Affiliation bias and expert disagreement in framing the nicotine addictiondebate

This study examined the relation between professional affiliation and the f raming of expert congressional testimony about nicotine's addictiveness. Ex perts were chosen from three different types of sponsoring organizations: t he tobacco industry, government, and independent research organizations, bo th pro- and anti-tobacco. The study sought to identify common technical bia ses and policy concerns that could define an overall "expert" attitude, as well os differences where the experts' framing of nicotine addiction would reveal attempts to favor their own institutions. Semantic network analysis was applied to each group's discourse, thereby clustering associated words that represented major themes in each type of expert group. Clusters reveal ed a common preoccupation with narrowly defined, lab-based evidence. bur mo re locally, each group framed the issues to support its sponsor's strategy.