Literature DB >> 19197308

Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology.

Dan M Kahan, Donald Braman, Paul Slovic, John Gastil, Geoffrey Cohen.   

Abstract

How is public opinion towards nanotechnology likely to evolve? The 'familiarity hypothesis' holds that support for nanotechnology will likely grow as awareness of it expands. The basis of this conjecture is opinion polling, which finds that few members of the public claim to know much about nanotechnology, but that those who say they do are substantially more likely to believe its benefits outweigh its risks. Some researchers, however, have avoided endorsing the familiarity hypothesis, stressing that cognitive heuristics and biases could create anxiety as the public learns more about this novel science. We conducted an experimental study aimed at determining how members of the public would react to balanced information about nanotechnology risks and benefits. Finding no support for the familiarity hypothesis, the study instead yielded strong evidence that public attitudes are likely to be shaped by psychological dynamics associated with cultural cognition.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19197308     DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2008.341

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol        ISSN: 1748-3387            Impact factor:   39.213


  10 in total

Review 1.  Mad cows, mad corn and mad communities: the role of socio-cultural factors in the perceived risk of genetically-modified food.

Authors:  Melissa L Finucane
Journal:  Proc Nutr Soc       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 6.297

2.  Discrimination, vulnerability, and justice in the face of risk.

Authors:  Terre A Satterfield; C K Mertz; Paul Slovic
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.000

3.  An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: cognitive appraisals of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma.

Authors:  Ellen M Peters; Burt Burraston; C K Mertz
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.000

4.  American risk perceptions: is climate change dangerous?

Authors:  Anthony A Leiserowitz
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.000

5.  Science communication. Public acceptance of evolution.

Authors:  Jon D Miller; Eugenie C Scott; Shinji Okamoto
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-08-11       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Bridging the partisan divide: Self-affirmation reduces ideological closed-mindedness and inflexibility in negotiation.

Authors:  Geoffrey L Cohen; David K Sherman; Anthony Bastardi; Lillian Hsu; Michelle McGoey; Lee Ross
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2007-09

7.  What drives public acceptance of nanotechnology?

Authors:  Steven C Currall; Eden B King; Neal Lane; Juan Madera; Stacey Turner
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 39.213

8.  A comparison of results from an alcohol survey of a prerecruited Internet panel and the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions.

Authors:  Timothy Heeren; Erika M Edwards; J Michael Dennis; Sergei Rodkin; Ralph W Hingson; David L Rosenbloom
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 3.455

9.  Anger, disgust, and presumption of harm as reactions to taboo-breaking behaviors.

Authors:  Roberto Gutierrez; Roger Giner-Sorolla
Journal:  Emotion       Date:  2007-11

10.  Gender, race, and perception of environmental health risks.

Authors:  J Flynn; P Slovic; C K Mertz
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 4.000

  10 in total
  43 in total

1.  The communication challenges presented by nanofoods.

Authors:  Timothy V Duncan
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2011-10-30       Impact factor: 39.213

2.  Adding to the mix: integrating ELSI into a National Nanoscale Science and Technology Center.

Authors:  David J Bjornstad; Amy K Wolfe
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  Ethical Discourse about the Modification of Food for Therapeutic Purposes: How Patients with Gastrointestinal Diseases View the Good, the Bad, and the Healthy.

Authors:  Krista L Harrison; Gail Geller; Patricia Marshall; Jon Tilburt; Marybeth Mercer; Margaret A Brinich; Janelle Highland; Ruth M Farrell; Richard R Sharp
Journal:  AJOB Prim Res       Date:  2012-06-19

4.  Risk perception, psychological heuristics and the water fluoridation controversy.

Authors:  Andrea M L Perrella; Simon J Kiss
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2015-04-29

5.  Nanotechnology and society. New insights into public perceptions.

Authors:  Steven C Currall
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 39.213

6.  Hearts and minds and nanotechnology.

Authors:  Chris Toumey
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2009-02-08       Impact factor: 39.213

7.  Communicating science in social settings.

Authors:  Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 8.  Food nanotechnology - an overview.

Authors:  Bhupinder S Sekhon
Journal:  Nanotechnol Sci Appl       Date:  2010-05-04

9.  Fixing the communications failure.

Authors:  Dan Kahan
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Piecing together the elephant: public engagement on nanotechnology challenges.

Authors:  Craig Cormick
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2009-06-19       Impact factor: 3.525

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.