ICON Web & News
Search Using OECD Database
Return to Previous Page
Addition or Correction
What’s in a name? How we define nanotech shapes public reactions
Link to Journal 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.
In this study, the authors examine how priming people with various definitions of nanotechnology differently shapes public perceptions of and engagement with the technology.
Peer Reviewed Journal Article
Exposure Or Hazard Target
Method Of Study
Risk Exposure Group
Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 15: 1421 (January 2013)
Journal of Nanoparticle Research
Anderson AA, Kim J, Scheufele DA, Brossard D, Xenos MA
Last updated on March 11, 2013
This work is supported in part by the Nanoscale Science and Engineering Initiative of the National Science Foundation
under NSF Award Number EEC-0118007.
Why Join Us?
Mission and Strategy
Good Nano Guide
Nano EHS Research Needs
Current Practices Survey