Abstract
Most previous studies of public understanding of nanotechnology have found that very few members of the public know much about this emerging field. Such results set the expectation among scientists, regulators, industry, and science communicators that publics are largely ignorant of nanotechnology and, hence, unprepared to engage in a discussion about research priorities or regulation. However, things may not be as grim as these studies and the engagement skeptics make out. Because these studies have largely relied on survey research to determine public understanding, they have captured data that reflects only what individuals know in isolation (the condition in which they tend to answer such surveys). For precisely this reason, these studies tend to miss not only the “wisdom of the crowd” but even the collective knowledge and cooperative ways to reasoning that make up most of how people think and live their lives.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Works Cited
Arnett, R. C., Fritz, J. M. H., & Bell, L. M. (2009). Communication ethics literacy: Dialogue and difference. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Kim, E., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2009). Religiosity as a perceptual filter: Examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology. Public Understanding of Science, 18(5), 546–558.
Buber, M. (1923/2004). I and thou (R. G. Smith, Trans.). London: Continuum.
Cobb, M. D., & Macoubrie, J. (2004). Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 6(4), 295–405.
Hart Research Associates. (2007). Awareness of and attitudes toward nanotechnology and federal regulatory agencies: A report of findings based on a national survey among adults. Retrieved from http://www.nanotechproject.org/process/files/5888/hart_nanopoll_2007.pdf
Honeycutt, J. M. (2011). Dialogue theory and imagined interactions. In J. M. Honeycutt (Ed.), Imagine that: Studies in imagined interactions (pp. 193–204). Cresskill: Hampton.
Johnson, D. (2009, January 14). Nanotechnology and public engagement: Is there a benefit? [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/semiconductors/devices/nanotechnology_and_public_enga
Macoubrie, J. (2006). Nanotechnology: Public concerns, reasoning, and trust in government. Public Understanding of Science, 15(2), 221–241.
Miller, G. (2008). Nanotechnology and the public interest: Repeating the mistakes of GM foods? International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialization, 7(2–3), 274–280.
Scheufele, D. A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2005). The public and nanotechnology: How citizens make sense of emerging technologies. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(6), 659–667.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gehrke, P.J. (2018). Public Understanding of Nanotechnology: How Publics Know. In: Nano-Publics . Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69611-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69611-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69610-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69611-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)