Understanding public attitudes to technology

Journal of Risk Research

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 221-235

  Frewer, Lynn J ^a   Howard, Chaya ^a   Shepherd, Richard ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF FOOD RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000811102     PISSN: 13669877     EISSN: 14664461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/136698798377141     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Alhakami, A.S. and Slovic, P. (1994) Apsychological study of attitudes, Risk Analysis 14, 1085–96.
2. Arnold, G.M. and Payne, R.W. (1989) Procedure GENPROC, in: R.W. Payne and G.M. Arnold (eds) Genstat Procedure Library Manual: Release 1.3 (2) (pp. 76–79) Oxford: Numerical Algorithms Group.
3. Arnold, G.M. and Williams, A.A. (1986) The Use of Generalized Procrustes Techniques in Sensory Analysis, in: J.R. Piggott (ed) Statistical Procedures for Food Research, pp. 233–53 London: Elsevier Applied Science.
4. Breakwell, G.M., Fife-Schaw, C., Lee, T. and Spencer, J. (1986) Attitudes to new technology in relation to social beliefs and group memberships, Current Psychological Research and Reviews 5, 34–47.
5. Breakwell, G.M., Fife-Schaw, C., Lee, T. and Spencer, J. (1987) Occupational aspirations and attitudes to new technology, Journal of Occupational Psychology 60, 169–72.
6. Brody, B.A. (1991) Scientific Responses to Moral, Cultural and Religious Concerns, in: D.J. Roy, B.E. Wynne and R.W. Old (eds) Bioscience/Society, pp. 305–13, London: Wiley.
7. Dijksterhuis, G.B. and Gower, J.C. (1991) The Interpretation of Generalised Procrustes Analysis and Allied Methods, Research Report RR-91–08, Leiden: University of Leiden, Department of Data Theory.
8. Douglas, M. (1966) Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, London: Rou tledge and Kegan Paul.
9. Drottz-Sjoberg, B.M. (1991) Perceptions of Risk : Studies of Risk Attitudes, Perceptions and Definitions, Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics.
10. Fife-Schaw, C., Breakwell, G.M., Lee, T.R. and Spencer, J. (1987) Attitudes to new technology in relation to scienti. c orientation at school, British Journal of Educational Psychology 57, 114–21.
11. Finn, D. (1984) The employment effects of the new technologies: A review of the arguments. London, HMSO: Unemployment Unit.
12. Fischoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S.S. and Combs, B. (1978) How safe is safe enough? Apsychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits, Policy Sciences 9, 127–52.
13. Foreman, C.T. (1990) Food Safety and Quality for the Consumer: Policies and Communication, in: J. Fessenden Macdonald (ed) NABC report 4, Animal Biotechnology: Opportunities and Challenges, pp. 121–26, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council: Ithaca, NY.
14. Frewer, L.J., Shepherd, R. and Sparks, P. (1994) Biotechnology and food production: knowledge and perceived risk, British Food Journal 96, 26–32.
15. Frewer, L.J., Howard, C. and Shepherd, R. (1996a) The influence of realistic product exposure on attitudes towards genetic engineering of food, Food Quality and Preference, 7, 61–67.
16. Frewer, L.J., Howard, C., Hedderley, D. and Shepherd, R. (1996b) What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs Risk Analysis, 16, 473–86.
17. Frewer, L.J., Howard, C., and Shepherd, R. (1997a) Public concerns about general and speci. c applications of genetic engineering: Risk, benefit and ethics, Science, Technology and Human Valu es 22, 98–124.
18. Frewer, L.J., Hedderley, D., Howard, C., and Shepherd, R. (1997b) Objection mapping in determining group and individual concerns regarding genetic engineering, Agriculture and Human Values 14, 1–13.
19. Frewer, L.J., Howard, C., Hedderley, D. and Shepherd, R. (1997c). Consumer attitudes towards different food-processing technologies used in cheese production – the mediating influence of consumer benefit, Food Quality and Preference 8, 271–80.
20. Gains, N. and Thompson, M.H. (1990) Sensory pro. ling of canned lager beers using consumers in their own homes, Food Quality and Preference 2, 39–47.
21. Gower, J.C. (1975) Generalized Procrustes analysis, Psychometric A40, 33–51.
22. Guy, C., Piggott, J.R. and Marie, S. (1989) Consumer profiling of scotch whisky, Food Quality and Preference 1, 69–73.
23. Kelly, G.A. (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs: A Theory of Personality, New York: Norton.
24. Matthews, J., Breakwell, G. and Fife-Schaw, C. (1989) Young peoples attitudes to new technology in Devon: An element in regional growth potential, Geoforum 20, 27–35.
25. Maharik, M., and Fischhoff, B. (1993) Risk knowledge and risk attitudes regarding nuclear energy sources in space, Risk Analysis 13, 345–53.
26. Raats, M.M., and Shepherd, R. (1991/1992) An evaluation of the use and perceived appropriateness of milk using the repertory grid method and the item by use appropriateness method, Food Quality and Preference 3, 89–100.
27. Raats, M.M., Sparks, P. and Grudgeon, S. (1994) Risk Perception and the Psychometric Paradigm, in: Search of New Methods, Proceedings, Society for Risk Analysis Annual Conference, 4–7 December, pp. 12, Baltimore, US.
28. Raats, M.M., and Shepherd, R. (1996) Developing A subject derived terminology to describe perceptions of chemicals in food, Risk Analysis 16, 133–36.
29. Slovic, P. (1992) Perceptions of Risk: Reflections on the Psychometric Paradigm, in: D. Golding and S. Krimsky (eds), Social Theories of Risk, pp. 117–52, Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood.
30. Slovic, P., Kraus, N.N., Lappe, H. and Major, M. (1991) Risk Perception of Prescription Drugs: Report on ASu rvey in Canada, Canadian Journal of Public Health 82, S15-S20.
31. Steger, M.A.E., Pierce, J.C., Steel, B.S. and Lovrich, N.P. (1989) Political culture, post material values, and the new environmental paradigm: A comparative analysis of Canada and the United States, Political Behaviour 11, 233–54.
32. Thompson, M. (1980) The Aesthetics of Risk: Culture or Context? In: W.C. Schwing and W.A. Albers (eds) Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe is Safe Enough? pp. 273–85, New York: Plenum.
33. Williams, A.A., and Arnold, G.M. (1985) A comparison of the aromas of six coffees characterised by conventional profiling, free choice pro. ling and similarity scaling methods, Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 36, 204–14.