Abstract
Regardless of the amount of information public groups possess or demonstrate, most seem willing to communicate preferences and apprehensions about new and emerging technologies. One of the goals of this study was to discover such preferences and apprehensions about nanotechnologies in various public groups. This chapter details those findings as well as what the expressed preferences teach us about how public groups form opinions about emerging technologies. Few studies have mined into the details of how different applications of nanotechnology evoke different responses from various public groups. In this study, we found such data emerged naturally in the course of the public engagement events. Our results indicate that some areas of nanotechnology have broad public support, while some almost universally produce public demands for regulation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Works Cited
Bainbridge, W. S. (2002). Public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 4(6), 561–570.
Cobb, M. D., & Macoubrie, J. (2004). Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 6(4), 295–405.
Deng, Y., Ediriwickrema, A., Yang, F., Lewis, J., Girardi, M., & Saltzman, W. M. (2015). A sunblock based on bioadhesive nanoparticles. Nature Materials, 14, 1278–1285.
Einsiedel, E. (2005). In the public eye: The early landscape of nanotechnology among Canadian and U.S. publics. AZoNano: Online Journal of Nanotechnology. Retrieved from https://www.azonano.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=1468
Gaskell, G., Eyck, T. T., Jackson, J., & Veltri, G. (2005). Imagining nanotechnology: Cultural support for technological innovation in Europe and the United States. Public Understanding of Science, 14(1), 81–90.
Macoubrie, J. (2006). Nanotechnology: Public concerns, reasoning, and trust in government. Public Understanding of Science, 15(2), 221–241.
Nisbett, M. C. (2010). Framing science: A new paradigm in public engagement. In L. Kahlor & P. A. Stout (Eds.), Communicating science: New agendas in communication (pp. 40–67). New York: Routledge.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence of unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 250–256.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: The Free Press.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1986). The psychometric study of risk perception. In V. T. Covello, J. Menkes, & J. Mumpower (Eds.), Risk evaluation and management (pp. 3–24). Boston: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gehrke, P.J. (2018). Nanotechnology Applications and Risks: Valences and Ambiguities. In: Nano-Publics . Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69611-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69611-9_3
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)