Nanotechnology Information, Risk and Regulation: Frames, Topics and Trust

1
Nanotechnology Information, Risk and Regulation
Frames, Topics and Trust

• Susanna Hornig Priest, Ph.D., and
• Ted Greenhalgh
• University of Nevada, Las Vegas

2
Two projects

• South Carolina panel study 75 individuals over
  three years (NSEC at U of SC)
• Experimental work on frames, topics and trust
  (NER w/John Besley)

3
Panel study

• Low awareness, but qualitative baseline
  interviews showed some context for nano
• Not dissimilar to scientists perceptions
• More concern with regulation
• Idea of a template for technology even with
  no familiarity, people have expectations for
  risks and benefits
• Concerns over social risks greater, and rising,
  compared to health/environment

4

5

6
Goals of Experimental Study

• Determine whether news framing (defined
  conservatively) really matters
• Pilot study implicates mention of regulation
• Longitudinal study points to ELSI salience
• Resonates with other studies, e.g. focus groups
• Explore whether people lump nano applications
  together
• Evaluate the contributions of prior attitudes

7
The F Word Framing

• What we call things (labeling e.g., Lakoff)
• Common scapegoat for controversy (Frankenfoods,
  therapeutic cloning), but what evidence?
• Partial truths and information effects (Entman?)
• What goes in and what not intention?
• Classic persuasion theory suggests effects wont
  last
• How news practices shape stories (Tuchman)
• Beat reporting discovering the story
• Narrative emphasis effect, not content effect

8
Study Design

• Four nano news stories
• Electronics, food processing, drug development,
  solar energy applications
• Four manipulations of story paragraph order
• Benefits, physical risks, regulatory status,
  social risks privileged
• Undergrad student subjects (41) each read one
  story within each application
• 16 conditions systematically rotated
• Pre-tested attitudes post-tested reactions

9
Preliminary Conclusions

• Subtle framing effects exist but depend on topic,
  treatment
• Perceived R/B ratios are higher for regulation,
  social risk frames than benefit, physical risk
  frames (one-tailed p .105 for effects on
  society .026 on self)
• Taking DVs separately, most effects n.s. (except
  food)
• Nevertheless finding is interesting given limited
  nature of manipulation (paragraph order only)
• Topic much more important (no evidence of
  lumping) some interaction w/frame
• Preexisting trust factors also very important
  (but not other attitudes tested)

10
Implications?

• Expanded vocabulary of risk
• Controlling physical hazards is not the only
  issue of public concern
• Trust is crucial to attitudes toward tech
• Not likely a short-term effect of news frames
• People make application distinctions, not
  mindless generalizations
• Even undergraduates reading 4 stories in a row!

11
Where to go from here..

• Thats why you are all here!