Leading US nano-scientists’ perceptions about media coverage and the public communication of scientific research findings

Despite the significant increase in the use of nanotechnology in academic research and commercial products over the past decade, there have been few studies that have explored scientists’ perceptions and attitudes about the technology. In this article, we use survey data from the leading U.S. nano-scientists to explore their perceptions about two issues: the public communication of research findings and media coverage of nanotechnology, which serves as one relatively rapid outlet for public communication. We find that leading U.S. nano-scientists do see an important connection between the public communication of research findings and public attitudes about science. Also, there is a connection between the scientists’ perceptions about media coverage and their views on the timing of public communication; scientists with positive attitudes about the media are more likely to support immediate public communication of research findings, while others believe that communication should take place only after research findings have been published through a peer-review process. We also demonstrate that journalists might have a more challenging time getting scientists to talk with them about nanotechnology news stories because nano-scientists tend to view media coverage of nanotechnology as less credible and less accurate than general science media coverage. We conclude that leading U.S. nano-scientists do feel a sense of responsibility for communicating their research findings to the public, but attitudes about the timing and the pathway of that communication vary across the group.     

The current state of public understanding of nanotechnology

The growing importance of nanotechnology in industry and society has not been accompanied by a widespread understanding of the subject among the general public. Simple questions to initially probe the smallest thing that people can see and can think of reveals a divide in the understanding of the general public. A survey of 1500 individuals ranging in age from 6 to 74 has revealed a lack of knowledge of nanotechnology and especially a lack of understanding of the context of nanotechnology in the world that is too small to see. Survey findings are corroborated by in-depth interviews with 400 adults in studies of nanoscience literacy commisioned by University of California, Berkeley and Cornell in 2002 and 2004, respectively. In general, with the exception of 14–28 year olds, over 60% of respondents say they have never heard of nano or nanotechnology. The results suggest that the general public, especially middle-school children, has no firm foundation to understand nanotechnology and likely will continue to be equally impressed by credible scientific information as well as pure fictional accounts of nanotechnology.     

The morality of attitudes toward nanotechnology: about God,techno-scientific progress,and interfering with nature

Using survey data, we examine public attitudes toward and awareness of nanotechnology in Germany (N = 750). First, it is shown that a majority of the people are still not familiar with nanotechnology. In addition, diffusion of information about nanotechnology thus far mostly seems to reach men and people with a relative higher educational background. Also, pro-science and technology views are positively related with nanotech familiarity. Results further show that a majority of the people have an indifferent, ambiguous, or non-attitude toward nanotechnology. Multinomial logit analyses further reveal that nanotech familiarity is positively related with people’s attitudes. In addition, it is shown that traditional religiosity is unrelated to attitudes and that individual religiosity is weakly related to nanotechnology attitudes. However, moral covariates other than religiosity seem of major importance. In particular, our results show that more negative views on technological and scientific progress as well as more holistic views about the relation between people and the environment increase the likelihood of having a negative attitude toward nanotechnology.     

Comparing nanoparticle risk perceptions to other known EHS risks

Over the last decade social scientific researchers have examined how the public perceives risks associated with nanotechnology. The body of literature that has emerged has been methodologically diverse. The findings have confirmed that some publics perceive nanotechnology as riskier than others, experts feel nanotechnology is less risky than the public does, and despite risks the public is optimistic about nanotechnology development. However, the extant literature on nanotechnology and risk suffers from sometimes widely divergent findings and has failed to provide a detailed picture of how the public actually feels about nanotechnology risks when compared to other risks. This study addresses the deficiencies in the literature by providing a comparative approach to gauging nanotechnology risks. The findings show that the public does not fear nanotechnology compared to other risks. Out of 24 risks presented to the participants, nanotechnology ranked 19th in terms of overall risk and 20th in terms of “high risk.”     

Nanotechnology and the public: Effectively communicating nanoscale science and engineering concepts

Researchers are faced with challenges when addressing the public on concepts and applications associated with nanotechnology. The goal of our work was to understand the public’s knowledge of nanotechnology in order to identify appropriate starting points for dialog. Survey results showed that people lack true understanding of concepts associated with atoms and the size of the nanoscale regime. Such gaps in understanding lead to a disappointing lack of communication between researchers and the public concerning fundamental concepts in nanoscale science and engineering. Strategies are offered on how scientists should present their research when engaging the public on nanotechnology topics. Since the time of writing, O.M. Castellini has relocated to the Department of Science and Technology, Museum of Science and Industry, 57th Street and Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.     

Nanotechnology in the public eye: the case of Iran,as a developing country

Using survey data, public awareness of and attitudes toward nanotechnology are examined in Iran (N = 759). Iran is a developing country with a national nanotechnology action plan for a ten year period starting from 2003 and has been active in the field of research and development of nanotechnology meanwhile. First, the results show that majority of people are still not familiar with nanotechnology and perceived risks posed by this technology are not considered to be a lot and most people feel its benefits outweigh the risks. The emotions toward this technology are of a hopeful and positive nature and this technology is looked upon favorably in Iran. In particular, our results reveals that although the level of trust is high specially in scientists to communicate the risks with the public, there are a great number who just have some trust not quite a lot of it. Knowing that it is a hard and time-consuming effort to manage a nation’s view on nanotechnology, extensive research as well as collaboration with other countries is needed to effectively communicate the risks in time.     

The North American opinion climate for nanotechnology and its products: Opportunities and challenges

A January 2005 telephone survey of 1200 people in the U.S. and 2000 Canadians provides a snapshot of current North American opinion regarding nanotechnology at this crucial early point in its emergence from the laboratory to the arena of public discourse and public understanding. Using a typology of “publics” developed through analysis of a previous comparative survey (Priest, S., 2006) and subsequently tested against these newer data (Priest, S., 2005) this article describes the opinion climate for nanotechnology across North America. The comparison of key results from the two countries helps illustrate how social and cultural differences contribute to reactions to new technologies, including nanotech. The article also discusses implications for nanotechnology-related public outreach and risk communication efforts.     

International Perspective on Government Nanotechnology Funding in 2005

The worldwide investment in nanotechnology research and development (R&D) reported by national government organizations and EC has increased approximately 9-fold in the last 8 years – from $432 million in 1997 to about $4,100 million in 2005. The proportion of national government investments for: academic R&D and education are between 20% (Korea, Taiwan) and 65% (US), industrial R&D – between 5% (US) and 60% (Korea, Taiwan), and core facilities and government laboratories – about 20–25% in all major contributing economies. This evaluation uses the NNI definition of nanotechnology (that excludes MEMS or microelectronics), and is based on direct information and analysis with managers of nanotechnology R&D programs in the respective countries.     

The slings and arrows of communication on nanotechnology

According to numerous surveys the perceived risk of nanotechnology is low and most people feel that the benefits outweigh the risks. This article provides greater insight into risk perception and concludes that the positive attitude to nanotechnology is based not on knowledge but on hope and fascination. The perceived risk is low because of a lack of vivid and frightening images of possible hazards. If news flashes were to link nanotechnology to concrete hazards or actual harm to people, attitudes might suddenly change. Risk communication faces the problem of dealing with a public at large that has little or no knowledge about the technology. As it takes time and extensive additional research to develop appropriate communication strategies and disseminate them to the relevant institutions, this exercise should be started immediately.     

The many faces of <Emphasis Type="Italic">nano</Emphasis> in newspaper reporting

The morpheme nano in languages such as Swedish and English is a constituent of many words. This article linguistically analyses the meaning potential of nano by focusing on word use in a Swedish newspaper corpus comprising 2,564 articles (1.6 million words) covering a 22-year period (1988–2010). Close to 400 word forms having nano as a constituent have been identified and analyzed. The results suggest that nano covers a broad and heterogeneous conceptual field: (i) as a prefix of the SI system; (ii) in relation to the scientific activities of nanoscience and nanotechnology, including their sub-processes and actors; and (iii) in relation to objects. The identified meanings of nano, besides the standard definition (i.e. ‘billionth part’ in relation to SI units), are ‘operating at the nanometre level’ in relation to activities and their actors and ‘nanometre sized’ and ‘nanotechnological’ in relation to objects; in addition, the less precise and non-technical meaning ‘very small’ is identified. We discuss the implications of the findings for a hypothesis about media influence on public understanding of technology, suggesting that repeated findings in Europe and the USA of little self-reported understanding and knowledge of nanotechnology or nanoscience among the public make sense in light of the polysemy of nano reflected in its broad variety of verbal forms and usages.     

Altruism and skepticism in public attitudes toward food nanotechnologies

To better explore and understand the public's perceptions of and attitudes toward emerging technologies and food products, we conducted a US-based focus group study centered on nanotechnology, nano-food, and nano-food labeling. Seven focus groups were conducted in seven locations in two different US metropolitan areas from September 2010 to January 2011. In addition to revealing context-specific data on already established risk and public perception factors, our goal was to inductively identify other nano-food perception factors of significance for consideration when analyzing why and how perceptions and attitudes are formed to nanotechnology in food. Two such factors that emerged—altruism and skepticism—are particularly interesting in that they may be situated between different theoretical frameworks that have been used for explaining perception and attitude. We argue that they may represent a convergence point among theories that each help explain different aspects of both how food nanotechnologies are perceived and why those perceptions are formed. In this paper, we first review theoretical frameworks for evaluating risk perception and attitudes toward emerging technologies, then review previous work on public perception of nanotechnology and nano-food, describe our qualitative content analysis results for public perception toward nano-food—focusing especially on altruism and skepticism, and discuss implications of these findings in terms of how public attitudes toward nano-food could be formed and understood. Finally, we propose that paying attention to these two factors may guide more responsible development of nano-food in the future.     

The changing information environment for nanotechnology: online audiences and content

The shift toward online communication in all realms, from print newspapers to broadcast television, has implications for how the general public consumes information about nanotechnology. The goal of this study is threefold: to investigate who is using online sources for information and news about science and nanotechnology, to examine what the general public is searching for online with regards to nanotechnology, and to analyze what they find in online content of nanotechnology. Using survey data, we find those who report the Internet as their primary source of science and technology news are diverse in age, more knowledgeable about science and nanotechnology, highly educated, male, and more diverse racially than users of other media. In a comparison of demographic data on actual visits by online users to general news and science Web sites, science sites attracted more male, non-white users from the Western region of the United States than news sites did. News sites, on the other hand, attracted those with a slightly higher level of education. Our analysis of published estimates of keyword searches on nanotechnology reveals people are turning to the Internet to search for keyword searches related to the future, health, and applications of nanotechnology. A content analysis of online content reveals health content dominates overall. Comparisons of content in different types of sites—blogs, government, and general sites—are conducted.     

Public Attitudes Toward Nanotechnology

Data from 3909 respondents to an Internet survey questionnaire provide the first insights into public perceptions of nanotechnology. Quantitative analysis of statistics about agreement and disagreement with two statements, one positive and the other negative, reveals high levels of enthusiasm for the potential benefits of nanotechnology and little concern about possible dangers. The respondents mentally connect nanotechnology with the space program, nuclear power, and cloning research, but rate it more favorably. In contrast, they do not associate nanotechnology with pseudoscience, despite its imaginative exploitation by science fiction writers. Qualitative analysis of written comments from 598 respondents indicates that many ideas about the value of nanotechnology have entered popular culture, and it provides material for an additional 108 questionnaire items that can be used in future surveys on the topic. The findings of this exploratory study can serve as benchmarks against which to compare results of future research on the evolving status of nanotechnology in society.     

Nanotechnology and society

Past experience has shown that the successful introduction of a new technology requires careful attention to the interactions between the technology and society. These interactions are bi-directional: on the one hand, technology changes and challenges social patterns and, on the other hand, the governance structures and values of the society affect progress in developing the technology. Nanotechnology is likely to be particularly affected by these kinds of interactions because of its great promise and the unusually early public attention it has received. Moreover, it represents a new kind of experiment in packaging a rather wide range of fundamental research activities under a single “mission-like” umbrella. Although this gives it more impetus as a field, it sets a higher bar for showing successful applications early on and because it links disparate fields, regulatory regimes reasonable for one kind of nanotechnology development may be inappropriately extended to others. There are a number of lessons to be gleaned from experience with the introduction of other technologies, which offer guidance with respect to what pitfalls to avoid and what issues to be sensitive to as we move forward with the development of nanotechnology applications. The problems encountered by nuclear power point out the dangers of over-promising and the role the need for the technology plays in ameliorating fears of risk. The public reaction to biomedical engineering and biotechnology highlights, in addition, the cultural factors that come into play when technologies raise questions about what is “natural” and what is “foreign” and what conceptions are involved in defining “personhood”. In all cases, it has been clear that a main task for those introducing new technology is building public trust–in the safety of the technologies and the integrity of those introducing it. The advocates of nanotechnology have already shown that they are generally aware of the need to consider the public’s reaction, and they have taken the first steps to act on that awareness. We have to build on those beginnings, not limiting our considerations simply to issues of safety. If we do so well, we have the opportunity to develop a new paradigm for technology introduction, which will serve society well in the future.     

Measuring science–technology interactions using patent citations and author-inventor links: an exploration analysis from Chinese nanotechnology

This article contributes to the growing study on the interactions between science and technology with China’s evidence in the field of nanotechnology, based on the database of United States Patent and Trademark Office. The analysis is focused during the period of 1991–2008, a rapid increasing period for the development of nanotechnology. Using the non-patent references cited by patents, we first investigate the science–technology connections in the context of Chinese nanotechnology, especially in institutional sectors and its application fields. Those patents, produced by academic researchers and directed towards basic scientific knowledge, generally cite more scientific references with a higher proportion of self-citations. It is interesting to find that patents contributed by collaborations between public organizations and corporations seldom contain scientific references. Following an interesting path on matching the data of publications and patents, we establish the author-inventor links in this emerging field. Author-inventors, who are co-active in publishing and patenting, are at the very top of the most prolific and highly cited researchers. Finally, we employ social network analysis to explore the characteristics of scientific and technological networks generated by co-authorship and co-invention data, to investigate the position and the role of patenting–publishing scientists in these research networks.     

Creating informed public opinion: citizen deliberation about nanotechnologies for human enhancements

Many people believe that ordinary citizens should influence scientific and technological developments, but the American public is routinely uninformed about these issues. As a solution, some scholars advocate creating informed public opinions by encouraging citizens to deliberate about the issues. Although this idea is currently widely applauded in the science and technology literature, deliberative outcomes are infrequently measured and the practice of deliberation is routinely criticized in other disciplines. This research contributes to our understanding of the effectiveness of citizen deliberation as a method for increasing public engagement with science. I report data measuring results of deliberation in a national citizens’ technology forum (NCTF) about nanotechnologies for human enhancement. The NCTF was a month-long process involving six groups of 9–15 ordinary citizens who deliberated in different locations across the United States with the goal of reaching consensus about policy recommendations within their groups. I find that structured deliberation generated informed opinions, sometimes meaningful shifts in preferences, and increased trust and internal efficacy among the participants. Nevertheless, the NCTF has important shortcomings, and it is not obvious that consensus conferences should be preferred over other mechanisms for creating informed opinions. Future research is needed to corroborate the findings of this study and to systematically compare outcomes of structured citizen deliberation to other less resource intensive forms of engagement.     

Longitudinal study on patent citations to academic research articles in nanotechnology (1976–2004)

Academic nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) research provides a foundation for nanotechnology innovation reflected in patents. About 60% or about 50,000 of the NSE-related patents identified by “full-text” keyword searching between 1976 and 2004 at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) have an average of approximately 18 academic citations. The most cited academic journals, individual researchers, and research articles have been evaluated as sources of technology innovation in the NSE area over the 28-year period. Each of the most influential articles was cited about 90 times on the average, while the most influential author was cited more than 700 times by the NSE-related patents. Thirteen mainstream journals accounted for about 20% of all citations. Science, Nature and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) have consistently been the top three most cited journals, with each article being cited three times on average. There is another kind of influential journals, represented by Biosystems and Origin of Life, which have very few articles cited but with exceptionally high frequencies. The number of academic citations per year from ten most cited journals has increased by over 17 times in the interval (1990–1999) as compared to (1976–1989), and again over 3 times in the interval (2000–2004) as compared to (1990–1999). This is an indication of increased used of academic knowledge creation in the NSE-related patents.     

A nano/micro ‘meso’ scale self-calibrating integrated optical wavelength and intensity meter

Wavelength-division multiplexing has become the dominant approach to utilizing the massive bandwidth of optical fibers and integrated optics, including those based on a photonic crystal approach and recent nanotechnology achievements. For tunable sources and tunable receivers, it is desirable to measure the wavelength accurately and quickly. Unfortunately, current wavelength-measurement devices are not integrated and not fast enough to support 1 Gbit/s and higher requirements of the modern communication lines. We show here how to make an integrated optical system that results in an intensity-independent wavelength determination and a wavelength-independent intensity determination at ultra-short pulse duration or higher than ∼1-GHz bandwidth. The two output beams from a Mach–Zehnder interferometer, tuned to 3 dB at each output at the beginning of the wavelength-measurement range, provide all of the needed information. We show how a simple fast wavelength meter can be built into a silicon – or other – optical chip. It employs fuzzy metrology using both outputs of an integrated interferometer. PACS 42.79.Sz; 42.87.Bg; 42.79.Ta     

Trends in worldwide nanotechnology patent applications: 1991 to 2008

Nanotechnology patent applications published during 1991–2008 have been examined using the “title–abstract” keyword search on esp@cenet “worldwide” database. The longitudinal evolution of the number of patent applications, their topics, and their respective patent families have been evaluated for 15 national patent offices covering 98% of the total global activity. The patent offices of the United States (USA), People’s Republic of China (PRC), Japan, and South Korea have published the largest number of nanotechnology patent applications, and experienced significant but different growth rates after 2000. In most repositories, the largest numbers of nanotechnology patent applications originated from their own countries/regions, indicating a significant “home advantage.” The top applicant institutions are from different sectors in different countries (e.g., from industry in the US and Canada patent offices, and from academe or government agencies at the PRC office). As compared to 2000, the year before the establishment of the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), numerous new invention topics appeared in 2008, in all 15 patent repositories. This is more pronounced in the USA and PRC. Patent families have increased among the 15 patent offices, particularly after 2005. Overlapping patent applications increased from none in 1991 to about 4% in 2000 and to about 27% in 2008. The largest share of equivalent nanotechnology patent applications (1,258) between two repositories was identified between the US and Japan patent offices.