Literature DB >> 22045550

Hype and public trust in science.

Zubin Master1, David B Resnik.   

Abstract

Social scientists have begun elucidating the variables that influence public trust in science, yet little is known about hype in biotechnology and its effects on public trust. Many scholars claim that hyping biotechnology results in a loss of public trust, and possibly public enthusiasm or support for science, because public expectations of the biotechnological promises will be unmet. We argue for the need for empirical research that examines the relationships between hype, public trust, and public enthusiasm/support. We discuss the complexities in designing empirical studies that provide evidence for a causal link between hype, public trust, and public enthusiasm/support, but also illustrate how this may be remedied. Further empirical research on hype and public trust is needed in order to improve public communication of science and to design evidence-based education on the responsible conduct of research for scientists. We conclude that conceptual arguments made on hype and public trust must be nuanced to reflect our current understanding of this relationship.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22045550      PMCID: PMC3954634          DOI: 10.1007/s11948-011-9327-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  45 in total

1.  Genetic optimism: framing genes and mental illness in the news.

Authors:  P Conrad
Journal:  Cult Med Psychiatry       Date:  2001-06

2.  Gene therapy and the public: a matter of trust.

Authors:  H Gottweis
Journal:  Gene Ther       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 5.250

3.  Role and reality: technology transfer at Canadian universities.

Authors:  Tania M Bubela; Timothy Caulfield
Journal:  Trends Biotechnol       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 19.536

4.  Who does the public trust? The case of genetically modified food in the United States.

Authors:  John T Lang; William K Hallman
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.000

5.  Belief in public efficacy, trust, and attitudes toward modern genetic science.

Authors:  J Barnett; H Cooper; V Senior
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.000

6.  A code of ethics for the life sciences.

Authors:  Nancy L Jones
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.525

Review 7.  The ethics of expectations: biobanks and the promise of personalised medicine.

Authors:  Alan Petersen
Journal:  Monash Bioeth Rev       Date:  2009-03

8.  Stem-cell tourism and scientific responsibility. Stem-cell researchers are in a unique position to curb the problem of stem-cell tourism.

Authors:  Zubin Master; David B Resnik
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 8.807

9.  Stem cell research as innovation: expanding the ethical and policy conversation.

Authors:  Rebecca Dresser
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 1.718

10.  Scientific research and the public trust.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2010-08-29       Impact factor: 3.525

View more
  19 in total

1.  To hype, or not to(o) hype. Communication of science is often tarnished by sensationalization, for which both scientists and the media are responsible.

Authors:  Andrea Rinaldi
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  Defining Nano, Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine: Why Should It Matter?

Authors:  Priya Satalkar; Bernice Simone Elger; David M Shaw
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  Research Ethics 2.0: New Perspectives on Norms, Values, and Integrity in Genomic Research in Times of Even Scarcer Resources.

Authors:  Caroline Brall; Els Maeckelberghe; Rouven Porz; Jihad Makhoul; Peter Schröder-Bäck
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 2.000

4.  Data-Intensive Science and Research Integrity.

Authors:  David B Resnik; Kevin C Elliott; Patricia A Soranno; Elise M Smith
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2017-05-08       Impact factor: 2.622

5.  Promoting public trust: ESCROs won't fix the problem of stem cell tourism.

Authors:  Zubin Master; David B Resnik
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 11.229

6.  A Dichotomy of Information-Seeking and Information-Trusting: Stem Cell Interventions and Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders.

Authors:  Kimberly Sharpe; Nina Di Pietro; Karen J Jacob; Judy Illes
Journal:  Stem Cell Rev Rep       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 5.739

7.  On being a (modern) scientist: risks of public engagement in the UK interspecies embryo debate.

Authors:  James Porter; Clare Williams; Steven Wainwright; Alan Cribb
Journal:  New Genet Soc       Date:  2012-05-22

8.  Is extinction forever?

Authors:  Brenda D Smith-Patten; Eli S Bridge; Priscilla H C Crawford; Daniel J Hough; Jeffrey F Kelly; Michael A Patten
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2015-02-23

9.  Understanding public opinion in debates over biomedical research: looking beyond political partisanship to focus on beliefs about science and society.

Authors:  Matthew Nisbet; Ezra M Markowitz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The Impact of Communicating Uncertainty on Public Responses to Precision Medicine Research.

Authors:  Chelsea L Ratcliff; Bob Wong; Jakob D Jensen; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2021-10-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.