Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/sage/crispr-images-media-use-and-public-opinion-about-gene-editing-uVXNYdNKNz
References (51)
-
Dmitry Sokolov (2023)
Meal 'n' Knowledge. Review of the book «Science In The Media: Popular Images and Public Perceptions»Science Management: Theory and Practice
-
S. Lecheler, C. Vreese (2018)
News Framing Effects -
S. Hamilton (2003)
Traces of the future: Biotechnology, science fiction, and the mediaScience Fiction Studies, 30
-
M. Hughes (1980)
The Fruits of Cultivation Analysis: A Reexamination of Some Effects of Television WatchingPublic Opinion Quarterly, 44
-
Patrice Kohl, Patrice Kohl, D. Brossard, Dietram Scheufele, Michael Xenos (2019)
Public views about editing genes in wildlife for conservationConservation Biology, 33
-
J. Delhove, Ivana Osenk, I. Prichard, M. Donnelley (2019)
Public acceptability of gene therapy and gene editing for human use: A systematic review.Human gene therapy
-
Hui Liu, S. Priest (2009)
Understanding public support for stem cell research: media communication, interpersonal communication and trust in key actorsPublic Understanding of Science, 18
-
(2011)
Science on television in the 21 st century : recent trends in portrayals and their contributions to public attitudes toward science -
R. Haynes (2016)
Whatever happened to the ‘mad, bad’ scientist? Overturning the stereotypePublic Understanding of Science, 25
-
S. Perkowitz (2007)
Hollywood Science: Movies, Science, and the End of the World -
Jarrod Green (2018)
Why scream about sound in space? The functions of audience discourse about unrealistic science in narrative fictionPublic Understanding of Science, 28
-
R. Entman (1993)
Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured ParadigmJournal of Communications
-
Emily Howell, Christopher Wirz, Dietram Scheufele, D. Brossard, Michael Xenos (2020)
Deference and decision-making in science and society: How deference to scientific authority goes beyond confidence in science and scientists to become authoritarianismPublic Understanding of Science, 29
-
S. Priest, T. Eyck (2003)
News coverage of biotechnology debatesSociety, 40
-
S. Chapin, Leslie Chapin (1994)
Biotech or Biowreck? the Implications of Jurassic Park and Genetic EngineeringBulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 14
-
M. Nisbet (2018)
The Gene-Editing ConversationAmerican Scientist, 106
-
Derek So, R. Sladek, Y. Joly (2021)
Assessing public opinions on the likelihood and permissibility of gene editing through construal level theoryNew Genetics and Society, 40
-
W. Gamson, A. Modigliani (1989)
Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist ApproachAmerican Journal of Sociology, 95
-
Molly Simis, Sara Yeo, Kathleen Rose, D. Brossard, Dietram Scheufele, Michael Xenos, Barbara Pope (2015)
New Media Audiences’ Perceptions of Male and Female Scientists in Two Sci-Fi MoviesBulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 35
-
A. Dudo, D. Brossard, J. Shanahan, Dietram Scheufele, M. Morgan, N. Signorielli (2011)
Science on Television in the 21st CenturyCommunication Research, 38
-
G. Gaskell, I. Bárd, A. Allansdottir, Rui Cunha, Peter Eduard, Juergen Hampel, E. Hildt, C. Hofmaier, Nicole Kronberger, Sheena Laursen, A. Meijknecht, S. Nordal, A. Quintanilha, G. Revuelta, Núria Saladié, J. Sandor, Júlio Santos, Simone Seyringer, I. Singh, H. Somsen, Winnie Toonders, H. Torgersen, V. Torre, Márton Varju, H. Zwart (2017)
Public views on gene editing and its usesNature Biotechnology, 35
-
M. Nisbet (2005)
The Competition for Worldviews: Values, Information, and Public Support for Stem Cell ResearchInternational Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17
-
P. Weingart, C. Muhl, Petra Pansegrau (2003)
Of Power Maniacs and Unethical Geniuses: Science and Scientists in Fiction FilmPublic Understanding of Science, 12
-
(2021)
COVID - 19 mRNA vaccines are not “ gene therapy ” as some are claiming -
P. Hirsch (1980)
The “Scary World” of the Nonviewer and Other AnomaliesCommunication Research, 7
-
G. Gerbner, L. Gross (1976)
Living with television: the violence profile.The Journal of communication, 26 2
-
A. Marcon, Z. Master, V. Ravitsky, T. Caulfield (2019)
CRISPR in the North American popular pressGenetics in Medicine, 21
-
(2018)
Public views of gene editing for babies depend on how it would be used. Pew Research Center -
Science Media monitor -report 2. The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania -
S. Ho, D. Brossard, Dietram Scheufele (2008)
Effects of Value Predispositions, Mass Media Use, and Knowledge on Public Attitudes Toward Embryonic Stem Cell ResearchInternational Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20
-
D. Mckie (1975)
Talking PoliticsThe Lancet, 305
-
Dietram Scheufele (1999)
Framing as a theory of media effectsJournal of Communication, 49
-
Ruthanna Gordon (2009)
Learning From Fiction: Applications in Emerging TechnologiesBulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29
-
James Druckman, T. Bolsen (2011)
Framing, Motivated Reasoning, and Opinions about Emergent TechnologiesJournal of Communication, 61
-
Michael Cobb (2005)
Framing Effects on Public Opinion about NanotechnologyScience Communication, 27
-
M. Nisbet, R. Goidel (2007)
Understanding citizen perceptions of science controversy: bridging the ethnographic—survey research dividePublic Understanding of Science, 16
-
G. Gerbner (1987)
Science on Television: How It Affects Public Conceptions.Issues in Science and Technology, 3
-
M. Nisbet, A. Dudo (2013)
Entertainment media portrayals and their effects on the public understanding of science -
M. Nisbet, B. Lewenstein (2002)
Biotechnology and the American MediaScience Communication, 23
-
W. Potter (1993)
Cultivation Theory and Research: A Conceptual Critique.Human Communication Research, 19
-
D. Brossard, M. Nisbet (2006)
Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Low Information Public: Understanding U.S. Opinion on Agricultural BiotechnologyInternational Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19
-
M. Nisbet, Dietram Scheufele, J. Shanahan, Patricia Moy, D. Brossard, B. Lewenstein (2002)
Knowledge, Reservations, or Promise?Communication Research, 29
-
M. Morgan, J. Shanahan (2010)
The State of CultivationJournal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 54
-
J. Besley, J. Shanahan (2005)
Media Attention and Exposure in Relation to Support for Agricultural BiotechnologyScience Communication, 26
-
P. Brewer, Barbara Ley (2021)
Science in the Media -
M. Morgan, J. Shanahan, N. Signorielli (2015)
Yesterday's New Cultivation, TomorrowMass Communication and Society, 18
-
D. Brossard, J. Shanahan (2003)
Do Citizens Want to Have Their Say? Media, Agricultural Biotechnology, and Authoritarian Views of Democratic Processes in ScienceMass Communication and Society, 6
-
Biotechnology research viewed with caution globally , but most support gene editing for babies to treat disease -
J. Anderson, Emily Howell, Michael Xenos, Dietram Scheufele, D. Brossard (2021)
Learning without seeking?: Incidental exposure to science news on social media & knowledge of gene editingJournal of Science Communication
-
M. Nisbet (2009)
Framing Science: A New Paradigm in Public Engagement -
(2012)
Cultivation of attitudes toward science
- Publisher
- SAGE
- Copyright
- © The Author(s) 2022
- ISSN
- 0270-4676
- eISSN
- 1552-4183
- DOI
- 10.1177/02704676221080919
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
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.
Journal
"Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society" – SAGE
Published: Jun 1, 2022