| 查看: 730 | 回复: 3 | ||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | ||
[资源]
【专题】Nature Nanotechnology：公众如何看待纳米技术
|
||
|
2009-04-16 《自然―纳米技术》 公众如何看待纳米技术的利弊得失？在2008年12月在线出版的《自然—纳米技术》（Nature Nanotechnology）期刊上，三篇文章探讨了这个问题。 有关纳米技术的民意调查显示，在熟悉纳米技术的人群中，只有少部分人对之持赞成态度，这一结论让许多人推测，随着公众对纳米的认识度增加，他们会支持这种新技术。然而，耶鲁法学院的Dan Kahan和同事的实验并不支持这种“熟悉性假设”，他们发现有一种类型的人，他们对纳米技术信息的寻找以及作出的反应取决于文化因素。当面临平衡的信息时，赞成商业价值的人倾向于认为这种技术利大于弊，这些人很可能已经很熟悉纳米技术了，与此同时，反对商业价值的人则倾向于认为这种技术的弊大于利。 在第二篇论文中，威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校的Dietram Scheufele和同事作了一项有趣的分析，他们在美国和欧洲对比了宗教信仰对人们在纳米技术态度上的不同影响。他们发现在奥地利、爱尔兰、意大利和美国这种普遍有宗教信仰的国家，人们明显在道德上难以接受纳米技术的使用，与其他更世俗的国家中人们的反应相反，这些国家包括丹麦、法国、德国和瑞典。在美国国内，他们也在有宗教信仰和无宗教信仰之间的人群中发现了类似的差异。 在第三篇论文中，卡迪夫大学的Nick Pidgeon和合作者利用在美国和英国的工作论坛，对比了人们在能量和健康应用上对纳米技术的不同态度。这种工作论坛允许研究人员在比民意调查更为细致的基础上，分析人们对新技术的反应。在这两个国家中，他们发现论坛的参与者倾向于关注“利”而不是“弊”；相比较于健康和人类质量的提升，纳米技术在能量的应用上受到更多的正面关注。（来源：科学时报 王丹红） （《自然—纳米技术》（Nature Nanotechnology），doi:10.1038/nnano.2008.341，Dan M. Kahan，Donald Braman） （《自然—纳米技术》（Nature Nanotechnology），doi:10.1038/nnano.2008.361，Dietram A. Scheufele，Elizabeth A. Corley） （《自然—纳米技术》（Nature Nanotechnology），doi:10.1038/nnano.2008.362，Nick Pidgeon，Barbara Herr Harthorn） [ Last edited by gshsheng on 2009-6-20 at 12:52 ] |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
化工学院（学院正式调剂群+联系方式）
已经有0人回复
-
化工学院（学院官方群）-院士团队招生-学生自由度高-培养模式成熟高效
已经有0人回复
-
无机化学论文润色/翻译怎么收费?
已经有215人回复
-
黑龙江大学分析化学招调剂
已经有0人回复
-
武汉高校国家级人才团队招收材料，化学，纺织等专业硕士调剂生
已经有26人回复
-
纺大化工学院（官方群）-院士团队招生-学生自由度高发展好-培养模式成熟
已经有0人回复
-
温州大学化材学院王娟课题组招生
已经有5人回复
-
学院官方群-院士团队招生-学生自由度高-培养模式成熟已有10余名学生赴985海外深造
已经有0人回复
-
武汉纺织大学化工学院官方群-院士团队招生-学生自由度高-10余名学生赴985海外深造
已经有0人回复
-
南昌航空大学蒋华麟教授课题组招收化学、环境、碳达峰碳中和及相关专业硕士信息
已经有0人回复
-
湖北师范大学复试调剂
已经有0人回复
» 本主题相关商家推荐: (我也要在这里推广)
|
Nature Nanotechnology 4 , 87 - 90 (2008) Published online: 7 December 2008 | doi :10.1038/nnano.2008.341 Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology Dan M. Kahan 1 , Donald Braman 2 , Paul Slovic 3 , John Gastil 4 & Geoffrey Cohen 5 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. Yale Law School, PO Box 208215, 127 Wall Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA The George Washington University Law School, 2000 H Street, NW, Washington, Dictrict of Columbia 20052, USA Decision Research 1201 Oak Street, Suite 200 Eugene, Oregon 97401, USA Department of Communication, University of Washington, Box 353740 Seattle, Washington 98195, USA Department of Psychology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Muenzinger Psychology Building, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA |
2楼2009-04-18 09:49:17
|
Nature Nanotechnology 4 , 91 - 94 (2008) Published online: 7 December 2008 | doi :10.1038/nnano.2008.361 Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States Dietram A. Scheufele 1 , Elizabeth A. Corley 2 , Tsung-jen Shih 3 , Kajsa E. Dalrymple 3 & Shirley S. Ho 4 How do citizens make sense of nanotechnology as more applications reach the market and the mainstream media start to debate the potential risks and benefits of technology ? As with many other political and scientific issues, citizens rely on cognitive shortcuts or heuristics to make sense of issues for which they have low levels of knowledge . These heuristics can include predispositional factors, such as ideological beliefs or value systems , and also short-term frames of reference provided by the media or other sources of information . Recent research suggests that 'religious filters' are an important heuristic for scientific issues in general , and nanotechnology in particular . A religious filter is more than a simple correlation between religiosity and attitudes toward science: it refers to a link between benefit perceptions and attitudes that varies depending on respondents' levels of religiosity. In surveys, seeing the benefits of nanotechnology is consistently linked to more positive attitudes about nanotechnology among less religious respondents, with this effect being significantly weaker for more religious respondents . For this study, we have combined public opinion surveys in the United States with Eurobarometer surveys about public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe to compare the influence of religious beliefs on attitudes towards nanotechnology in the United States and Europe. Our results show that respondents in the United States were significantly less likely to agree that nanotechnology is morally acceptable than respondents in many European countries. These moral views correlated directly with aggregate levels of religiosity in each country, even after controlling for national research productivity and measures of science performance for high-school students. Department of Life Sciences Communication, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 309 Hiram Smith Hall, 1545 Observatory Drive, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA School of Public Affairs, Arizona State University, 411 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004, USA School of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 821 University Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, 31 Nanyang Link, Singapore 637718, Singapore |
3楼2009-04-18 09:50:38
|
Nature Nanotechnology 4 , 95 - 98 (2008) Published online: 7 December 2008 | doi :10.1038/nnano.2008.362 Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom Nick Pidgeon 1 , Barbara Herr Harthorn 2 , Karl Bryant 3 & Tee Rogers-Hayden 4 Emerging nanotechnologies pose a new set of challenges for researchers, governments, industries and citizen organizations that aim to develop effective modes of deliberation and risk communication early in the research and development process. These challenges derive from a number of issues including the wide range of materials and devices covered by the term 'nanotechnology', the many different industrial sectors involved, the fact that many areas of nanotechnology are still at a relatively early stage of development, and uncertainty about the environmental, health and safety impacts of nanomaterials . Public surveys have found that people in the United States and Europe currently view the benefits of nanotechnologies as outweighing their risks although, overall, knowledge about nanotechnology remains very low. However, surveys cannot easily uncover the ways that people will interpret and understand the complexities of nanotechnologies (or any other topic about which they know very little) when asked to deliberate about it in more depth, so new approaches to engaging the public are needed. Here, we report the results of the first comparative United States–United Kingdom public engagement experiment. Based upon four concurrent half-day workshops debating energy and health nanotechnologies we find commonalities that were unexpected given the different risk regulatory histories in the two countries. Participants focused on benefits rather than risks and, in general, had a high regard for science and technology. Application context was much more salient than nation as a source of difference, with energy applications viewed in a substantially more positive light than applications in health and human enhancement in both countries. More subtle differences were present in views about the equitable distribution of benefits, corporate and governmental trustworthiness, the risks to realizing benefits, and in consumerist attitudes. School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK NSF Centre for Nanotechnology in Society, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106, USA Department of Sociology and Women's Studies Program, State University of New York at New Paltz, 600 Hawk Drive, New Paltz, New York 12561, USA School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK |
4楼2009-04-18 09:50:56
