Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 24, Issue 5, pp 519–531 | Cite as

Students’ Attitudes Toward Gene Technology: Deconstructing a Construct



Emergent technologies are commonly characterized as involving cutting-edge developments while lacking wide-scale public implementation. Although currently prevalent in many applications, gene technology is often considered emergent in that the science changes so rapidly. Science educators at all levels of formal education are faced with a unique challenge of facilitating student understanding of gene technology (in comparison with more established content) as well as integrating some of the more controversial socioscientific aspects of such content into the curricula. Much of the literature regarding student understanding of biotechnology has focused on development of student attitudes toward the field and the impact of this on their learning. However, there has, of yet, been no unifying framework in the literature regarding what is meant by attitudes toward gene technology. This article reviews the current scholarship (38 empirical studies published between 1990 and 2011) on the measurement of student attitudes toward biotechnology in order to highlight major themes present within the literature. Items from all reviewed studies were collected, coded, and sorted for construction of a comprehensive instrument representing the conceptualizations of attitudes toward gene technology in all 38 studies. Factor analytic techniques were used as a tool to reduce and categorize measurement items. Results provided a framework of five factors that help describe student attitudes toward biotechnology across all the studies. This emergent framework of factors is proposed as a useful means to standardize the discourse in future research.


Attitudes Gene technology Biotechnology 



Timothy Darden, Danielle Johnson-Young, students who help gather and input the data on the literature provided in this review as well as validate some of the items.


  1. *Indicates references used in the analysisGoogle Scholar
  2. Bahri NM, Suryawati E, Osman K (2014) Students’ biotechnology literacy: the pillars of STEM education in Malaysia. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ 10(3):195–207Google Scholar
  3. *Bal S, Samanci NK, Bozkurt O (2007) University students’ knowledge and attitude about genetic engineering. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ 3(2):119–126Google Scholar
  4. *Batrinou AM, Spiliotis V, Sakellaris G (2008) Acceptability of genetically modified maize by young people. Br Food J 110(3):250–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. *Chen S-Y, Raffan J (1999) Biotechnology: student’s knowledge and attitudes in the UK and Taiwan. J Biol Educ 34(1):17–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Condit CM (2010) Public attitudes and beliefs about genetics. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 11:339–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. *Crne-Hladnik H, Peklaj C, Kosmelj K, Hladnik A, Javornik B (2009) Assessment of Slovene secondary school students’ attitudes to biotechnology in terms of usefulness, moral acceptability and risk perception. Public Underst Sci 18(6):747–758Google Scholar
  8. *Dawson V (2007) An exploration of high school (12–17 year old) students’ understanding of, and attitudes towards biotechnology processes. Res Sci Educ 37:59–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. *Dawson V, Schibeci R (2003) Western high school students attitudes toward biotechnology processes. J Biol Educ 38(1):7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. *Dawson V, Soames C (2006) The effect of biotechnology education on Australian high school students’ understanding and attitudes about biotechnology processes. Res Sci Technol Educ 24(2):183–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. *Erdogan M, Ozel M, Usak M, Prokop P (2009) Development and validation of an instrument to measure University students’ biotechnology attitude. J Sci Educ Technol 18:255–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Erdogan M, Ozel M, BouJaoude S, Lamanauskas V, Usak M, Prokop P (2012) Assessment of science teachers’ knowledge of and attitudes regarding biotechnology: a cross-cultural comparison. J Baltic Sci Educ 11(1):78–93Google Scholar
  13. *Finke MS, Kim H (2003) Attitudes about genetically modified foods among Korean and American college students. AgBioForum 6(4):191–197Google Scholar
  14. Fonesca MJ, Costa P, Lencastre L, Tavares F (2012) Multidimensional analysis of high-school students’ perceptions about biotechnology. J Biol Educ 46(3):129–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. *Fritz S, Husmann D, Wingenbach G, Rutherford T, Egger V, Wadhwa P (2003) Awareness and acceptance of biotechnology issues among youth, undergraduates, and adults. AgBioForum 6(4):178–184Google Scholar
  16. Gardner GE, Jones MG (2010) Science instructors’ perceptions of the risks of biotechnology: implications for science education. Res Sci Educ 41:711–738Google Scholar
  17. Gardner GE, Jones MG, Taylor A, Forrester J, Robertson, L (2010) Students’ risk perceptions of nanotechnology applications. Int J Sci Educ 32(14):1951−1969Google Scholar
  18. Gaskell G et al (2000) Biotechnology and the European public. Nat Biotechnol 18:935–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. *Gunter B, Kinderlerer J, Beyleveld D (1996) Teenagers and biotechnology: a survey of understanding and opinion in Britain. Stud Sci Educ 32(1):81–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Herodotou C, Kyza EA, Nicolaidou I, Hadjichambis A, Kafouris D, Terzian F (2012) The development and validation of the GMOAS, an instrument measuring secondary school students’ attitudes towards genetically modified organisms. Int J Sci Educ B Commun Public Engagem 2(2):131–147Google Scholar
  21. *Hill R, Stanisstreet M, Boyes E, O’Sullivan H (1998) Reactions to a new technology: students’ ideas about genetically engineered foodstuffs. Res Sci Technol Educ 16(2):203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. *Hill R, Stanisstreet M, O’Sullivan H, Boyes E (1999a) Genetic engineering of animals for medical research: students’ views. Sch Sci Rev 80(293):23–30Google Scholar
  23. *Hill R, Stanisstreet M, Boyes E, O’Sullivan H (1999b) Genetically engineered foodstuffs: school students views. Int J Environ Stud 56(6):785–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnstone AH, Reid N (1981) Towards a model for attitude change. Eur J Sci Educ 3(2):205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. *Jordahl R (1993) Attitudes of Prairie Bible College students toward human genetic manipulation: a survey and comparative study. ERIC 368:619Google Scholar
  26. *Kidman G (2009) Attitudes and interests towards biotechnology: the mismatch between students and teachers. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ 5(2):135–143Google Scholar
  27. *Kitto SL, Griffiths LG, Pesek JD (2003) A long term study of knowledge, risk, and ethics for students enrolled in an introductory biotechnology course. J Anim Sci 81:1348–1353Google Scholar
  28. *Klop T, Severiens S (2007) An exploration of attitudes towards modern biotechnology: a study among Dutch secondary school students. Int J Sci Educ 5(2):663–679Google Scholar
  29. *Klop T, Severiens S, Knippels M-CPJ, van Mil MHW, Ten Dam GTM (2010) Effects of a science education module on attitudes towards modern biotechnology of secondary school students. Int J Sci Educ 9(1):1127–1150Google Scholar
  30. Kurzweil R (2001) The law of accelerating returns. Retrieved from on April 14, 2011
  31. *Lamanauskas V, Makarskaite-Petkeviciene R (2008) Lithuanian University students’ knowledge of biotechnology and attitudes to the taught subject. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ 4(3):269–277Google Scholar
  32. Laugksch RC (2000) Scientific literacy: a conceptual overview. Sci Educ 84:71–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. *Laux CM, Mosher GA, Freeman SA (2010) Factors affecting college students’ knowledge and opinions of genetically modified foods. J Technol Stud 36(2):2–9Google Scholar
  34. *Lock R, Miles C (1993) Biotechnology and genetic engineering: students’ knowledge and attitudes. J Biol Educ 27(4):267–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. *Lock R, Miles C, Hughes S (1995) The influence of teaching on knowledge and attitudes in biotechnology and genetic engineering contexts: implications for teaching controversial issues and public understanding of science. Sch Sci Rev 76(276):47–59Google Scholar
  36. *Massarani L, de Castro Moreira I (2005) Attitudes towards genetics: a case study among Brazilian high school students. Public Underst Sci 14:201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. *Mohapatra AK, Priyadarshini D, Biswas A (2010) Genetically modified food: knowledge and attitude of teachers and students. J Sci Educ Technol 19:489–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. *Olsher G, Dreyfus A (1999) The ‘ostension-teaching’ approach as a means to develop junior high student attitudes towards biotechnologies. J Biol Educ 34(1):25–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Osborne J, Simon S, Collins S (2003) Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. Int J Sci Educ 25(9):1049–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. *Ozel M, Erdogan M, Usak M, Prokop P (2009) High school students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding biotechnology applications. Educ Sci Theory Pract 9(1):321–328Google Scholar
  41. Priest SH (2000) US public opinion divided over biotechnology. Nat Biotechnol 18:939–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. *Prokop P, Leskova A, Kubiatko M, Diran C (2007) Slovakian students’ knowledge of an attitudes toward biotechnology. Int J Sci Educ 29(7):895–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ramaley JA, Haggett RR (2005) Engaged and engaging science: a component of a good liberal education. Peer Rev 7:8–12Google Scholar
  44. Reid N (2006) Thoughts on attitude measurement. Res Sci Technol Educ 24(1):3–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roberts DA (2007) Scientific literacy/science literacy. In: Abell SK, Lederman NG (eds) Handbook of research on science education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 729–780Google Scholar
  46. *Saez MJ, Nino AG, Carretero A (2008) Matching society values: students’ views of biotechnology. Int J Sci Educ 30(2):167–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. *Saher M, Lindeman M, Hursti U-KK (2006) Attitudes towards genetically modified and organic foods. Appetite 46:324–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sandler R (2009) Nanotechnology: the social and ethical issues. Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  49. Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanopart Res 7:659–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. *Seethaler S, Linn M (2004) Genetically modified food in perspective: an inquiry-based curriculum to help middle school students make sense of tradeoffs. Int J Sci Educ 26(14):1765–1785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Smith JE (2001) Public perception of biotechnology. In: Ratledge C, Kristiansen B (eds) Basic biotechnology, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–16Google Scholar
  52. Snyder M, Du J, Gerstein M (2010) Personal genome sequencing: current approach and challenges. Genes Dev 24:423–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. *Sorgo A, Ambrozic-Dolinsek J (2010) Knowledge of, attitudes toward, and acceptance of genetically modified organisms among prospective teachers of biology, home economics, and grade school in Slovenia. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 38(3):141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. *Sterling LG, Halbrendt CK, Kitto SL (1993) Impact of education on the attitudes of college students toward biotechnology. J Agric Environ Ethics 6(1):75–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. *Surmeli H, Sahin F (2010) Examination of university students’ attitudes towards biotechnological studies in terms of faculty and gender variables. Procedia 2:3999–4005Google Scholar
  56. Trefil J (2008) Why science?. National Science Teacher Association Press, Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  57. Turner S (2008) School science and its controversies: or whatever happened to scientific literacy? Public Underst Sci 17:55–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. *Usak M, Erdogan M, Prokop P, Ozel M (2009) High school and university students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding biotechnology. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 37(2):123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Eijk M, Roth W-M (2011) Cultural diversity in science education through novelization: against the epicization of science and cultural centralization. J Res Sci Teach 48(7):824–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Volet S, Vauras M (eds) (2013) Interpersonal regulation of learning and motivation: methodological advances. Routledge, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  61. *Wingenbach GJ, Rutherford TA, Dunsford DW (2002) Selected college students’ knowledge and perceptions of biotechnology issues in the mass media. J Appl Commun 86(3):7–23Google Scholar
  62. *Wingenbach GJ, Rutherford TA, Dunsford DW (2003) Agricultural communications students’ awareness and perceptions of biotechnology issues. J Agric Educ 44(4):80–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zeilder DL, Herman BC, Ruzek M, Linder A, Lin S-S (2013) Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues. J Res Sci Teach 50(2):251–283Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyMiddle Tennessee State UniversityMurfreesboroUSA

Personalised recommendations