Article ID: CBB346361495

CRISPR Images: Media Use and Public Opinion About Gene Editing (February-June 2022)

unapi

As gene editing technologies such as CRISPR have become increasingly prominent, so have media portrayals of them. With this in mind, the present study builds on theoretical accounts of framing effects, cultivation effects, and genre-specific viewing effects to examine how different forms of media use predict attitudes toward applications of gene editing. Specifically, the study tests how news use, overall television viewing, and science fiction viewing are related to such attitudes. The analyses draw on original data from two surveys of the U.S. public, one conducted in 2020 and the other in 2021. The results from both surveys indicate that news use and overall television viewing predict support for uses of gene editing, whereas science fiction viewing is not significantly related to opinion. The findings suggest that media frames and images may carry implications for the trajectory of public opinion about gene editing technologies and, ultimately, the social context for their development and adoption.

...More
Citation URI
https://data.isiscb.org/isis/citation/CBB346361495/

Similar Citations

Article Lisa M. PytlikZillig; Brittany Duncan; Sebastian Elbaum; Carrick Detweiler; (March 2018)
A Drone by Any Other Name: Purposes, End-User Trustworthiness, and Framing, but Not Terminology, Affect Public Support for Drones (/isis/citation/CBB947202008/)

Article Christopher L. Cummings; Agnes S. F. Chuah; Shirley S. Ho; (September 2018)
Protection Motivation and Communication through Nanofood Labels: Improving Predictive Capabilities of Attitudes and Purchase Intentions toward Nanofoods (/isis/citation/CBB867911612/)

Article Anja Bauer; Alexander Bogner; (2020)
Let’s (not) talk about synthetic biology: Framing an emerging technology in public and stakeholder dialogues (/isis/citation/CBB333309152/)

Book Greenberg, Bradley S.; (2002)
Communication and terrorism: Public and media responses to 9/11 (/isis/citation/CBB001181027/)

Article Mike Michael; (November 2018)
On “Aesthetic Publics”: The Case of VANTAblack® (/isis/citation/CBB312320431/)

Article Ryan J. Morrison; (2019)
Ethical Depictions of Neurodivergence in SF about AI (/isis/citation/CBB696781856/)

Book O'Doherty, Kieran; Einsiedel, Edna F; (2013)
Public Engagement and Emerging Technologies (/isis/citation/CBB001420078/)

Book Jennifer Rhee; (2018)
The robotic imaginary: the human and the price of dehumanized labor (/isis/citation/CBB488009100/)

Book Megan Finn; (2018)
Documenting Aftermath: Information Infrastructures in the Wake of Disasters (/isis/citation/CBB913221779/)

Article Peter Achterberg; Willem de Koster; Jeroen van der Waal; (2015)
A Science Confidence Gap: Education, Trust in Scientific Methods, and Trust in Scientific Institutions in the United States, 2014 (/isis/citation/CBB337703195/)

Article Pierce, John C.; Steel, Brent S.; Warner, Rebecca L.; (2009)
Knowledge, Culture, and Public Support for Renewable-Energy Policy (/isis/citation/CBB844357836/)

Authors & Contributors
Achterberg, Peter
Doorn, Neelke
Joshua Raulerson
Alexander Bogner
Frazier, Derrick
Ho, Shirley S.
Concepts
Public opinion
Technoscience; science and technology studies
Technology and society
Communication of scientific ideas
Regulation
Risk
Time Periods
21st century
20th century, late
20th century
19th century
Places
United States
Netherlands
Japan
Germany
European Union
California (U.S.)
Comments

Be the first to comment!

{{ comment.created_by.username }} on {{ comment.created_on | date:'medium' }}

Log in or register to comment