Tweeting nano: How public discourses about nanotechnology develop in social media environments

Journal of Nanoparticle Research

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Runge, Kristin K ^a   Yeo, Sara K ^a   Cacciatore, Michael ^a   Scheufele, Dietram A ^a   Brossard, Dominique ^a   Xenos, Michael ^a   Anderson, Ashley ^a   Choi, Doo Hun ^a   Kim, Jiyoun ^a   Li, Nan ^a   Liang, Xuan ^a   Stubbings, Maria ^a   Su, Leona Yi Fan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Nanotechnology; Online; Policy; Public opinion; Social media; Twitter

Indexed keywords

NANOTECHNOLOGY; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES; INFORMATION SHARING; NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY INITIATIVES; ONLINE; PUBLIC OPINIONS; SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION; SOCIAL MEDIA; TWITTER;

SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; INTERNET; NANOTECHNOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIAL MEDIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84871709201     PISSN: 13880764     EISSN: 1572896X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11051-012-1381-8     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anderson AA, Brossard D, Scheufele DA (2010) The changing information environment for nanotechnology: online audiences and content. J Nanopart Res 12(4):1083-1094. doi: 10.1007/s11051-010-9860-2
2. Audretsch DB, Feldman MP (1996) R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. Am Econ Rev 86(3):630-640 (Pubitemid 126417096)
3. Bainbridge WS (2002) Public attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 4(6):561-570
4. Bansal M, Cardie C, Lee L (2008) The power of negative thinking: exploiting label disagreement in the min-cut classification framework. Proceedings of COLING: companion volume: Posters, 13-16
5. Brossard D, Shanahan J, McComas K (2004) Are issue-cycles culturally constructed? A comparison of French and American coverage of global climate change. Mass commun Soc 7(3):359-377 (Pubitemid 38889214)
6. Brossard D, Scheufele DA, Kim E, Lewenstein BV (2009) Religiosity as a perceptual filter: examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci 18(5):546-558. doi: 10.1177/0963662507087304
7. Cacciatore MA, Anderson AA, Choi D-H, Brossard D, Scheufele DA, Liang X, Dudo A (2012) Coverage of emerging technologies: a comparison between print and online media. New Media Soc 14(6):1039-1059. doi: 10.1177/1461444812439061
8. Carlino G, Hunt R, Duranton G, Weinberg BA (2009) What explains the quantity and quality of local inventive activity? Brookings-Wharton Papers on Urban Affairs, pp 65-123
9. Chmiel A, Sobkowicz P, Sienkiewicz J, Paltoglou G, Buckley K, Thelwall M, Holyst JA (2011) Negative emotions boost users activity at BBC Forum. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 90(16):2936-2944
10. Christensen C (2011) Twitter revolutions? Addressing social media and dissent. Commun Rev 14(3):155-157
11. Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust. J Nanopart Res 6(4):395-405
12. Conrad JG, Schilder F (2007) Opinion mining in legal blogs. Paper presented at the ICAIL01: The 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, New York
13. Dudo A, Choi D-H, Scheufele DA (2011a) Food nanotechnology in the news: coverage patterns and thematic emphases during the last decade. Appetite 56(1):78-89
14. Dudo A, Dunwoody S, Scheufele DA (2011b) The emergence of nano news: tracking thematic trends and changes in media coverage of nanotechnology. J Mass Commun Q 88(1):55-75
15. Friedman SM, Egolf BP (2005) Nanotechnology risks and the media. IEEE Technol Soc Mag 24(4):5-11 (Pubitemid 43009961)
16. Heinze T (2006) Mapping the evolution of nano S&T: analytical and empirical tools. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 34(1):60-82
17. Hopkins DJ, King G (2010) A method of automated nonparametric content analysis for social science. Am J Political Sci 54(1):229-247
18. Hughes AL, Palen L (2009) Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events. Int J Emerg Manage 6(3):248-260
19. Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M, Henderson R (1993) Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Q J Econ 108(3):577-598
20. Krugman P (2009) The increasing returns revolution in trade and geography. Am Econ Rev 99(3):561-571
21. Kwon N, Shulman SW, Hovy E (2006) Multidimensional text analysis for eRulemaking. Paper presented at the The 7th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York
22. Ladwig P, Anderson AA, Brossard D, Scheufele DA, Shaw B (2010) Narrowing the nano discourse? Mater Today 13(5):52-54
23. Lasorsa DL (2011) Normalizing twitter-journalism practice in an emerging communication space. J Stud 1(1):1-18
24. Lee CJ, Scheufele DA (2006) The influence of knowledge and deference toward scientific authority: a media effects model for public attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Mass Commun Q 83(4):819-834 (Pubitemid 46547090)
25. Murthy D (2011) Twitter: microphone for the masses? Media Cult Soc 33(5):779
26. National Nanotechnology Initiative. (2012). Centers and Networks. http://nano.gov/centers-networks. Accessed 24 Apr 2012
27. National Science Board (2012) Science and technology: public attitudes and understanding science and engineering indicators 2012. National Science Foundation, Arlington
28. National Science Foundation (2012) Awards Search. http://www.nsf.gov/ awardsearch/index.jsp. Accessed 25 Aug 2012
29. Nisbet MC, Scheufele DA (2009) What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. Am J Bot 96(10):1767-1778. doi: 10.3732/ajb.0900041
30. Nisbet MC, Brossard D, Kroepsch A (2003) Framing science the stem cell controversy in an age of press/politics. Int J Press Politics 8(2):36-70 (Pubitemid 36719570)
31. Pang B, Lee L (2008) Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Found Trends Inf Retr 2(1-2):1-135. doi: 10.1561/1500000011
32. Papacharissi Z, de Fatima Oliveira M (2012) Affective news and networked publics: the rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. J Commun 62(2):266-282. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01630.x
33. Pew Research Center (2011b) Press widely criticized, but trusted more than other information sources. The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
34. President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2010). Report to the President and Congress on the third assessment of the National Nanotechnology Initiative
35. Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanopart Res 7(6):659-667. doi: 10.1007/s11051-005-7526-2 (Pubitemid 41767366)
36. Shapira P, Youtie J (2008) Emergence of nanodistricts in the United States: path dependency or new opportunities? Econ Dev Q 22(3):187-199
37. Smith A, Brenner J (2012) Twitter use 2012. Pew Internet & American Life Project. http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2012/PIP-Twitter- Use-2012.pdf. Accessed 31 May 2012
38. Smith TW, Marsden P, Hout M, Kim J (2011) General social surveys, 1972-2010 (National Science Foundation, Trans.). In: National opinion research center (Ed.). The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, Storrs
39. Sunstein CR (2007) Republic 2.0. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
40. Tewksbury D (2005) The seeds of audience fragmentation: specialization in the use of online news sites. J Broadcasting & Electronic Media 49(3):332-348 (Pubitemid 43875984)
41. Tewksbury D, Weaver AJ, Maddex BD (2001) Accidentally informed: incidental news exposure on the World Wide Web. J Mass Commun Q 78(3):533-554 (Pubitemid 33404518)
42. The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (2012) Consumer products inventory. http://www.nanotechproject.org/inventories/consumer/search/?keywords= &company=0&country-origin=0&categories=0&subcategories= 0&created=&modified=&search=1. Accessed 28 Dec 2012
43. Twitter (2012) About Twitter. https://twitter.com/about. Accessed 9 July 2012
44. United States Census Bureau (2012) Education: educational attainment by state:1990-2009. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0233.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2012
45. Weaver DA, Bimber B (2008) Finding news stories: a comparison of searches using Lexisnexis and Google News. J Mass Commun Q 85(3):515-530
46. Youtie J, Shapira P (2008) Building an innovation hub: a case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development. Res Policy 37(8):1188-1204