Survey Finds Emotional Reactions to Nanotechnology

Embargoed 12:01 a.m.

U.S. Attitudes Could Divide Like Those on Nuclear Power and Global Warming

    WASHINGTON, March 6 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- "The U.S. public's
 perception of nanotechnology is up for grabs. It could divide along the
 lines of nuclear power, global warming and other contentious environmental
 issues absent a major public education and engagement effort by industry,
 government, civic groups and scientists. People who know little or nothing
 about 'nanotechnology' instantly react in an emotionally charged way to the
 concept, and their opinions divide along cultural lines as they learn more
 about it," according to Dan M. Kahan, the Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor at
 Yale Law School.
     His conclusions are based on the findings of a new web-based public
 opinion survey of U.S. public perceptions of nanotechnology. "Essentially,
 when asked what they think about this new technology, Americans go with
 their gut instinct -- which usually reflects their views toward other
 issues like climate change and nuclear power. When they learn more, they
 tend to adopt a stance about nanotechnology that fits their political and
 cultural predispositions," said Kahan, one of the principal investigators
 in the study.
     "Nothing in our findings suggests that public polarization over
 nanotechnology is inevitable," noted Don Braman, a professor at The George
 Washington University. "Our results indicate that another outcome is
 possible but unlikely unless government, business, and educators take a
 more proactive approach to nanotechnology public engagement and
 communication."
     The results from this study of 1,800 persons who were recruited to
 participate in an online survey experiment were released today by the
 Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies at the Woodrow Wilson International
 Center for Scholars. The research was conducted by The Cultural Cognition
 Project -- an interdisciplinary team of top experts from Yale University,
 the University of Washington, The George Washington University, and
 Decision Research.
     The study produced two major findings. The first is that "affect," or
 emotion, plays a major role in people's perceptions toward nanotechnology.
 The second major finding of the study is that individuals' values determine
 their reaction to information about nanotechnology. "We exposed one group
 of subjects to information about the benefits and risks of nanotechnology,
 and we compared their views to those subjects who did not receive such
 information," explained Kahan.
     "We found that when people who hold largely 'individualistic' values --
 and who tend to dismiss claims that commerce and industry are dangerous and
 need regulation -- receive information about nanotechnology, they tend to
 focus on the benefits. When those who hold 'egalitarian' and
 'communitarian' values -- and who are relatively more community-oriented
 and sensitive to environmental and technological risks -- get the same
 information, they focus on the risks. Social psychologists call this a
 polarization effect," Kahan said.
     "Based on our results, it is fair to anticipate that as nanotechnology
 assumes a higher profile in the media and public imagination, people's
 attitudes may divide along the same lines that nuclear power or climate
 change have," said John Gastil, professor at the University of Washington.
     The study also confirmed a major finding of an earlier poll conducted
 by Hart Research that Americans remain largely unaware of nanotechnology --
 despite government and industry investments of $10 billion annually in
 nanotechnology research and development. The new survey found that over 80
 percent of U.S. respondents had heard "little" or "nothing at all" about
 nanotechnology.
     "When it comes to nanotechnology, the American public is probably like
 people from Missouri -- the 'Show Me' State," according to David Rejeski,
 director of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. "They have to be
 convinced that the benefits of this new technology -- with its valuable
 applications in medicine, the environment, and energy production -- will
 outweigh its risks. This survey indicates that just providing the public
 with factual scientific information about nanotechnology will not guarantee
 popular acceptance and support. The window of opportunity for reaching out
 to the public about nanotechnology -- before polarization occurs -- is
 closing fast. The current government strategy for educating and engaging
 the public is weak, and industry strategies are almost nonexistent," said
 Rejeski.
     This study was supported by the National Science Foundation, the Oscar
 M. Ruebhausen Fund at Yale Law School, and the Project on Emerging
 Nanotechnologies.
     About Nanotechnology
     Nanotechnology is the ability to measure, see, manipulate and
 manufacture things usually between 1 and 100 nanometers. A nanometer is one
 billionth of a meter; a human hair is roughly 100,000 nanometers wide. More
 than $30 billion in products incorporating nanotechnology were sold
 globally in 2005. By 2014, Lux Research estimates this figure will grow to
 $2.6 trillion.
     The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies is an initiative launched by
 the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and The Pew Charitable
 Trusts in 2005. It is dedicated to helping business, government and the
 public anticipate and manage possible health and environmental implications
 of nanotechnology. For more information about the project, log on to
 http://www.nanotechproject.org.
     Contact: Sharon McCarter
     Phone: (202) 691-4016
     sharon.mccarter@wilsoncenter.org
 
 

SOURCE Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars