What’s in a name? How we define nanotech shapes public reactions

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Ashley A. Anderson (1) (4)
  Jiyoun Kim (2) (4)
  Dietram A. Scheufele (2) (3) (4)
  Dominique Brossard (2) (3) (4)
  Michael A. Xenos (4) (5)
  
• 关键词：Public opinion ; Public engagement ; Nanotechnology ; Definition
• 刊名：Journal of Nanoparticle Research
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：February 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：15
• 期：2
• 全文大小：221KB
• 参考文献：1. Cobb MD (2005) Framing effects on public opinion about nanotechnology. Sci Commun 27:221-39. doi:10.1177/1075547005281473 CrossRef
  2. Folkes VS (1988) The availability heuristic and perceived risk. J Consum Res 15:13-3. doi:10.1086/209141 CrossRef
  3. Hastie R, Park B (1986) The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the task is memory-based or online. Psychol Rev 93:258-68. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.93.3.258 CrossRef
  4. Kahan DM (2009) Nanotechnology and society: the evolution of risk perceptions. Nat Nanotech 4:705-06. doi:10.1038/nnano.2009.329 CrossRef
  5. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263-92. doi:10.2307/1914185 CrossRef
  6. Kunreuther HC (2001) Protective decisions: fear or prudence. In: Hoch SJ, Kunreuther HC, Gunther RE (eds) Wharton on making decisions. Wiley, New York, pp 259-72
  7. Lee CJ, Scheufele DA (2006) The influence of knowledge and deference toward scientific authority: a media effects model for public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Journalism Mass Commun Q 83:819-34. doi:10.1177/107769900608300406 CrossRef
  8. Peter D, Hart Associates (2006) Report findings based on a national survey of adults. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Washington
  9. Peter D, Hart Associates (2007) Awareness of and attitudes toward nanotechnology and federal regulatory agencies. Wilson International Center for Scholars Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Washington
  10. Peter D, Hart Associates (2009) Nanotechnology, synthetic biology, & public opinion: a report of findings, based on a national survey of adults. Wilson International Center for Scholars Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Washington
  11. Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanopart Res 7:659-67. doi:10.1007/s11051-005-7526-2 CrossRef
  12. Schwarz N et al (1991) Ease of retrieval as information: another look at the availability heuristic. J Pers Soc Psychol 61:195-02. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.61.2.195 CrossRef
  13. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol 5:207-32. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 CrossRef
  14. NISE Network Content Map. Available at http://www.nisenet.org/catalog/tools_guides/nanoscale_science_informal_learning_experiences_nise_network_content_map. Accessed 18 Jan 2013
  
• 作者单位：Ashley A. Anderson (1) (4)
  Jiyoun Kim (2) (4)
  Dietram A. Scheufele (2) (3) (4)
  Dominique Brossard (2) (3) (4)
  Michael A. Xenos (4) (5)
  
  1. Center for Climate Change Communication, George Mason University, 4400 University Dr., MS 6A8, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA
  4. Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center in Templated Synthesis and Assembly at the Nanoscale, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
  2. Department of Life Sciences Communication, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
  3. Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University, Gledale, AZ, USA
  5. Department of Communication Arts, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
  
• ISSN：1572-896X

文摘

Audiences are most likely to form their opinions about issues based on the aspects that are primed and easily available in their minds (Hastie and Park, Psychol Rev 93:258-68, 1986; Tversky and Kahneman, Cogn Psychol 5:207-32, 1973). In this study, we examine how priming people with various definitions of nanotechnology differently shapes public perceptions of and engagement with the technology. Using a randomized experimental design embedded in a representative survey of the U.S. population (n?=?1,736), we find that defining nanotechnology in terms of novel applications increases public support for nanotechnology but does not motivate audiences to gather more information about it. In contrast, definitions highlighting the potential risks and benefits of nanotechnology can increase likelihood of future information seeking.