuman Skills” with a
photo of the man playing the percussion with his prosthetic
arm. As this example shows, most images actually depict
the object, person, or activity mentioned in the headline,
ensuring that the relation between the image and the text is
easily grasped, and a sense of “synergy” (Royce, 1998) is
Qualitative Inquiry 25(4)
Figure 4. This bone cancer cell contains many more
chromosomes than is usual in a human cell.
Source. Gopal Murti/SPL accompanying article “Monster Cancer
Chromosome Is Made From Shattered DNA” (November 10, 2014).
Retrieved from https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26530-monster-
cancer-chromosome-is-made-from-shattered-dna/.
Note. The framing of negativity is achieved through the dark background
and the projection of deviance through irregularity in the “shattered”
pattern.
produced. Some images employ very straightforward asso-
ciations with the subject of the article, for example a spider
in the article on arachnophobia, or cotton candy in the anal-
ysis of the role of sugar in diet. There are few cases of an
indirect or obscure relationship between the headline and
the main image, which is then clarified in the lead-in (or in
the caption; cf. a colorful irregular pattern in the image
accompanying the article “Monster Cancer Chromosome Is
Made From Shattered DNA” turns out to show a cancer-
plagued cell’s chromosomes; Figure 4).
Having discussed the salient properties of images and
their distribution in science popularization articles, I will
now proceed to suggest their discursive functions consid-
ering Bednarek and Caple’s (2012) typology of the illus-
trative, evidential, evaluative, iconic, esthetic, and
sensational roles of imagery in journalism. It would be
wrong to assume that one picture fulfills one function
only it is rather a question of identifying which function
is salient in the given context by relating each image to
the information presented in the textual mode. If the illus-
trative function is taken to be the default function of jour-
nalistic images, it applies to the majority of images in our
sample too. The evidential function can be identified in
about 35% of cases, notably in science-sourced images,
photos of drugs/tests, visuals of replacement organs, and
pictures of patients. These images serve to underline the
Molek-Kozakowska
credibility of the report as they function as evidence that
the particular research study or experiment took place and
yielded particular results. The evaluative meaning poten-
tial of the image consists in its ability to foster attitudes or
evoke judgments. Taking iconography and color semiot-
ics as the main instantiations of evaluation (and confront-
ing imagery with texts), positive evaluations can be
attributed to around 30% of the examined ensembles
(reports on new discoveries, experimental treatments,
patented remedies), and negative evaluations to about
20% of cases (reports on mysterious symptoms, untreat-
able diseases, wrong diet choices). Interestingly, there are
two cases of incongruence where the headline seems to
evoke a different evaluation from the one suggested by
the tone of the image. For example, “Protein That Shrinks
Depressed Brains Identified” seems to celebrate an
important finding that helps to treat depression, while the
static monochromatic image (likely to stand for depres-
sion) imbues the article with a sense of resignation.
However, as suggested above, ambiguity may also serve
the purpose of intriguing readers, making them intent on
resolving the apparent incongruence.
The use of certain symbolic icons imbued with a spe-
cial social, cultural, or moral significance or value is not
uncommon and applies to images featuring fetuses/
babies, female hands/bodies, fMRIs, heart models, surgi-
cal gloves, operating theaters, and urban surroundings. In
most contexts, these respectively stand for new life,
health/domesticity, power of the human mind, life-saving
technology, professionalism, and medical and civiliza-
tional advancement. Arguably, some of these iconic rep-
resentations (often reproduced in popular culture)
function as cognitive shortcuts to activate a reservoir of
(mostly positive) associations that prime an uncritical
interpretation of bioscientific progress. A positive fram-
ing of the issue is also a result of supplanting the texts
with images that have a clearly esthetic function. As men-
tioned above, a clever use of iconography, color, compo-
sition, contrast, reduced distance, engaging angles and
other pictorial devices enhance the reader’s appreciation
of an article with compositionally simple visuals. The
esthetic function is most obvious in the case of pictures
that seem to be artistic impressions of abstract or futuris-
tic issues, scenic landscapes, and tinted microcosms of
human cells and tissues. With the exception of a few natu-
ralistic renderings, the esthetic appeal of the images
seems to be a priority for the editors. The last important
function of images is that of sensation, which is achieved
with selected imagery (in terms of emotion-provoking
content) or crafted (through close-up, cropping, color,
rotation) to generate strong reactions. As mentioned
above, examples include images of naked bodies, operat-
ing theaters, the deceased or phobia-related objects (e.g.,
spiders, syringes, or heights; Figure 1). It is also worth
387
noting that both images and headlines can have a sensa-
tionalist tone, as is the case with formulations like
“Human Brain’s Ultimate Barrier To Open for First Time”
or “Man with Tiny Brain Shocks Doctors.” In fact, the
sample shows that it is fairly common to introduce factual
articles and evidential images with catchy headlines,
witty captions and other stylistic devices that mitigate the
seriousness of the subject matter and domesticate it for a
wider audience.
The functions of imagery in science reporting discussed
above were identified on the basis of a close reading of
each text (headline, lead, copy, caption) vis-à-vis the
attached visuals. The procedure was repeated to determine
whether the images elaborate on (produce a more general
overview), extend (add information, connotation or figu-
ration), or enhance the text of the article (modify informa-
tion, qualify circumstances, introduce causal relations; cf.
Martinec & Salway, 2005). Cases of visual elaboration
seem relatively rare in popular science writing, as they do
not really help to process the abstract and complex scien-
tific information often presented in the articles. The sam-
ple includes one example of elaboration in which the
image (a computer-generated picture of a wooden clock
on a patterned wall) is more general than the text and
refers to the passage of time and, by implication, to aging,
while the article (“Testicular Time Bomb: Older Dads’
Mutant Sperm”) and the caption (The clock is always tick-
ing for testicles) specify the particular issue of male
aging—the increased likelihood of fathering a child with a
genetic disorder. Almost a quarter of the examples of
image–text relations in the sample fall into the category of
visual enhancement. These include science-sourced imag-
ery where a specific case is presented with details illustrat-
ing the merit of the research, like the juxtaposition of an
Alzheimer’s-affected brain with a brain scan of a person
showing no signs of dementia for the article “First Test To
Predict Alzheimer’s Years in Advance” (Figure 5). This
information reminds readers of the type and scope of neu-
ral damage (represented in terms of contrasted color varia-
tion, shape, and size), caused by toxic substances
accumulated in the brain, and particularizes the informa-
tion given in the text. Most images in the sample, how-
ever, classify as visual extensions: through their emotive,
esthetic, or sensationalist overtones they modify the infor-
mation given in the textual mode with additional evalua-
tions, connotations or attention-enhancing devices. The
image accompanying the article “Bacterial Waste Makes
You Feel Fuller for Longer” (which discusses a new appe-
tite-suppressant) is one such example, showing a nibbled
doughnut that looks fresh and delicious as it is sprinkled
with a colorful sugary topping. As is the case here, many
images present well-known objects, recognizable icons,
and generic settings to evoke emotional responses and
generate readers’ interest.
388
Figure 5. The death of nerve cells makes the brains of people
with Alzheimer’s disease (left) smaller than those of people
showing no signs of dementia (right).
Source. Pasieka SPL accompanying article “First Test To Predict
Alzheimer’s Years in Advance” (March 9, 2014). Retrieved from https://
www.newscientist.com/article/dn25190-first-test-to-predict-alzheimers-
years-in-advance/.
Note. The use of color and compositional asymmetry in the
“comparative” layout of the two brain images lends credibility to the
science-derived claims and elevates the status of the article.
Discussion: Discursive Strategies in Science
Popularization
I set out with the claim that in the context of market-driven
journalism, science popularization media outlets tend to
be more preoccupied with attracting (and retaining) sci-
ence-related news consumers rather than disseminating
science-related knowledge and fostering the public under-
standing of science. Regarding the above multimodal
analysis of image–text relations in the sample of articles
garnered from the online edition of New Scientist, one
might argue that popularity-driven bioscience journalism
is characterized by discursive strategies like the human-
ization of scientific results, the domestication of science
and the aesthetization of representations of science for
popular consumption. The boons of reduced cognitive
effort, emotional gratifications, and visual pleasures these
constructions of bioscience involve may ultimately facili-
tate the ideological legitimization of this discipline at the
expense of others, to the extent of bioscientific research
being uncritically accepted, legitimized, and largely
demoted from politicized public debates. After all, the
power of images in constructing arguments and ideologies
is all too familiar to propagandists and advertisers.
As far as the humanization strategy is concerned, the
image–text relations explored here reveal a distinct ten-
dency on the part of science popularizers toward presenting
bioscientific research as serving and benefiting an inordi-
nate number of average people. In fact, much of the
Qualitative Inquiry 25(4)
coverage deals with statistical analyses of health-related
population data, studies of chemical processes, physiologi-
cal reactions, results of experiments on animals, as well as
preliminary results of experiments on genes, cells, and tis-
sues, with only a few reports devoted to tests, drugs, vac-
cines, or therapies in the early stages of their way to market.
What is not made visible is that these discoveries might in
fact be of far greater profit to their developers and pharma-
ceutical companies than to the average patient. Despite that,
the visuals accompanying the coverage (unless they are
exclusive images provided by research institutions in a pro-
motional move) tend to present people as if they were the
direct beneficiaries, recipients, patients, or customers reap-
ing the rewards of scientists’ work. Often people in the
images virtually “present” viewers with something (a prod-
uct, an invaluable piece of information), while the headlines
insist that this is what everyone of us needs. The salience of
the personal address is most misleading when the images
provide visualizations of products or solutions that are not
yet widely available.
As regards the domestication strategy, bioscience is fre-
quently visualized as contributing to the public good by
solving everyday problems like preventing diseases, screen-
ing for potential risks, or helping us make informed lifestyle
and diet choices to improve our well-being. Bioscience is
thus celebrated for its practicality, applicability, and the
promise of making life easier, longer, better, and more plea-
surable. The distance between academia and the general
public is visually bridged with a variety of nonscientific
images and accessible representations, even of brains or
cells, which were formerly only available to a select group
of researchers. Missing from the picture is a consideration
of the social validity or ethical dilemmas involved in some
biotechnologies, an aspect that could alienate readers. The
distorting potential of the domestication strategy also con-
sists of the false projection of biotechnologists being largely
in control of the natural world and about to solve most of
the mysteries of human life, effectively nullifying the need
for larger public debate about the relevance, priorities, and
funding of biosciences.
As for the aesthetization strategy, the representations
preferred by science popularizers visualize bioscience as a
palatable, pleasurable and rewarding experience. The
images accompanying much of the coverage are obviously
intended to please viewers with colors, luminosity, com-
positional balance, and intriguing or photogenic per­
spectives. Sometimes—to add a little diversity and
challenge—interesting or witty pictorial devices are intro-
duced to enhance visibility or produce additional sensa-
tional or cognitive effects. Arguably, this strategy aims to
balance out the seriousness of the content and mental
effort involved in processing science-related issues with
visual pleasure and the self-satisfaction readers may derive
from deciphering complex relations between images and
Molek-Kozakowska
texts. The pleasures of experiencing consonance—itself a
news value—with typical expectations of scientific imag-
ery or with familiar conventions of imaging (artistic, real-
istic, filmic) are guaranteed by images featuring cultural
icons and recognizable symbols. Such images influence
viewers with the “seductive allure” of claims to material-
ity that testify to the validity of most, if not all, biomedical
endeavors (cf. Gruber & Dickerson, 2012).
Conclusion
The methodology presented in this article was adopted to
enable an investigation into the types of image–text rela-
tions in biomedical coverage in a popular science maga-
zine. Its adaptation to the research field was designed to
allow for an analysis of the representations of bioscience
made particularly salient and visible. Rather than simply
comparing the properties of the text with the qualities of
the accompanying images, I aimed to explore the domi-
nant patterns of image–text relations that foster specific
visualizations of science and discussed their implications.
It is important to note that it was beyond the methodologi-
cal scope of this study to verify how the studied ensem-
bles were interpreted by audiences (save the fact that they
were listed as popular with the public according to online
traffic) or the motivations with which they were pro-
duced. These two aspects could be explored in follow-up
research to establish if the discursive strategies identified
here operate on a conscious/strategic level, or whether
they are by-products of dominant journalistic practices or
entrenched patterns of science coverage consumption.
The multimodal analysis conducted in this study was
focused on the frequency and distribution of selected prop-
erties of visual images accompanying newscientist.com’s
most popular articles on biotechnology and medicine. The
analysis detailed their sourcing (scientific or library/image
bank), striking aspects of their iconography (participants,
processes, circumstances) and representation of social
actors, as well as salient aspects of layout (composition,
color, modality, metaphor). The status of the images with
respect to the texts was explored in terms of illustration,
anchorage, or relay. It was also possible to identify the
dominant functions of the images (illustrative, evidential,
evaluative, iconic, esthetic, sensational), based on their sci-
entific, realistic, artistic, or pop-cultural provenance. I
found that most images were nonscientific representations
(although about 20% of the sample included science-
sourced images presented for evidential purposes), which
tended to be relatively simple in composition and thus easy
to process. Typically, they represented science-related
issues in generic and static ways with human actors and
recognizable iconic signifiers inserted to promote recogni-
tion, relevance, and audience engagement. Images were
389
overtly aestheticized with color enhancement, symmetry,
contrast, and various pictorial devices, and included artistic
impressions in articles related to abstract or futuristic
issues (e.g., landscape and sci-fi conventions). Visual
salience was also achieved through size, color, and reduced
distance, as well as emotionally charged iconography and
framing, sensationalizing the issues by celebrating scien-
tific results or introducing taboo motifs.
In the course of the analysis, I aimed to refer multi-
modally produced meanings to salient dimensions of pop-
ularization articles, and capture the functional relation
between images and headlines, captions, leads, and cop-
ies. Using representative examples, I demonstrated the
extent of logico-semantic elaboration, extension, and
enhancement in image–text relations. At the interpreta-
tive and critical stage of analysis I posited the dominant
discursive strategies of representing scientific issues and
those that increased salience or visibility. I argued that
imagery used in popular science journalism contributes to
the discursive humanization, domestication, and aestheti-
zation of bioscience, which can lead to its ideological
legitimization. In doing so, I tried to identify the ideologi-
cal investments of the ways in which biotechnological
and medical discoveries are made available for mediated
consumption through artificially constructed newsworthi-
ness and strategically enhanced visibility (cf. Bednarek &
Caple, 2012; Machin & Mayr, 2012).
Science popularization is a hybrid domain of discourse
placed between science communication and popular jour-
nalism and an arena of competing representations of con-
troversial scientific issues, diverse discourses (academic
vs. pop-cultural), styles (public vs. private), and voices. In
the face of such inherent multiplicity, a reflective audience
should theoretically have the opportunity to interpret new
facts from the vantage points of different identity posi-
tions (cf. Moirand, 2003). In this respect, science popular-
ization has a long-term positive effect of increasing
science literacy and democratizing public access to sci-
ence. However, science journalists also act as gate-keepers
and framers of science who, ultimately, can downplay
risks and highlight benefits, mobilize public acceptance,
and legitimize the interests of powerful institutions and
corporations. In pursuit of audience engagement, scien-
tific issues can be trivialized or dramatized, and interest
generated through constructed controversy (Jensen, 2012;
Szyma, 2018) or an entertaining format. Acknowledging
the market-driven context of contemporary journalism and
the changing role of science communication intent on pro-
motion (cf. Bauer & Bucchi, 2010), social scientists need
to turn to methodologically sound examinations of the
strategies pursued by science popularizers that may be to
the detriment of a responsible presentation of controver-
sial bioscientific developments.
390 Qualitative Inquiry 25(4)

Appendix 32. Lose Weight by Tricking Body into Thinking It’s Cold
33. Fingertips and Forehead are Most Sensitive to Pain
1. 3D Drops Raise Hopes of Cure for Baldness 34. Bionic Pancreas Frees People From Shackles of
2. Women’s Breasts Age Faster than the Rest of their Diabetes
Body 35. Human Brain’s Ultimate Barrier to Open for First
3. Cyborg Gel Implant Fights Diabetes with Light Time
4. Sugary Drinks Tinker with Vital Proteins in the 36. Consciousness On-Off Switch Discovered Deep in
Brain Brain
5. Vastly Diluted Bleach May Have Protective Effect 37. Diabetes Drugs May Sometimes do More Harm
on Skin Than Good
6. Are Alzheimer’s and Diabetes the Same Disease? 38. Stem Cell Treatment Causes Nasal Growth in
7. Cancer Meets its Nemesis in Reprogrammed Blood Woman’s Back
Cells 39. Nerve Implant Retrains Your Brain to Stop Tinnitus
8. Replacement Artificial Heart Keeps First Patient 40. Revealed: How Ebola Paralyses the Immune System
Alive 41. Young Blood to Be Used in Ultimate Rejuvenation
9. High-Fibre Diet May Protect Against Allergic Trial
Asthma 42. Woman of 24 Found to Have no Cerebellum in her
10. Learning Drugs Reawaken Grown-Up Brain’s Inner Brain
Child 43. Man With Tiny Brain Shocks Doctor
11. Drink Two Espressos to Enhance Long-Term 44. Artificial Sweeteners Linked to Glucose Intolerance
Memory 45. “Final” Word on Female Orgasm is an Anticlimax
12. Extraordinary Stem Cell Method Tested in Human 46. Exercise May Be the Best Anti-Ageing Pill
Tissue 47. Number of Eggs a Woman has Predicts Heart Attack
13. Sugar on Trial: What You Really Need to Know Risk
14. Cure for Love: Chemical Cures for the Lovesick 48. Biological Litmus Paper Detects Ebola Strains
15. Cannabis can Kill Without the Influence of Other 49. Can Chocolate Boost Memory? Only in Insane
Drugs Amounts
16. Testicular Time Bomb: Older Dads’ Mutant Sperm 50. Guzzling Milk Might Boost Your Risk of Breaking
17. Push-Button Pleasure Bones
18. Bionic arm Gives Cyborg Drummer Superhuman 51. Brain Decoder Can Eavesdrop on Your Inner Voice
Skills 52. Arachnophobia Chopped out of a Man’s Brain
19. First Test to Predict Alzheimer’s Years in Advance 53. Why Scratching An Itch Only Makes it Worse
20. Gunshot Victims to be Suspended Between Life 54. Breast Milk Stem Cells May be Incorporated Into
and Death Baby
21. Five A Day is Not Enough Fruit and Veg for Best 55. Monster Cancer Chromosome is Made from Shattered
Health Dna
22. Rosacea May Be Caused by Mite Faeces in Your 56. The Man Who Can Hear Wi-Fi Wherever he Walks
Pores 57. Largest Study Of Gay Brothers Homes in on ‘Gay
23. Meet Your Unborn Child—Before it’s Even Genes’
Conceived 58. Bacterial Waste Makes You Feel Fuller For Longer
24. Brain Damage in American Football Linked to Head
Trauma
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
25. Flu Vaccine Helps Unravel Complex Causes of
Narcolepsy The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
26. The Therapy Pill: Forget Your Phobia in Fast to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Forward
27. Engineered Vaginas Grown in Women for the First Funding
Time The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
28. Deaf People Get Gene Tweak to Restore Natural authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Hearing
29. Protein That Shrinks Depressed Brains Identified Note
30. Spark of Life: Metabolism Appears in Lab Without 1. This was contrary to my expectations, assuming that pro-
Cells jected eye contact engages readers more through direct
31. Blood of World’s Oldest Woman Hints at Limits of appeal and involves them in a virtual interaction (Machin &
Life Mayr, 2012; Van Leeuwen, 2005).
Molek-Kozakowska
ORCID iD
Katarzyna Molek-Kozakowska https://orcid.org/0000-0001-
9455-7384
References
Barnhurst, K. G. (1994). Seeing the newspaper. New York, NY:
St. Martin’s.
Barthes, R. (1977). Image-music-text. London, England: Fontana.
Bateman, J. (2008). Multimodality and genre: A foundation for the
systematic analysis of multimodal documents. Basingstoke,
UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bauer, M., & Bucchi, M. (Eds.). (2010). Journalism, science and
society: Science communication between news and public
relations. London, England: Routledge.
Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2012). News discourse. London,
England: Continuum.
Bell, A. (1991). The language of news media. Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
Bowler, P. (2009). Science for all: The popularization of science
in early twentieth century. Chicago, IL: Chicago University
Press.
Broks, P. (2006). Understanding popular science. Maidenhead,
UK: Open University Press.
Calsamiglia, H. (2003). Popularization discourse. Discourse
Studies, 5, 139-146.
Dahlgren, P. (1992). Introduction. In P. Dahlgren & C. Sparks
(Eds.), Journalism and popular culture (pp. 1-23). London,
England: Sage.
Eldridge, J. (Ed.). (1995). Glasgow Media Group Reader: Vol.
1. News content, language, and visuals. New York, NY:
Routledge.
El Refaie, E. (2003). Understanding visual metaphor: The exam-
ple of newspaper cartoons. Visual Communication, 2, 75-96.
Fahnestock, J. (1993). Accommodating science: The rhetorical
life of scientific facts. In M. W. McRae (Ed.), The literature
of science (pp. 17-36). Athens: University of Georgia Press.
Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial metaphor in advertising. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Giora, R. (1999). On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of
literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics, 31,
919-929.
Gruber, D., & Dickerson, J. (2012). Persuasive images in popular
science: Testing judgments of scientific reasoning and cred-
ibility. Public Understanding of Science, 21, 938-948.
Harcup, T., & O’Neill, D. (2001). What is news? Galtung and
Ruge revisited. Journalism Studies, 2, 269-280.
Jensen, E. (2012). Scientific sensationalism in American and
British press coverage of therapeutic cloning. Journalism &
Mass Communication Quarterly, 89, 40-54.
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London, England:
Routledge.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The gram-
mar of visual design. London, England: Routledge.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The
modes and media of contemporary communication. London,
England: Hodder Arnold.
391
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2002). Colour as a semiotic mode:
Notes for a grammar of colour. Visual Communication, 1,
343-368.
Lacy, M. L. (1996). The power of color to heal the environment.
London, England: Rainbow Bridge Publications.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago,
IL: Chicago University Press.
Machin, D. (2008). Introduction to multimodal analysis. London,
England: Hodder Arnold.
Machin, D., & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse
analysis: A multimodal introduction. London, England:
Sage.
Martinec, R., & Salway, A. (2005). A system for image-text rela-
tions in new and old media. Visual Communication, 4, 337-
371.
McManus, J. (1994). Market-driven journalism. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Moirand, S. (2003). Communicative and cognitive dimensions
of discourse on science in the French mass media. Discourse
Studies, 5, 175-206.
Molek-Kozakowska, K. (2013). Towards a pragma-linguistic
framework for the study of sensationalism in news headlines.
Discourse & Communication, 7, 173-197.
Molek-Kozakowska, K. (2016). Framing disease, ageing and
death in popular science journalism. Brno Studies in English,
42(1), 49-69.
Molek-Kozakowska, K. (2017). Stylistic analysis of headlines in
science journalism: A case study of New Scientist. Public
Understanding of Science, 26, 894-907.
Montgomery, M. (2007). The discourse of broadcast news: A lin-
guistic approach. London, England: Routledge.
Myers, G. (2003). Discourse studies of scientific populariza-
tion: Questioning the boundaries. Discourse Studies, 5,
265-279.
Newton, J. (2001). The burden of visual truth: The role of pho-
tojournalism in mediating reality. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
O’Halloran, K. (2008). Systemic functional-multimodal dis-
course analysis (SF-MDA): Constructing ideational meaning
using language and visual imagery. Visual Communication,
7, 443-475.
O’Toole, M. (1994). The language of displayed art. Leicester,
UK: Leicester University Press.
Perrault, S. (2013). Communicating popular science: From deficit
to democracy. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Puhalla, D. (2008). Perceiving hierarchy through intrinsic color
structure. Visual Communication, 7, 199-228.
Royce, T. (1998). Synergy on the page: Exploring intersemiotic
complementarity in page-based multimodal text. JASFL
Occasional Papers, 1(1), 25-49.
Sanina, A. (2019). “Who are you kidding?” Visual political irony
in contemporary Russia. Qualitative Inquiry, 25, 432-444.
Szyma, K. (2018). The eristic of newsworthiness in the repre-
sentation of Barnevernet controversy: A case study of the
Norwegian Child Welfare Service. Res Rhetorica, 5(1), 1-20.
Trumbo, J. (1999). Visual literacy and science communication.
Science Communication, 20, 409-425.
392
Van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introduction to social semiotics. London,
England: Routledge.
Weitkamp, E. (2003). British newspapers privilege health and
medicine topics over other science news. Public Relations
Review, 29, 321-333.
Wilke, R., & Hill, M. (2019). On new forms of science communica-
tion and communication in science. A videographic approach to
visuality in science slams and academic group talks. Qualitative
Inquiry, 25, 363-378.
Wojcieszak, M. (2009). Three dimensionality: Taxonomy of
iconic, linguistic, and audio messages in television news.
Television & New Media, 10, 459-481.
Qualitative Inquiry 25(4)
Zelizer, B. (2010). About to die: How news images move the pub-
lic. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Author Biography
Katarzyna Molek-Kozakowska, PhD, is associate professor at
the Institute of English, University of Opole, Poland, specializing
in discourse analysis and media studies. She has published on rhe-
torical and stylistic properties of journalistic discourse, methodol-
ogy of critical discourse analysis and media literacy. She coedits
the international open access journal Res Rhetorica.