Framing Synthetic Biology

Dragojlovic, Nick; Einsiedel, Edna F.

doi:10.1177/1075547012470707

Cited by 27 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An additional factor may be the extent to which technologies allow humans to interfere with the natural world (Hansen, ; Sjöberg, ). Researchers have proposed that resistance to scientific and technological developments may arise from discomfort with tampering with nature, and that some people experience this discomfort more than others (Corner, Parkhill, Pidgeon, & Vaughan, ; Dragojlovic & Einsiedel, ; Vandermoere, Blanchemanche, Bieberstein, Marette, & Roosen, ; Wolske, Raimi, Campbell‐Arvai, & Hart, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People differ in their comfort with tampering with the natural world. Although some see altering nature as a sign of human progress, others see it as dangerous or hubristic. Across four studies, we investigate discomfort with tampering with the natural world. To do so, we develop the Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale, a short scale that is the first to directly measure this discomfort. We identify six activities that people believe tamper with nature (geoengineering, genetically modified organisms, pesticides, cloning, gene therapy, and nanoparticles) and show that ATN scores are associated with opposition to these activities. Furthermore, the ATN Scale predicts actual behavior: donations to an anti‐tampering cause. We demonstrate that ATN is related to previously identified constructs including trust in technology, naturalness bias, purity values, disgust sensitivity, aversion to playing God, and environmental beliefs and values. By illuminating who is concerned about tampering with nature and what predicts these beliefs, the ATN Scale provides opportunities to better understand public opposition to technological innovations, consumer preferences for “natural” products, and strategies for science communication.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consumers have been found to be sceptical about the new biotechnologies used in food production, and reluctant to eat meat from vaccinated animals (Scudamore, 2007;Zingg & Siegrist, 2012). There is a limited literature on understandings of synthetic biology applications, but earlier studies have found that people consider synthetic biology to be risky because they regard it as a form of human interference with nature, and that people's attitudes to applications of synthetic biology depend on the degree to which the applications are seen as 'natural' (Avellaneda & Hagen, 2016;Dragojlovic & Einsiedel, 2013). 'Naturalness' is perceived to be a sign of safety and order, whereas 'unnaturalness' signals potential danger to many consumers and rises anxiety (Ditlevsen & Andersen, 2020;Douglas, 2002).…”

Section: Synthetic Biology and Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Better than antibiotics. Public understandings of risk, human health and the use of synthetically obtained livestock vaccines in five European countries

Ditlevsen

Glerup

Sandøe

et al. 2021

Health, Risk & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing upon data collected within 20 focus groups with consumers from five European countries, in this article we investigate how perceptions of human health risk and current anxieties regarding agricultural food production affect citizens' acceptance of the use of an emerging biotechnology, synthetic biology, in the development of vaccines for animals bred for food production. In focus group discussions in Austria, the UK, Poland and Denmark, participants tended to value the positive potential of synthetic vaccines if they could solve existing problems. Participants argued that the technology could be beneficial for animal welfare and was a potential solution to the problem of risks to human health posed by the use of antibiotics on livestock. The perceived drawbacks of antibiotic use affected the discussions towards acceptance of synthetic biology and the use of vaccines in meat production despite concerns over the potential risks. The participants from Spain stood out in that their acceptance of the synthetic vaccine appeared to be disconnected from concerns about risks related to the use of antibiotics. Participants from all countries found the vaccine to have potential uses, but also expressed concerns about health risks for consumers. In general consumers were perceived as those bearing the heaviest burden of risk, while pharmaceutical companies were perceived as likely to benefit most from production of the vaccine. We found that institutional trust and national contexts of (dis)engagement with science influenced the participants' understandings of the degree to which the synthetic livestock vaccine had a fair risk-benefit balance.

show abstract

“…Nature's comic also invited readers to consider the implications of constructing life. Among them, it may have elicited the notion of risks posed by deliberately tinkering with nature, which is one of the most prevalent associations found in surveys and focus group work involving lay people (Dragojlovic and Einsiedel 2013a). It is arguable, though, whether this comic contributed to a positive perception of SB as obviously intended or, instead, to a notion of hazard and uncontrollability, and of the average SB scientist being a kind of doctor Frankenstein (Gschmeidler and Seiringer 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cartoons on bacterial balloons: scientists’ opinion on the popularization of synthetic biology

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do scientists perceive the media coverage of synthetic biology (SB)? In this paper, we approach this question by studying a set of cartoons devoted to SB. Based on a categorization of the cartoons into five large thematic groups an international survey was carried out to assess the opinion of SB research groups on science communication with regard to the public image of their discipline. The 101 responses obtained indicate that in general, their perception of the communication is not negative, although many respondents raised concerns on the media's inclination to sensationalism and over-simplification. However, the results also suggest that (in the light of the unfortunate experiences with GMO communication) scientists should think twice before proposing metaphorical interpretations of their research.

show abstract

Framing Synthetic Biology

Cited by 27 publications

References 47 publications

The Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World

The Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World

Better than antibiotics. Public understandings of risk, human health and the use of synthetically obtained livestock vaccines in five European countries

Cartoons on bacterial balloons: scientists’ opinion on the popularization of synthetic biology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About