Terre Satterfield|Milind Kandlikar|Christian E. H. Beaudrie|Joseph Conti|Barbara Herr Harthorn
Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies
University of British Columbia|University of British Columbia|University of British Columbia|University of California, Santa Barbara|University of California, Santa Barbara
understanding emerging trends public perceptions nanomaterials critically important regulate risks number surveys explored public perceptions risks benefits paper metaanalyse surveys assess extent following four hypotheses derived previous studies new technologies might said valid nanotechnologies risk aversion prevail benefit appreciation increase knowledge result reduced aversion risks judgements malleable subject persuasion given riskcentric information contextual psychometric attitudinal predictors perceived risk prior studies help anticipate future perceptions nanotechnologies find half public least familiarity nanotechnology perceive greater benefits outnumber perceive greater risks 3 1 however large minority surveyed 44 unsure suggesting risk judgements highly malleable nanotechnology risk perceptions also appear contradict longstanding findings particular unfamiliarity nanotechnology contrary expectations strongly associated risk aversion reduced knowledge deficits correlated positive perceptions early controversyfree period psychometric variables trust affect continue drive risk perceptions new context although influence trust affect mediated even reversed demographic cultural variables given potential malleability perceptions novel methods understanding future public responses nanotechnologies need developed metaanalysis surveys public attitudes nanotechnology reveals public perceptions malleable new methods understanding future responses need developed