Are Chinese scientists willing to engage with the public on genetically modified foods?
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 24237632 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Yixuan Guo (0000-0002-6465-3858, Ghent University), Marcia Dutra De Barcellos (0000-0002-4311-2921, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul), Lawton Lanier Nalley (0000-0002-6718-8189, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA), Hans De Steur (0000-0003-1340-0882, Ghent University) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Pages | 9636625261491174-9636625261491174 |
| Publication date | 2026-10-17 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Public Understanding of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0963-6625 • E-ISSN: 1361-6609 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/09636625261491174 |
| PMID | 42891535 |
| OpenAlex | W7222850821 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 64 |
Drawing on survey data from 321 Chinese scientists, this study investigates their willingness to engage on a controversial topic, namely, genetically modified foods. Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior with topic-specific beliefs, we analyze how six key factors shape engagement intentions: attitudes toward public engagement, perceived institutional and peer climates, perceived self-efficacy, scientists’ own attitude toward genetically modified foods, and their perception of public attitudes toward genetically modified foods. Results of partial least squares structural equation modeling reveal that attitude toward public engagement and perceived self-efficacy are the strongest predictors, while subjective norms play a limited role. Crucially, scientists’ own favorable attitudes toward genetically modified foods exert an indirect, positive effect on their engagement intentions. We further examine disciplinary differences in public engagement beliefs and find that agricultural and biological scientists hold significantly more positive attitudes toward engaging the public on genetically modified foods than scientists in other disciplines.
agricultural scientists · China · Citizen participation · disciplinary differences · Genetically modified foods · institutional climate · public attitudes · scientists' attitudes · Self-efficacy · Theory of planned behavior · willingness to engage · Genetically Modified Organisms Research · Research, Science, and Academia · Risk Perception and Management
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Who Does the Public Trust? The Case of Genetically Modified Food in the United States
Scientists’ Prioritization of Communication Objectives for Public Engagement
Interactions with the Mass Media
Cognitive Dissonance
Determinants of Consumer Attitudes and Purchase Intentions With Regard to Genetically Modified Food – Results of a Cross-National Survey
Evaluation of Reflective Measurement Models
The gateway belief model
Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis
The theory of planned behavior
When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM
Exploring Undergraduate Biology Students’ Science Communication About Covid-19
What we know about what they think
Information sources and consumer attitudes toward genetically modified food in China
Societal Debates About Emerging Genetic Technologies
The Role of Trust in Communicating Scientific Consensus and the Environmental Benefits of Genetically Engineered Crops
Stakeholders’ rationales for representing uncertainties of biotechnological research
How institutional factors at US land-grant universities impact scientists’ public scholarship
Academic staff and public communication
Unbalanced progress
Chinese scientists’ mediated participation in public outreach
Scientists’ public engagement goals
The experts’ perspective of “ask-an-expert”
Predicting scientists’ participation in public life
How scientists view the public, the media and the political process
Are Productive Scientists More Willing to Engage With the Public
What Factors Predict Scientists' Intentions to Participate in Public Engagement of Science Activities
Toward a Model of Scientists’ Public Communication Activity
An Empirical and Conceptual Note on Science Communication’s Role in Society
Viral misinformation and echo chambers
When technology is more than instrumental
Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation
Gender Differences in Scientists’ Public Outreach and Engagement Activities
Organizational Influence on Scientists’ Efforts to Go Public
Understanding Scientists’ Willingness to Engage
Food, eating behavior, and culture in Chinese society
Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries
| Highly cited | No |
|---|