Cognitive Structures in the Perception of Modern Technologies

Abstract

Results of two survey studies (N = 197 and N = 2037) are presented. It is shown that attitudes of the public about "technology in general" are not stable and can easily be affected by how the subject is introduced. Eight areas of technology are compared on the basis of empirical relations in attitudinal judgments, in attribute ratings, in selfassigned importance weights of attributes, and in importance of reference groups and persons. On the basis of similarities in these four kinds of judgments, three clusters of technology areas were identified: (1) a cluster of modern reproductive technologies, (2) an information cluster containing automation, computer, and communication technologies, and (3) a cluster containing nuclear energy and military technology. The attitude toward "technology in general" can not be considered as an aggregation of attitudes toward these areas of technology: The relations between general attitude and specific attitudes are only moderate to negligible. Experts and entrepreneurs are as a matter of course involved with the development and implementation of technological innovations. The government, too, is a party with direct influence, for instance as subsidizer, regulator, and consumer. The role of citizens is indirect: Via Parliament and as selective consumers they can exercise some influence on technological developments. In recent decades, segments of the population have found that they cannot adequately influence technological developments through this indirect route. More directly, via pressure groups, they have agitated against the implementation of certain technological innovations. A well-known example is the movement against nuclear energy. Resistance of this kind can at least slow down the implementation of technologies and affect (in the eyes of some) the economic competitiveness of the country. &dquo;Public acceptance&dquo; therefore has become an important topic for entrepreneurs and politicians when decisions about future technologies are at stake.

Constructing social representations of science and technology: the role of metaphors in the press and the popular scientific magazines

“…Similar representations have also been reported in articles published in the British press on Biotechnology (Liakopoulos, 2002), as well as in the Italian press about Informatics (Sensales, 1994). One might possibly attribute the fact that the general public seems to hold similar attitudes for both Engineering & Informatics and Genetics & Biotechnology to the prevalence of common representations within the corresponding disciplinary fields (Daamen et al, 1990;Agassi, 1996).…”

“…This tendency may have some effect on the way the public perceives the relevant issues, since as some studies have shown, lay people tend not to realize the special features (e.g., designing, quality controls, etc.) differentiating technology from science and hence, tend to extrapolate the nature of science over that of technology; this, in turn, results in a common undifferentiated image for both areas (Daamen et al, 1990;Agassi, 1996).…”

Tourist behaviour towards self-service hotel technology adoption: Trust and subjective norm as key antecedents

“…However, attitude of people can be measured for a specific technology (Daamen, van der Lans, & Midden, 1990). Curran and Meuter (2005) also mentioned that people show distinguishable attitudes towards distinct SSTs.…”

Pandora's Box or panacea? Using metaphors to create the public representations of biotechnology

“…The ensuing cognitive process refers to both rational and affective components in the formation of the final attitude and metaphor plays a pivotal role in this process. 10 As we have seen, metaphors are both building blocks of common imagery and basic constituents for the incorporation of new information. 11 They are the vehicles of familiarization and are responsible for the psychological impact of the debate; this is the main reason why technological debates, such as the one on biotechnology, are permeated with a wealth of metaphorical concepts.…”