This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Gamble, J. Articles by Kassardjian, E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The use of selected community groups to elicit and understand the values underlying attitudes towards biotechnology

Department of Consumer and Sensory Science, HortResearch, 120 Mt Albert Road, Auckland, New Zealand, jgamble{at}hortresearch.co.nz

Elsa Kassardjian

Department of Consumer and Sensory Science, HortResearch, 120 Mt Albert Road, Auckland, New Zealand

Focus groups were used to examine the social, cultural and spiritual dimensions of biotechnology through an analysis of five selected community groups (total n = 68): scientists, Buddhists, business people, mothers with young children and the environmentally active. Participants from all groups were united in their perspective on three of the value spheres explored: health and welfare of family/society; maintaining/preserving the environment; and ethical considerations (e.g. welfare of animals, sanctity of life). However, values regarding science and business differentiated scientists and business people from the remaining community segments. Business people were more likely to adhere to "productionism," resulting in a greater acceptance of biotechnology, since business people did not hold the same resentment toward the business sphere held by other community segments. Scientists were far more accepting of the norms and values inherent in the sphere of science, believing science to be more predictable and controllable than general public perceptions. The disparity in worldviews for this value sphere meant scientists and laypeople did not communicate at the same level, in spite of having the same concerns for health and the environment. This resulted in feelings of frustration and powerlessness on the part of the layperson and the scientist.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 17, No. 2, 245-259 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0963662506065332


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. C. Gamble Guardians of our future: New Zealand mothers and sustainable biotechnology Public Understanding of Science, March 1, 2009; 18(2): 189 - 198. [Abstract] [PDF]