Ethical perception of modern biotechnology

African Journal of Biotechnology

Volumn 10, Issue 58, 2011, Pages 12435-12447

  Amin, Latifah ^a   Azlan, Noor Ayuni Ahmad ^a   Hashim, Hasrizul ^a   Ahmad, Jamil ^a  

^a UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Ethical aspects; Malaysia; Modern biotechnology; Perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; DEVELOPING COUNTRY; EDUCATION; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALAYSIA; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; NAMED GROUPS OF PERSONS; NON GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION; POLICY MAKER; PRODUCER; RACE; RELIABILITY; RELIGION; RISK FACTOR; SCIENTIST; SEX DIFFERENCE; TRANSGENIC ORGANISM; UNIVERSITY STUDENT;

EID: 80053350837     PISSN: 16845315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aiken LR (1994). Psychological testing and assessment. (8th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
2. BABAS (1999). Ethical aspects of Agricultural Biotechnology. Report of the EFB Task Group on Public Perceptions of Biotechnology. Cambridge Biomedical Consultants: The Hague.
3. Batalion N (2000). Harmful effects of genetically modified foods. Available on http://www.cqs.com/50harm,htm
4. BIOTEK-National Biotechnology Divison. Biotechnology in Malaysia. Available on http://www.biotek.gov.my.
5. Brody CJ (1984). Differences by sex in support for nuclear power. Soc. Forces, 63: 209-228
6. Cohen J (1969). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Academic Press.
7. Costa-Font M, Gil JM (2009). Structural equation modelling of consumer acceptance of genetically modified (GM) food in the Mediterranean Europe: a cross country study. Food qual. Prefer, 20: 399-409
8. Chern WS, Rickertsen K, Tsuboi N, Fu T (2002). Consumer acceptance and willingness to pay for genetically modified vegetable oil and salmon: A multiple-country assessment. AgBioForum, Available on http://www.agbioforum.org. 5(3): 105-112
9. Connor M, Siegrist M (2010). Factors influencing people's acceptance of gene technology: the role of knowledge, health expectations, naturalness and social trust. Sci. Commun. 32 (4): 514-538
10. De Joy D (1992). An examination of gender differences in traffic accident risk perception. J. AAP, 24: 237-246
11. De Vellis RF (1991). Scale development. Sage Publications: Newbury Park, New Jersey.
12. EFB (1996). Briefing Paper 1 of the EFB Task Group on Public Perceptions of Biotechnology. Available on www.efbcentral.org/.../Patenting-in-Biotechnology.English.pdf
13. Eisendel EF (2000). Cloning and its discontents - a Canadian perspective. Nat. Biotechnol. 8(9): 943-944
14. Firdaus-Raih M, Senafi S, Murad A, Sidik N, Kiew Lian W, Daud F, Zainal Ariffin S, Zamrod Z, Chon Seng T, Othman A, Harmin S, Saad M, Mohamed R (2005). A nationwide biotechnology outreach and awareness program for Malaysian high schools. Electron. J. Biotechnol. Available on http://www.ejbiotechnology.info/content/vol8/issue1/full/2/index.html.
15. Furedi F (1997). Culture of fear. Risk-taking and the morality of low expectation. London-New York: Continuum.
16. Gaskell G, Alum N, Baouer M, Durant J, Allansdottir A, Bonfadelli H, Boy D, Cheveigne DS, Fjaestad B, Gutteling JM, Hampel J, Jelsoe E, Jesuino JG, Kohring M, Kronberger N, Midden C, Nielsen TH, Przestalski A, Rusanen T, Sakellaris G, Torgersen H, Twardowski T, Wagner W (2000). Biotechnology and the European public. Nat. Biotechnol. (18): 935-938
17. Gaskell G, Allum N, Stares S (2003). Europeans and biotechnology in 2002. A report to the EC Directorate General for Research from the project 'Life Sciences in European Society'. QLG7-CT-1999-00286
18. Glenn LM (2004). Ethical issues in Genetic Engineering and Transgenics. Available on http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/glenn.html.
19. Gott M, Monamy V (2004). Ethics and transgenesis: toward a policy framework incorporating intrinsic objections and societal perceptions. ATLA 32 Supplement, 1: 391-396
20. Hallman WK, Hebden WC, Aquino HL, Cuite CL, Lang JT (2003). Public perceptions of genetically modified foods: a national study of Americans knowledge and opinion. New Brunswick: New Jersey.
21. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1992). Multivariate data analysis with readings. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.
22. Hajj MAA-H (2001). Genetic engeenering. Available on http://nuradeen.com/archives/CurrentIssues/GeneticEngineering.htm
23. Hansen J, Holm L, Frewer L, Robinson P, Sandoe P (2003). Beyond the knowledge deficit: recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks. Appetite, 41(2): 111-121
24. Hossain FO, Benjamin O, Adesoji A, Brian S, Hallman W (2002). Consumer acceptance of food biotechnology: willingness to buy genetically modified food product: Food Policy Institute. (Kindly provide page number)
25. Islamic Fiqh Academy (Jeddah) (2000). Resolutions and recommendations of the Council of Islamic Fiqh Academy: Jeddah.
26. Kelley J (1995). Public perceptions of genetic engineering: Australia, 1994. Final report to the Department of Industry, Science and Technology. Available on http://www.dist.gov.au/pubs/reports/genengin/content.html
27. Koch K (1998). Food safety battle: organic vs. biotech. CQ Researcher 9(33): 761-784
28. Latifah A, Jamaluddin MJ, Abdul Rahim MN (2007). Malaysian Public Awareness and Knowledge on Modern Biotechnology. J. Pengajian Umum 8: 195-2004
29. Lin W, Somwaru A, Tuan F, Huang J, Bai J (2004). Consumer attitudes toward biotech foods in China. Paper presented at the 8th ICABR International Conference on Agricultural Biotechnology: International Trade and domestic Production. Ravello, Italy.
30. Macer DRJ (2000). Bioethics: perceptions of biotechnology and policy implications. Int. J. Biotechnol. 3: 116-133
31. Matlock-Hetzel S (1997). Basic concepts in item and test analysis. In: Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, San Antonio. (ERIC Document: ED406441). Available on http://www.eric.ed.gov
32. Priest SH (2000). US public opinion divided over biotechnology. Nat. Biotechnol. 18(9): 939-942
33. Quaye W, Yawson I, Yawson RM, Williams IE (2009). Acceptance of Biotechnology and social-cultural implications in Ghana. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 8: 1997-2003
34. Rohrmann B (1994). Risk perception of different societal groups: Australian findings and cross-national comparisons. Aust. J. Psychol. 46(3): 150-163
35. Rowe G (2004). How can genetically modified foods be made publicly acceptable?. Trends Biotechnol. 22(3): 107-109
36. Singh OV, Ghai S, Paul D, Jain RK (2006). Genetically modified crops: success, safety assessment, and public concern. Mini Review. Appl. Microbiol. Microbiotechnol. 71: 598-607
37. Sjöberg L (2008). Genetically Modified Food In The Eyes of The Public and Experts. Risk Manage. doi: 10.1057/rm.2008.2. 10: 168-193
38. Stenholm CW, Waggoner DB (1992). Public Policy in Animal Biotechnology in the 1990s: Challenges and Opportunities. In: MacDonald J.F. (Ed.) Animal Biotechnology: Opportunities and Challenges, National Agricultural Biotechnology Report no. 4. Ithaca, NY: National Agric. Biotechnol. Council, pp. 25-35
39. Tucker M, Whaley SR, Sharp, JS (2006). Consumer perceptions of food-related risks. Int. J. Food Sci. Tech. 41(2): 135-146
40. Uzogara SG (2000). The impact of genetic modification of human foods in the 21st century. A review. Biotechnol. Adv. 18(13): 179-206
41. Wansink B, Kim J (2001). The marketing battle over genetically modified foods: false assumptions about consumer behaviour. Am. Behav. Sci. 44(8): 1405-1417.