Literature DB >> 16082707

Geneticists' views on science policy formation and public outreach.

Debra J H Mathews1, Andrea Kalfoglou, Kathy Hudson.   

Abstract

Though much research about the public's views of scientists, genetic research and its moral, ethical, and social implications exists, little has been done to investigate how scientists view their own role(s) in public discussions and policy formation related to genetic research and technologies. We interviewed 20 academic geneticists in the United States about their perceptions of the roles they and others (e.g., professional societies, the public, ethicists, and elected officials) do and should play in the formation of science policy, the communication of science to the public, and the public discussions of moral and ethical issues raised by scientific advances. The participants in our study thought that scientists should be more actively involved in public outreach and science policy formation, but frequently they felt ill-equipped and unsupported by their peers and institutions to pursue these activities. Furthermore, many were skeptical of or did not trust elected officials--who they consider uninformed about the issues and too driven by political agendas--to formulate sound science policy. They do, however, have faith in the ability of scientific societies to influence policy effectively, and some thought that societies should play a larger role, both in science policy and as a liaison between scientists and the public. Finally, participants offered suggestions for increasing the involvement and influence of scientists in science-policy formation and public discourse. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16082707     DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.30849

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med Genet A        ISSN: 1552-4825            Impact factor:   2.802


  4 in total

1.  You never call, you never write: why return of 'omic' results to research participants is both a good idea and a moral imperative.

Authors:  Misha Angrist
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.512

2.  The "how" and "whys" of research: life scientists' views of accountability.

Authors:  J M Ladd; M D Lappé; J B McCormick; A M Boyce; M K Cho
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Perceptions of genetic research in three rural Appalachian Ohio communities.

Authors:  Amy N Fullenkamp; Erin N Haynes; Lisa Meloncon; Paul Succop; Daniel W Nebert
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-08-05

4.  How academic biologists and physicists view science outreach.

Authors:  Elaine Howard Ecklund; Sarah A James; Anne E Lincoln
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.