Hypothesis 3 states that articles about race and genetics that are health-related will be framed in a more objective, scientific manner and have less controversy or ideological content than articles not related to health. Consistent with this expectation, Table 2 shows that articles discussing health-related racial differences were significantly less likely to mention racism (mean rating .51 for health-related versus .94 for non–health-related; p < .01) or discuss ethical concerns (mean rating .63 for health-related versus 1.03 for non–health-related; p < .001). Genetic causes were presented in much more affirmative terms—that is, endorsing rather than refuting genetic causes—when the outcome in question was a health-related racial difference (mean endorsement rating = 4.28) than when the outcome was not health-related (mean endorsement rating = 2.76; p < .001). The magnitude of all these differences is large. The two types of articles differ by nearly half a standard deviation for racism and ethical concerns and by more than one standard deviation for endorsement of genetic cause. Hypothesis 3 is thus strongly supported.
