Nanotechnology in Dutch science cafés
Public risk perceptions contextualised
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20402154 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Anne M Dijkstra (0000-0002-1699-5087, University of Twente, the Netherlands, corresponding author), Christine Critchley (0000-0001-9376-5229, Swinburne University of Technology), Christine R Critchley (Swinburne University of Technology) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 71-87 |
| Publication date | 2016-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Public Understanding of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0963-6625 • E-ISSN: 1361-6609 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0963662514528080 |
| PMID | 24812210 |
| OpenAlex | W1991542457 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
| References cited | 33 |
Understanding public perceptions of and attitudes to nanotechnology is important in order to understand and facilitate processes of dialogue and public participation. This research quantitatively analysed risk perceptions and attitudes of Dutch science café participants ( n = 233) and compared these with members of the Dutch public ( n = 378) who had not attended a café but were interested in science and technology as well. A qualitative analysis of the meetings contextualised and enriched the quantitative findings. Both groups shared similar key attitudes and were positive about nanotechnology while the Dutch café participants were even more positive about nanotechnology than the group of non-participants. The perception that nanotechnology would lead to risk applications was only predictive of attitudes for the non-participants. The qualitative analysis showed that café participants and speakers considered discussion of the risks, benefits and related issues important. Further research could investigate how science cafés can play a role in the science–society debate
Pedagogy · Perception · Political science · Public relations · Qualitative research · Risk perception · Science communication · Science education · Social science · Sociology · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Psychology · Risk Perception and Management
‘Not for me’
Die Versinnbildlichung von Gesellschaftswissenschaft
Communicating Science
How Can I Contribute? Citizen Engagement in the Development of Nanotechnology for Health
Citizen Science Fiction
Public opinions about human enhancement can enhance the expert-only debate
Engaging the Public at a Science Festival
Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology
Science's new social contract with society
Laypeople's and Experts' Perception of Nanotechnology Hazards
Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology
Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States
Constitutional Moments in Governing Science and Technology
Opening up nanotechnology dialogue with the publics
Discussing dialogue
Imagining nanotechnology
Coping with uncertainty
Dwarfing the Social? Nanotechnology Lessons from the Biotechnology Front
Why Do We Need to Know What the Public Thinks about Nanotechnology
Introduction
Challenges for the Democratic Management of Technoscience
Machineries for Making Publics
What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda
Getting the Focus and the Group
| Unique citing works | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.7 |
| Citation span | 2016 - 2026 (11) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |