For the first time, Nature Nanotechnology (Impact Factor: 14.917) published three studies on the social impact of nanotechnology in the same issue.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scheufele, D. A., Corley, E. A., Shih, T.-j., Dalrymple, K. E., & Ho, S. S. (2008). Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States. Nat Nano, advanced online publication.
Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., & Cohen, G. (2008). Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nat Nano, advanced online publication.
Pidgeon, N., Harthorn, B. H., Bryant, K., & Rogers-Hayden, T. (2008). Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom. Nat Nano, advanced online publication.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will focus my discussion on the first two studies, since I haven't read the third one. To begin with, the Kahan and Scheufele studies shared a common theme--there exist something that shapes how people interpret messages. Kahan and colleagues suggest it to be cultural worldviews (such as egalitarian/hierarchical and communitarian/individualist ), whereas Scheufele et. al. see religiosity as the determining predisposition.
To say it simple, what these researchers argue is that the same information do not always conjure up the same meaning for people because they possess different worldviews and value predispositions. For people holding a egalitarian and communitarian worldviews, because of their pro-technology disposition, they tend to attribute information a positive light. In contrast, those who are individualist and hierarchical tend to see exactly the same information more negatively because of their proclivity to strive a balance between nature and technology, along with a balance between the rich and the poor.
Similarly, religiosity did the same job. Those who are more religious tend to see more risks associated with nanotechnology. What is noteworthy is that this relationship not only appear at the individual level, but also at the country level. Specifically, religion played a relatively important role in the US, as opposed to other countries with similar level of human development, which, in turn, leads US people to possess more reserved attitudes toward nanotechnology, compared with the more secular country such as the UK, France, and Germany. Such a difference in the level of religiosity and secular was also documented in the Secred and Secular book authored by Norris and Inglehart.
These studies were also covered by a lot of media organizations. For example:
Religion 'shun Nanotechnology' on BBC
Attitudes about nanotechnology vary according to religious and cultural differences on US News and World Report
No comments:
Post a Comment