Public attitudes toward nanotechnology applications in Taiwan

Technovation

Volumn 33, Issue 2-3, 2013, Pages 88-96

  Chen, Mei Fang ^a   Lin, Yi Ping ^b   Cheng, Tsun Jen ^c  

^a TATUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL YANG MING UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Attitudes toward nanotechnology applications; Knowledge; Perceived benefits; Perceived risks; Social trust; Technology attitude

Indexed keywords

KNOWLEDGE; NANOTECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS; PERCEIVED BENEFITS; PERCEIVED RISK; SOCIAL TRUST;

PUBLIC RISKS; RISK PERCEPTION;

NANOTECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84874652951     PISSN: 01664972     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2012.11.008     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. R.J. Aitken, M.Q. Chaudhry, A.B.A. Boxall, and M. Hull Manufacture and use of nanomaterials: current status in the UK and global trends Occupational Medicine 56 5 2006 300 306 (Pubitemid 44304820)
2. M. Allarakhia, and S.T. Walsh Managing knowledge assets under conditions of radical change: the case of the pharmaceutical industry Technovation 31 2-3 2011 105 117
3. J. Anderson, and D. Gerbing Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach Psychological Bulletin 103 3 1988 411 423
4. Arnall, A., 2003. Future Technologies, Today's Choices: Nanotechnology, Artificial Intelligence and Robotics. A Technical, Political and Institutional Map of Emerging Technologies (report for the Greenpeace Environmental Trust). Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of London.
5. W.S. Bainbridge Public attitudes toward nanotechnology Journal of Nanoparticle Research 4 6 2002 561 570 (Pubitemid 135713449)
6. D. Barben, E. Fisher, C. Selin, and D.H. Guston Anticipatory governance of nanotechnology: foresight, engagement and integration J. Edward, Olga Hacket, Michael Amsterdamska, Lynch Judy Wajcman, The Handbook of Science and Technologies Third Edition 2007 MIT Press (in cooperation with Society for Social Studies of Science)
7. P. Bentler, and P. Dudgeon Covariance structure analysis: Statistical practice, theory and directions Annual Review of Psychology 47 1 1996 563 592 (Pubitemid 126416118)
8. Birnbauer, W., 2005. Nano could be a huge future health crisis. Theage.com.au.: 〈http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/nano-could-be-a- huge-future-health-crisis/2005/10/29/1130400402062.html (2010/12/28)〉
9. B. Bozeman, P. Laredo, and V. Mangematin Understanding the emergence and deployment of nano S&T Research Policy 36 6 2007 807 812
10. L. Bredahl Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified foods - results of a cross national survey Journal of Consumer Policy 24 1 2001 23 61 (Pubitemid 33808729)
11. M.F. Chen, and H.L. Li The consumer's attitude toward genetically modified foods in Taiwan Food Quality and Preference 18 4 2007 662 674
12. M.D. Cobb, and J. Macoubrie Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust Journal of Nanoparticle Research 6 4 2004 395 405
13. V.L. Colvin The potential environmental impact of engineered nanomaterials Nature Biotechnology 21 10 2003 1166 1170 (Pubitemid 37203347)
14. L.J. Cronbach Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests Psychometrika 16 1951 297 334
15. Davies, J.C., 2008. Nanotechnology Oversight: An Agenda For The New Administration. Project on Emerging Technologies, Washington D.C.
16. H. Dumortier, S. Lacotte, and G. Pastorin Functionalized carbon nanotubes are non-cytotoxic and preserve the functionality of primary immune cells Nanoletters 6 7 2006 1522 1528 (Pubitemid 44195341)
17. T.C. Earle, and G.T. Cvetkovich Social Trust: Toward A Cosmopolitan Society 1995 Praeger Westport, CT
18. T.C. Earle, and M. Siegrist Morality information, performance information, and the distinction between trust and confidence Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36 2 2006 383 416 (Pubitemid 43395888)
19. European Commission, 2001. Eurobarometer survey on Europeans, science and technology. Brussels: European Commission.
20. M. Fiedler, and I.M. Welpe Antecedents of cooperative commercialization strategies of nanotechnology firms Research Policy 38 3 2010 400 410
21. M. Fishbein, and I. Ajzen Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research 1975 Addison-Wesley Reading, MA
22. F.J. Fowler Survey Research Methods 3rd ed. 2002 Sage Publications Thousand Oaks, CA
23. R.A. Freitas What is nanomedicine? Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine 1 1 2005 2 9
24. L. Frewer, J. Lassen, B. Kettlitz, J. Scholderer, V. Beekman, and K.G. Berdal Societal aspects of genetically modified foods Food and Chemical Toxicology 42 7 2004 1181 1193 (Pubitemid 38581214)
25. L.J. Frewer, C. Howard, D. Hedderley, and R. Shepherd What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs Risk Analysis 16 4 1996 473 486
26. L.J. Frewer, C. Howard, and R. Shepherd The influence of initial attitudes on responses to communication about genetic engineering in food production Agriculture and Human Values 15 1 1998 15 30
27. S.M. Friedman, and B.E. Egolf Nanotechnology: risks and the media IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 24 4 2005 5 11 (Pubitemid 43009961)
28. G. Gaskell, T. Ten Eyck, J. Jackson, and G. Veltri Public attitudes to nanotechnology in Europe and the United States Nature Materials 3 8 2004 496
29. G. Gaskell, T. Ten Eyck, J. Jackson, and G. Veltri Imaging nanotechnology: cultural support for technological innovation in Europe and the United States Public Understanding of Science 14 1 2005 81 90 (Pubitemid 40097270)
30. J. Gibson Consumer protection: consumer strategies and the European market in genetically modified foods Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property 5 2006 176 191
31. Hart Research Associates, 2007. Awareness of and attitudes toward nanotechnology and federal regulatory agencies. Available at (2010/12/28): 〈http://www.nanotechproject.org/process/.les/5888/hart-nanopoll-2007. pdf〉.
32. Z. Huang, H. Chen, and M.C. Roco Longitudinal patent analysis for nanoscale science and engineering in 2003: country, institution and technology field analysis based on USPTO patent database Journal of Nanoparticle Research 6 4 2004 325 354
33. S.C. Hung, and Y.Y. Chu Stimulating new industries from emerging technologies: challenges for the public sector Technovation 26 1 2006 104 110
34. Kahan, D.M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., Cohen, G., 2008. The Future of Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions: An Experimental Investigation of Two Hypotheses. Cultural Cognition Project Working Paper no. 46
35. J.X. Kasperson, R.E. Kasperson, N. Pidgeon, and P. Slovic The social amplification of risk: assessing fifteen years of research and theory N. Pidgeon, R.E. Kasperson, P. Slovic, The Social Amplification of Risk 2003 Cambridge University Press Cambridge 13 46
36. K. Kjølberg Representations of nanotechnology in Norwegian newspapers implications for public participation Journal of Nanoethics 3 1 2009 61 72
37. C.-J. Lee, D.A. Scheufele, and B.V. Lewenstein Public attitudes toward emerging technologies Science Communication 27 2 2005 240 267
38. J.D. Linton, and S.T. Walsh Integrating innovation and learning curve theory: an enabler for moving nanotechnologies and other emerging process technologies into production R&D Management 34 5 2004 517 526 (Pubitemid 39499278)
39. J.D. Linton, and S.T. Walsh A theory of innovation for process-based innovations such as nanotechnology Technological Forecasting and Social Change 75 5 2008 583 594 (Pubitemid 351737228)
40. A. Liu, K. Sun, J. Yang, and D. Zhao Toxicological effects of multi-wall carbon nanotubes in rats Journal of Nanoparticle Research 10 8 2008 1303 1307
41. J. Macoubrie Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in government Public Understanding of Science 15 2 2006 221 241
42. A. Magrez, S. Kasas, V. Salicio, N. Pasquier, J.W. Seo, M. Celio, S. Catsicas, B. Schwaller, and L. Forro Cellular toxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials Nanoletters 6 6 2006 1121 1125 (Pubitemid 44013471)
43. G.A. Marcoulides, and R.E. Schumacker Advanced Structural Equation Modeling 1996 Erlbaum Mahwah, NJ
44. H.W. Marsh, and K.T. Hau Assessing goodness of fit: when parsimony is undesirable Journal of Experimental Education 64 4 1996 364 390 (Pubitemid 126405058)
45. B. Martin The sociology of the fluoridation controversy: a reexamination The Sociology Quarterly 30 1 1989 59 76
46. T. Masciangioli, and W.-X. Zhang Environmental technologies at the nanoscale Environmental Science and Technology 37 5 2003 102 108
47. A.D. Maynard, R.J. Aitken, T. Butz, V. Colvin, K. Donaldson, G. Oberdörster, M.A. Philbert, J. Ryan, A. Seaton, V. Stone, S.S. Tinkle, L. Tran, N.J. Walker, and D.B. Warheit Safe handling of nanotechnology Nature 444 16 2006 267 269 (Pubitemid 44764087)
48. C. Medina, M.J. Santos-Martinez, A. Radomski, O.I. Corrigan, and M.W. Radomski Review: nanoparticles: pharmacological and toxicological significance British Journal of Pharmacology 150 5 2007 552 558 (Pubitemid 46355555)
49. M.D. Mehta From biotechnology to nanotechnology: what can we learn from earlier technologies? Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 24 1 2004 34 39
50. Michelson, E.S., 2006. Nanotechnology Policy: An Analysis of Transnational Governance Issues Facing the United States and China. Project on Emerging Technologies, Washington, D.C.
51. B. Nerlich, D.D. Clarke, and F. Ulph Risks and benefits of nanotechnology: how young adults perceive possible advances in nanomedicine compared with conventional treatments Health, Risk and Society 9 2 2007 159 171 (Pubitemid 46993393)
52. K.M. Nielsen Transgenic organisms - time for conceptual diversification? Nature Biotechnology 21 2003 227 228 (Pubitemid 36314798)
53. J. Nunnally Psychometric Theory 1967 McGraw-Hill New York, NY
54. E. Oberdorster Manufactured nanomaterials (Fullerenes, C60) induce oxidative stress in the Brain of Juvenile Largemouth Bass Environmental Health Perspectives 112 10 2004 1058 1062 (Pubitemid 39029159)
55. G. Oberdorster, V. Stone, and K. Donaldson Toxicology of nanoparticles: a historical perspective Nanotoxicology 1 1 2007 2 25 (Pubitemid 46570244)
56. Phoenix, C., Treder, M., 2004. Applying the Precautionary Principle. Accessed at: 〈http://www.crnano.org/precautionary.htm (2010/12/28)〉.
57. N. Pidgeon, and T. Rogers-Hyden Opening up nanotechnology dialogue with the publics: risk communication or 'upstream engagement'? Health, Risk and Society 9 2 2007 191 210 (Pubitemid 46993395)
58. C.A. Poland, R. Duffin, I. Kinlock, A. Maynard, W.A.H. Wallace, A. Seaton, V. Stone, S. Brown, W. MacNee, and K. Donaldson Carbon nanotubes introduced into the abdominal cavity of mice show asbestos like pathogenicity in a pilot study Nature Nanotechnology 3 2008 423 428
59. B. Priestly, and A. Harford The human health risk assessment (HHRA) of nanomaterials G. Hodge, D. Bowman, K. Ludlow, New Global Frontiers in Regulation: The Age of Nanotechnology 2006 Elgar Northampton, USA 134 148
60. Rejeski, D., 2006. Why We Need a Corporation for Public Gaming. Woodrow Wilson Centre (2010/12/28). Accessed at: 〈http://seriousgamessource.com/ features/feature-041106-public-gaming.html〉
61. O. Renn, and M.C. Roco Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance Journal of Nanoparticle Research 8 2 2006 153 191 (Pubitemid 44199974)
62. M.C. Roco Broader societal issues of nanotechnology Journal of Nanoparticle Research 5 3-4 2003 181 189
63. E.A. Rosa The logical structure of the social amplification of risk framework (SARF): metatheoretical foundation and policy implications N. Pidgeon, R.E. Kasperson, P. Slovic, The Social Amplification of Risk 2003 Cambridge University Press Cambridge 47 79
64. Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004. Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties. London: Royal Society.
65. D.A. Scheufele, and B.V. Lewenstein The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies Journal of Nanoparticle Research 7 6 2005 659 667 (Pubitemid 41767366)
66. R.F. Service Nanotech forum aims to head off replay of past blunders Science 306 5698 2004 955 (Pubitemid 39482873)
67. M. Siegrist A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology Journal of Applied Social Psychology 29 10 1999 2093 2106
68. M. Siegrist The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology Risk Analysis 20 2 2000 195 203 (Pubitemid 30354440)
69. M. Siegrist, and G. Cvetkovich Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge Risk Analysis 20 5 2000 713 719
70. M. Siegrist, T.C. Earle, and H. Gutscher Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks Risk Analysis 23 4 2003 705 716 (Pubitemid 36929566)
71. M. Siegrist, C. Keller, H. Kastenholz, S. Frey, and A. Wiek Laypeople's and experts' perception of nanotechnology hazards Risk Analysis 27 1 2007 59 69 (Pubitemid 46411634)
72. L. Sjöberg, B.-E. Moen, and T. Rundmo Explaining Risk Perception: An Evaluation of the Psychometric Paradigm in Risk Perception Research 2004 Norwegian University of Science and Technology Trondheim, Norway 1-17
73. P. Slovic The Perception of Risk 2000 Earthscan London, UK
74. P. Sparks, R. Shepherd, and L.J. Frewer Gene technology, food production, and public opinion: a United Kingdom study Agriculture and Human Values 11 1 1994 19 28
75. P.E. Spector Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: myth or significant problem Journal of Applied Psychology 72 1987 438 443
76. C. Starr Social benefit versus technological risk Science 165 3899 1969 1232 1238
77. The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, 2011. Consumer products: An Inventory of Nanotechnology-Based Consumer Products Currently on the Market. 〈http://www.nanotechproject.org/〉 (2011/07/25)
78. A. Verdurme, and J. Viaene Consumer beliefs and attitude towards genetically modified food: basis for segmentation and implication for communication Agribusiness 19 1 2003 91 113
79. Waitz, A., Bokhari, W., 2003. Nanotechnology Commercialization Best Practices. 〈http://www.quantuminsight.com/papers/030915 commercialization.pdf.(2012/01/20)〉.
80. A.M. Waldron, D. Spencer, and C.A. Batt The current state of public understanding of nanotechnology Journal of Nanoparticle Research 8 5 2006 569 575 (Pubitemid 44744642)
81. S.T. Walsh Roadmapping a disruptive technology: a case study - the emerging microsystems and top-down nanosystems industry Technological Forecasting and Social Change 71 1-2 2004 161 185 (Pubitemid 38047690)
82. P.D. Windschitl, and G.L. Wells Measuring psychological uncertainty: verbal versus numeric methods Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied 2 4 1996 343 364 (Pubitemid 126449528)
83. E. Wong-Ekkabut, J. Baoukina, and S. Triampo Computer simulation study of fullerene translocation through lipid membranes Nature Nanotechnology 3 2008 363 368