Bias in the exchange of arguments: The case of scientists' evaluation of lay viewpoints on GM food

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 591-606

  Cuppen, Eefje ^a   Hisschemöller, Matthijs ^a   Midden, Cees ^b  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIOTECHNOLOGY; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

ADULT; BIOTECHNOLOGY; COMMUNICATION; FOOD, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; QUESTIONNAIRES; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 70349218137     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662508091021     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Appelstrand, M. (2002) Participation and Societal Values: The Challenge for Lawmakers and Policy Practitioners, Forest Policy and Economics 4: 281-90.
2. Berry, B. (1969) The Public Interest, in W. Connolly (ed.) The Bias of Pluralism, pp. 159-78. New York: Atherton Press.
3. Bodenhausen, G.V. and Lichtenstein, M. (1987) Social Stereotypes and Information-processing Strategies: The Impact of Task Complexity, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52: 871-80.
4. Bodenhausen, G.V., Macrae, C.N. and Sherman, J.W. (1999) On the Dialectics of Discrimination, in S. Chaiken and Y. Trope (eds) Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology, pp. 271-90. London: The Guilford Press.
5. Bohman, J. (1996) Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Breckler, S.J. (1984) Empirical Validation of Affect, Behavior, and Cognition as Distinct Components of Attitude, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47: 1191-205.
7. Cobb, R.W. and Elder, C.D. (1983) Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda Building. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
8. Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A. (1982) Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
9. Downs, A. (1967) Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.
10. Durant, J. (1999) Participatory Technology Assessment and the Democratic Model of the Public Understanding of Science, Science and Public Policy 26: 313-9.
11. Easton, D. (1953) The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
12. Edelenbos, J. and Klijn, E.H. (2006) Managing Stakeholder Involvement in Decision-making: A Comparative Analysis of Six Interactive Processes in the Netherlands, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16: 417-46.
13. Einsiedel, E.F., Jelsoe, E. and Breck, T. (2001) Publics at the Technology Table: The Consensus Conference in Denmark, Canada, and Australia, Public Understanding of Science 10: 83-98.
14. Ester, P., Vinken, H. and Van der Straaten, J. (1999) Besluitvormers, publiek en het milieudebat. Politieke representatie en maatschappelijk draagvlak voor het Nederlandse milieubeleid in het Global Environmental Survey (GOES), Globus [online]. URL: www.tilburguniversity.nl/globus/publications/publications99.html
15. Fischer, F. (1990) Technocracy and the Politics of Expertise. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
16. Fischer, F. (1995) Evaluating Public Policy. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Inc.
17. Fischer, F. (2000) Citizens, Experts and the Environment. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
18. Fishkin, J.S. (1995) The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19. Funtowicz, S.O. and Ravetz, J.R. (1993) Science for the Post-Normal Age, Futures 25: 739-55.
20. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge. London: SAGE.
21. Gough, C., Darier, E., De Marchi, B., Funtowicz, F., Grove-White, R., Guimarães Pereira, A. et al. (2003) Contexts of Citizen Participation, in B. Kasemir, J. Jäger, C.C. Jaeger and M.T. Gardner (eds) Public Participation in Sustainability Science, pp. 37-61. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Hamilton, D.L. and Trolier, T.K. (1986) Stereotypes and Stereotyping: An Overview of the Cognitive Approach, in J.F. Dovidio and S.L. Gaertner (eds) Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism, pp. 127-64. London: Academic Press.
23. Hisschemöller, M. (2003) Participation as Knowledge Production and the Limits of Democracy, in S. Maasen and P. Weingart (eds) The 2003 Yearbook of the Sociology of the Sciences, pp. 1-20. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
24. Hisschemöller, M. and Hoppe, R. (2001) Coping with Intractable Controversies: The Case for Problem Structuring in Policy Design and Analysis, in M. Hisschemöller, R. Hoppe, W.N. Dunn and J.R. Ravetz (eds) Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis, pp. 47-72. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Transaction.
25. Hisschemöller, M. and Midden, C.J.H. (1989) Technological Risk, Policy Theories and Public Perception in Connection with the Siting of Hazardous Facilities, in C. Vlek and G. Cvetkovich (eds) Social Decision Methodology for Technological Projects, 1st edn, pp. 173-94. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
26. Hisschemöller, M., Hoppe, R., Dunn, W.N. and Ravetz, J.R. (2001) Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis: An Introduction, in M. Hisschemöller, R. Hoppe, W.N. Dunn and J.R. Ravetz (eds) Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Transaction.
27. Huitema, D. (2003) Siting Unwanted Land-uses: Does Interactive Decision-making Help?, in B. Denters, O. Van Heffen, J. Huisman and P.J. Klok (eds) The Rise of Interactive Governance and Quasi-markets, pp. 171-98. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
28. Jelsma, J. (2001) Frame-reflective Policy Analysis in Practice: Co-evolution of a Policy Regime and an Intractable Controversy in Biotechnology, in M. Hisschemöller, R. Hoppe, W.N. Dunn and J.R. Ravetz (eds) Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis, pp. 201-28. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Transaction.
29. Joss, S. (2002) Towards the Public Sphere: Reflections on the Development of Participatory Technology Assessment, Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 22: 220-31.
30. Joss, S. (2005) Between Policy and Politics. Or: Whatever do Weapons of Mass Destruction Have to do with GM Crops? The UK's GM Nation Public Debate as an Example of Participatory Governance, in S. Maasen and P. Weingart (eds) Democratization of Expertise? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-making, pp. 171-88. Dordrecht: Springer.
31. Joss, S. and Brownlea, A. (1999) Considering the Concept of Procedural Justice for Public Policy- and Decision-making in Science and Technology, Science and Public Policy 26: 321-30.
32. Joss, S. and Durant, J. (1995) The UK National Consensus Conference on Plant Biotechnology, Public Understanding of Science 4: 195-204.
33. Kasemir, B., Jaeger, C.C. and Jäger, J. (2003) Citizen Participation in Sustainability Assessments, in B. Kasemir, J. Jäger, C.C. Jaeger and M.T. Gardner (eds) Public Participation in Sustainability Science, pp. 3-36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Laird, F. (1993) Participatory Analysis, Democracy, and Technological Decision Making, Science Technology and Human Values 18: 341-61.
35. Lijphart, A. (1968) The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands. Berkeley: University of California Press.
36. Lindblom, C.E. and Cohen, D.K. (1979) Usable Knowledge: Social Science and Social Problem Solving. New Haven: Yale University Press.
37. Linville, P.W., Salovey, P. and Fischer, G.W. (1986) Stereotyping and Perceived Distributions of Social Characteristics: An Application to Ingroup-Outgroup Perception, in J.F. Dovidio and S.L. Gaertner (eds) Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism, pp. 165-208. London: Academic Press.
38. Marris, C., Wynne, B., Simmons, P. and Weldon, S. (2001) Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe. University of Lancaster, Centre for the Study of Environmental Change.
39. Meijnders, A.L., Midden, C.J.H., Kohring, M., Olofsson, A., Ohman, S., Matthes, J. et al. (forthcoming) Evaluating Genetically Modified Food: Determinants of Trust in Information Sources, Risk Analysis.
40. Midden, C.J.H. and Louw, C. (1994) Emotieve factoren in consumentengedrag, in C.J.H. Midden and S. Chaiken (eds) Consument and Milieu: Beoordeling van milieurisico's en sturing van gedrag, pp. 213-28. Houten/ Zaventem: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.
41. Midden, C.J.H. and Meijnders, A.L. (2001) Public Perceptions of Environmental Risks and Willingness to Act, in M. Hisschemöller, R. Hoppe, W.N. Dunn and J.R. Ravetz (eds) Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis, pp. 297-316. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Transaction.
42. Mitroff, I.I., Mason, R.O. and Barabba, V.P. (1983) The 1980 Census: Policymaking amid Turbulence. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
43. Pateman, C. (1979) The Problem of Political Obligation: A Critique of Liberal Theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.
44. Pellizzoni, L. (2001) The Myth of the Best Argument: Power, Deliberation and Reason, British Journal of Sociology 52: 59-86.
45. Poortinga, W. and Pidgeon, N.F. (2005) Trust in Risk Regulation: Cause or Consequence of the Acceptability of GM Food?, Risk Analysis 25: 199-209.
46. Sabatier, P. and Jenkins-Smith, H. (eds) (1993) Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Framework. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
47. Schön, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
48. Schön, D.A. and Rein, M. (1994) Frame Reflection: Towards the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. New York: Basic Books.
49. Sherif, M. and Hovland, C.I. (1961) Social Judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change. Oxford: Yale University Press.
50. Slovic, P., Finucane, M.L., Peters, E. and MacGregor, D.G. (2004) Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect Reason, Risk, and Rationality Risk Analysis 24: 311-22.
51. Thompson Klein, J. (2004) Prospects for Transdisciplinarity, Futures 36: 515-26.
52. Van de Kerkhof, M. (2004) Debating Climate Change: A Study of Stakeholder Participation in a Integrated Assessment of Long-term Climate Policy in the Netherlands. Utrecht: Lemma.
53. Vandenabeele, J. and Goorden, L. (2004) Consensus Conference on Genetic Testing: Citizenship and Technology, Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 14: 207-13.
54. Vaughan, E. and Seifert, M. (1992) Variability in the Framing of Risk Issues, Journal of Social Issues 48: 119-35.
55. Webler, T. (1995) 'Right' Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick, in O. Renn, T. Webler and P. Wiedemann (eds) Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation, pp. 35-86. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
56. White, M.P., Pahl, S., Buehner, M. and Haye, A. (2003) Trust in Risky Messages: The Role of Prior Attitudes, Risk Analysis 23: 717-26.
57. Woodhouse, E.J. and Nieusma, D.A. (2001) Democratic Expertise: Integrating Knowledge, Power, and Participation, in M. Hisschemöller, R. Hoppe, W.N. Dunn and J.R. Ravetz (eds) Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis, pp. 73-96. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Transaction.
58. Zeelenberg, M. and Aarts, H. (1999) Affect en cognitie, in R. Vonk (ed.) Cognitieve sociale psychologie: psychologie van het dagelijks denken en doen, pp. 367-403. Utrecht: Lemma.