International Council on Nanotechnology

ICON Web & News Virtual Journal Everything

Resources
	Virtual Journal
	Analyze Database
	GoodNanoGuide
	ICON Reports
	ICON Backgrounders
	Glossary
	Policy Reports
	Ratings Comment Guidelines
	Links

Quick Search:
Keywords: Search: Search Using OECD Database

Details

Return to Previous Page

Addition or Correction

Title:

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

Date:

1/2013

Link to Journal Abstract

Abstract:

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�268, 1986; Tversky and Kahneman, Cogn Psychol 5:207�232, 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.

Non-technical Summary:

In this study, the authors examine how priming people with various definitions of nanotechnology differently shapes public perceptions of and engagement with the technology.

Content Emphasis

Peer Reviewed Journal Article

Exposure Or Hazard Target

Exposure Pathway

Method Of Study

Paper Type

Particle Type