Effects of knowledge and persuasion on high‐school students' attitudes toward nuclear power plants

Abstract

Researchers report finding corrclational data to identify a positive relationship between nuclear knowledge and positive attitudes toward the use of nuclear cnergy. This study investigated the relationship between nuclear knowledge and nuclear attitudes and to the understanding of Science-Technology-Society attitudes involving tcchnological attitude objects. This quasi-experimental study tested the causal relationship between knowledge about nuclear power plants and attitudes toward their use in electrical generation. Subjects were presented with systematically designed communications developcd to change either their knowledge about or attitude toward nuclear plants. The Standard Events of Instruction was the basis of the knowledge instruction, whereas the Learning Theory Approach and the Theory of Reasoned Action were the theoretical bases of the persuasive communication. The principal finding was that nuclear knowledge and nuclear attitude each can be changed independently of the other. Although knowledge and attitudes arc correlationally linked, this study shows no evidence of a cause-effect relationship.A better understanding of the mechanisms by which students form and change attitudes toward Science-Technology-Society (STS) issues precedes the design of affective components within STS curricula. Fostering positive science attitudes in students living in a technological society means that science educators and classroom teachers must be able to measure students' attitudes and know how attitudes form and change. The role of attitudes about nuclear energy in the lives of secondary-school students is the focus of this report.Research on nuclear attitudes are pertinent in today's society. First, the generation of electricity by nuclear energy is a familiar STS issue, as shown by the Newspaper Abstracts Database (1992) lists 577 articles dealing with nuclear power. Second, students have measurable attitudes toward nuclcar power plants (Calhoun, Shrigley, & Showers, 1988;Crater, 1972;Melber, Nealey, Hammersla, & Rankin, 1977). Third, other factors such as knowledge, prior opinion, and worry are influential in forming nuclear attitudes (Douglas, 1987;MacGregor, 1991). Last, the literature on nuclear attitudes has grown to the level such that new studies can be marshaled from the findings of earlier research (Calhoun

Impact of green stadium initiatives on donor intentions toward an intercollegiate athletic programme

“…Findings indicated that beliefs about the consequences of donating to GSI had a positive impact on attitude toward the behaviour, and normative beliefs were positively related with SN. These findings were consistent with several studies using either the TRA or TPB as a theoretical framework in a variety of settings such as a burn policies of the National Park System (Bright et al, 1993), water conservation O'Keefe, 2001, 2004), nuclear power (Showers and Shrigley, 1995), agricultural conservation (Luzar and Diagne, 1999;Heong and Escalada, 1999), and consumer purchases (Brinberg and Durand, 1983).…”

Towards a cross-paradigmatic framework of the social acceptance of energy systems

“…In our selective review are examples of experimental and quasiexperimental designs (e.g. [75] in relation to CCS and [76] in relation to nuclear energy); observational and correlational designs based on conventional surveys [77]; information choice questionnaires [78] and Q-method [79]; case-specific questionnaires [80]; qualitative designs based on case studies and qualitative field studies (with interviews and focus groups) [81] and mixed method designs combining questionnaires and interviews of end-users [82].…”

Examining the Interaction of Acceptance and Understanding: How Does the Relationship Change with a Focus on Macroevolution?

“…A number of studies suggest that knowledge-oriented interventions do not change students' beliefs or acceptance (Angiullo et al 1996;Carmel et al 1992;Erickson et al 2003;Harris et al 1991;Koumi and Tsiantis 2001;Showers and Shrigley 1995). Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that content instruction in evolutionary biology does not provoke a detectable change in students' acceptance of evolution (Demastes-Southerland et al 1995;Sinatra et al 2003, 2005.…”