As both PLOS papers made clear, there are things that journal reviewers and editors can do to guard against spin and indicate when and where new findings refute or attenuate earlier conclusions—and both papers have their own limitations, having to do mostly with the fairly narrow scope of each. But there’s no doubt that “single study syndrome,” as The New York Times’s Andrew Revkin calls it, is one of the most vexing disorders in science journalism. While it’s hard to talk about a cure, skeptical coverage that gives greater context to the latest research can do a lot to alleviate the symptoms.

If you'd like to get email from CJR writers and editors, add your email address to our newsletter roll and we'll be in touch.


More in The Observatory

No debate about environment

Read More »

Curtis Brainard writes on science and environment reporting. Follow him on Twitter @cbrainard.