'Ambivalent' individual preferences towards biotechnology in the European Union: Products or processes?

Journal of Risk Research

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 341-354

  Costa Font, Joan ^a,b   Mossialos, Elias ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Ambivalence; Biotechnology; Risk perceptions

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; PUBLIC POLICY; RISK PERCEPTION; ROBUSTNESS (CONTROL SYSTEMS);

AMBIVALENCE; DECISION MAKERS; MORAL CONCERNS;

BIOTECHNOLOGY;

EID: 31144473510     PISSN: 13669877     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1366987042000275091     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Bauer, M., Gaskell, G. and Durant, J. (2002) Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy, New York: Cambridge University Press.
2. Holender, J. (2001) A two-tiered cognitive architecture for moral reasoning, Biology and Philosophy 16, 339-56.
3. Costa, J. and Mossialos, E. (2003) Attitudes toward Biotechnology Applications in the UK: the Role of Knowledge and Beliefs, LSE Health and Social Care Discussion Papers Series 10-2003.
4. Costa, J. and Mossialos, E. (2002) Do risk perceptions vary across European Countries?, Pharmaceutical Policy and Law 5, 167-83.
5. Eagly, A. H. and Chaiken, S. (1993) The Psychology of Attitudes, Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
6. Gaskell, G. (1997) Europe ambivalent on biotechnology, Nature 387, 845-47.
7. Gaskell, G., Allum, N., Bauer, M., Jackson, J., Howard, S. and Lindslay, N. (2003) Ambivalent GM Nation? Public Attitudes to Biotechnology in the UK, 1991-2002, Life Sciences in European Society Report: London School of Economics and Political Science.
8. Gaskell, G., Bauer, M., Durant, J. and Allum, N. (1999) Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the US, Science 285, 384-87.
9. Gaskell, G., Allum, N., Bauer, M., Durant, J., Allansdottir, A., Bonfadelli, H., Boy, T., de Cheveigné, S., Fjaestad, B., Gulteling, J. M., Hampel, J., Jelsøe, E., Jesuino, J. C., Kohring, M., Kronberger, N., Midden, C., Nielsen, T. H., Przestalski, A., Rusanen, T., Sakellaris, G., Torgersen, H., Twardowski, T. and Wagner, W. (2000) 'Biotechnology and the European public, Nature Biotechnology 18, 935-42.
10. Health, C. and Tversky, A. (1991) Preferences and beliefs; ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 4, 29-59.
11. Heijis, W. J. M., Miden, C. J. H. and Drabbe, R. A. J. (1993) Biotechnology: Attitudes and Influencing Factors, Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.
12. Hoban, J. (1996) Trends in consumer attitudes about biotechnology, Journal of Food Distribution Research 27, 1-10.
13. Hoban, J. (1997) consumer acceptance of biotechnology: an international perspective, Nature Biotechnology 15, 232-34.
14. INRA (2000) The Europeans and Biotechnology, Directorate General for Research, 15 March 2000.
15. Johnson, E. J. and Tversky, A. (1983) Affect, generalisation and the perception of risk, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45, 20-31.
16. Kanheman, D. and Tversky, A. (1972) Subjective probability: a judgement of representativeness, Cognitive Psychology 3, 430-54.
17. Katz, I. (1981) Stigma: A Social Psychological Analysis, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Katz, I. and Hass, R. G. (1988) Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55, 893-905.
19. Kaplan, K. J. (1972) On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement: a suggested modification of the semantic differential technique, Psychological Bulletin 77, 361-72.
20. Lujan, J. L. and Todt, O. (2000) Perceptions, attitudes and ethical valuations: the ambivalence of the public image of biotechnology in Spain, Public Understanding of Science 9, 383-92.
21. Macer, D. (1994) Perception of risks and benefits of in vitro fertilisation, genetic engineering and biotechnology, Social Science and Medicine 38, 23-33.
22. Macer, D. (1996) Public Acceptance and Risks of Biotechnology, in Quality of Risk Assessment in Biotechnology, pp. 227-246. Tilburg, The Netherlands: International Centre for Human and Public Affairs.
23. Maio, G. R., Bell, D. W. and Esses, V. M. (1996) Ambivalence and persuasion: the processing of messages about immigrant groups, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 32, 513-36.
24. Sheehy, H., Legault, M. and Ireland, D. (1998) Consumers and biotechnology: a synopsis of survey and focus group research, Journal of Consumer Policy 21, 359-86.
25. Thompson, M. M., Zanna, M. P. and Griffin, D. W. (1995) Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence., In R. E and and J. A (eds) Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences, pp. 361-386. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Wahlberg, A. and Sjoberg, L. (2000) Risk perception and the media, Journal of Risk Research 3, 31-50.