Focus group discussions inform concern assessment and support scientific policy advice for the risk governance of nanomaterials

Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 79-95

  Fleischer, Torsten ^a   Haslinger, Julia ^b   Jahnel, Jutta ^a   Seitz, Stefanie B ^a  

^a KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^b ERICH SCHMID INSTITUTE OF MATERIALS SCIENCE   (Austria)

Author keywords

Attitudes; Concern assessment; Focus group discussion; Nanoparticles; Opinions; Risk governance

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870989174     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14490706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Allport G 1935, 'Attitudes', in: C Murchison (ed), A Handbook of Social Psychology. Clark University Press, Worchester, pp. 798-844.
2. Barbour R 2007, Doing Focus Groups. Designing Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, London.
3. Bassili JN 2008, 'Attitude Strength', in: WD Crano & R Prislin (eds), Attitudes and Attitude Change. Psychology Press, Hove/New York, pp. 237-260.
4. Berube DM, Cummings CL, Frith JH, Binder AR & Oldendick R 2011,'Comparing Nanoparticle Risk Perceptions to Other Known EHS Risks', Journal of Nanoparticle Research, vol. 13, pp. 3089-3099.
5. Berube DM, Faber B, Scheufele DA, Cummings CL, Gardner GE, Martin KN, Martin MS & Temple NM 2010, Communicating Risk in the 21st Century: Case of Nanotechnology, An Independent Analysis Commissioned by the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO), viewed 10 January 2012. Available at: http://www.nano.gov/sites/default/files/pub_resource/berube_risk_white_paper_feb_2010.pdf
6. Bohner G & Dickel N 2011 'Attitude and Attitude Change', Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 62, pp. 391-417.
7. Bohnsack R 2003, Rekonstruktive Sozialforschung. Einführung in qualitative Methoden. 5th Edition, Leske/Budrich, Opladen.
8. Bürki R 2000, 'Klimaänderung und Anpassungsprozesse im Wintertourismus', Ostschweizerische Geografische Gesellschaft, St. Gallen, Neue Reihe, vol. 6, pp. 99-103.
9. Crano WD & Prislin R 2006, 'Attitudes and Persuasion', Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 57, pp. 345-374.
10. Davies SR 2011, 'How We Talk When We Talk About Nano: The Future in Laypeople's Talk', Futures, vol. 43, pp. 317-326.
11. ENRHES 2010: Engineered Nanoparticles: Review of Health and Environmental Safety. An International Collaborative Review involving Researchers from Edinburgh Napier University, the Institute of Occupational Medicine, the Technical University of Denmark, the Institute for Health and Consumer Protection of the European Commission's Joint Research Centre, and the Institute of Nanotechnology. Project Report, January 2010, http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology/reports/reportpdf/report133.pdf
12. Erikson RS & Tedin KL 2001, American Public Opinion: Its Origins, Content, and Impact. 6th Edition, Longman, New York.
13. Gawronski B 2007, 'Attitudes Can be Measured! But What is an Attitude?' Social Cognition, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 573-581.
14. Glynn CJ, Herbst S, O'Keefe GJ, Shapiro RY & Lindeman M 2004, Public Opinion. 2nd Edition, Westview Press, Boulder.
15. Görsdorf A 2012, 'Das offene Gespräch und seine Grenzen, Strukturprobleme von Verfahren partizipativer Technikbewertung am Beispiel der Verbraucherkonferenz Nanotechnologie', in: A Bora, S Maasen, C Reinhardt & P Wehling (eds), Schriftenreihe, Wissenschafts- und Technikforschung, vol. 8. Nomos, Baden-Baden.
16. IRGC (International Risk Governance Council) 2008, Risk Governance of Nanotechnology Applications in Food and Cosmetics, by Renn O, Grobe A & Jaeger A, viewed 11 January 2012, http://www.irgc.org/IMG/pdf/IRGC_Report_FINAL_For_Web.pdf
17. IRGC 2006, White Paper No. 2 on Nanotechnology Risk Governance by Renn O & Roco M with Annexes by Roco M & Litten E, Geneva, viewed 11 January 2012. Available at: http://www.irgc.org/IMG/pdf/IRGC_white_paper_2_PFD_final_version-2.pdf
18. Krosnick JA & Petty RE 1995, 'Attitude Strength: An Overview, in RE Petty & JA Krosnick (eds), Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences, Erlbaum, Mahwah, New York, pp. 1-24.
19. Lankshear AJ 1993, 'The Use of Focus Groups in a Study of Attitudes to Student Nurse Assessment', Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 18, pp. 1986-1989.
20. Myers G 2005, 'Applied Linguistics and Institutions of Opinion'. Applied Linguistics, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 527-544.
21. Renn O & Grobe A 2010, 'Risk Governance in the Field of Nanotechnologies: Core Challenges of an Integrative Approach', in: GA Hodge, DM Bowman, AD Maynard (eds), International Handbook on Regulating Nanotechnologies, pp. 484-507.
22. Renn O & Walker K 2008, 'Lessons Learned: A Re-Assessment of the IRGC Framework on Risk Governance', in: O Renn & K Walker (eds), Global Risk Governance: Concept and Practice Using the IRGC Framework. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 331-367.
23. Rokeach M 1968, 'The Role of Values in Public Opinion Research.' Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 547-559.
24. Schwarz N 2007 'Attitude Construction: Evaluation in Context', Social Cognition, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 638-656.
25. Seitz S & Jahnel J 2011, 'Ketchup gegen Schweißgeruch? Bürgerperspektiven zum Einsatz synthetischer Nanopartikel', Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, vol. 20, pp. 80-83.
26. Siegrist M, Cousin M-E, Kastenholz H, Wiek A 2007a, 'Public Acceptance of Nanotechnology Foods and Food Packaging', Appetite, vol. 49, pp. 459-466.
27. Siegrist M, Keller C, Kastenholz H, Frey S, Wiek A 2007b, 'Laypeople's and Experts' Perception of Nanotechnology Hazards', Risk Analysis, vol. 72, pp. 59-69.
28. Slocum N, Elliott J, Heesterbeek S, & Lukensmeyer CJ 2005, in S Steyaert & H Lisoir (eds), Participatory Methods Toolkit: A Practioner's Manual, 2nd Edition, ViWTA and King Baudoin Foundation, Brussels
29. Smith A & Stirling A 2007, 'Moving Outside or Inside? Objectification and Reflexivity in the Governance of Socio-Technical Systems', Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, vol. 9, no. 3-4, pp. 351-373.
30. Stirling A 2008, 'Opening Up' and 'Closing Down'. Power, Participation, and Pluralism in the Social Appraisal of Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 262-294.
31. STOA (Science and Technology Options Assessment) 2012, NanoSafety - Risk Governance of Manufactured Nanoparticles, Final Report. Fleischer T, Jahnel J & Seitz SB European Parliament, Directorate General for Internal Policies. Directorate G: Impact Assessment. PE 482.685 Brussels.