journal article·2006-11-03

The current state of public understanding of nanotechnology

Anna M Waldron, Douglas Spencer, Carl A Batt

Publisher page

Abstract

The growing importance of nanotechnology in industry and society has not been accompanied by a widespread understanding of the subject among the general public. Simple questions to initially probe the smallest thing that people can see and can think of reveals a divide in the understanding of the general public. A survey of 1500 individuals ranging in age from 6 to 74 has revealed a lack of knowledge of nanotechnology and especially a lack of understanding of the context of nanotechnology in the world that is too small to see. Survey findings are corroborated by in-depth interviews with 400 adults in studies of nanoscience literacy commisioned by University of California, Berkeley and Cornell in 2002 and 2004, respectively. In general, with the exception of 14–28 year olds, over 60% of respondents say they have never heard of nano or nanotechnology. The results suggest that the general public, especially middle-school children, has no firm foundation to understand nanotechnology and likely will continue to be equally impressed by credible scientific information as well as pure fictional accounts of nanotechnology.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Nanotechnology research and applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (23)

Show source-provided references
1. Bainbridge W. (2002) Public attitudes toward nanotechnology. J. Nanoparticle Res. 4: 561–57010.1023/A:1022805516652 ↗
2. Cobb M., Macoubrie J. (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust. J. Nanoparticle Res. 6: 395–40510.1007/s11051-004-3394-4 ↗
3. Dowling A., 2004. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and uncertainties. from http://www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm
4. Drexler K.E. (2004) Nanotechnology: From feynman to funding. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 24(1): 21–2710.1177/0270467604263113 ↗
5. Driver R., Squires A., Rushworth P., Wood-Robinson V. (1994) Making sense of secondary science: Research into children’s ideas. Routledge, London10.4324/9780203823583 ↗
6. Einsiedel E.F., Goldenberg L. (2004) Dwarfing the social? Nanotechnology lessons from the biotechnology front. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 24(1): 28–3310.1177/0270467604263110 ↗
7. Friedman S.M., Egold B.P. (2005) Nanotechnology: Risks and the media. IEEE Technol. Soc. Mag. 24(4): 5–1110.1109/MTAS.2005.1563496 ↗
8. Halford B., 2004. An idea run amok. Chem. Eng. News 80(30), 4510.1021/cen-v082n030.p045 ↗
9. Knight H. & J. Pierce, 2003. To kill a technology. The Engineer 291, 25–29
10. Mehta M.D. (2004) From biotechnology to nanotechnology: What can we learn from earlier technologies? Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 24(1): 34–3910.1177/0270467604263119 ↗
11. Mills K., Fledderman C. (2005). Getting the best from nanotechnology: Approaching social and ethical implications openly and proactively. IEEE Technol. Soc. Mag. 24(4): 18–2610.1109/MTAS.2005.1563498 ↗
12. Morrissey S.R., 2004. Harnessing nanotechnology. Chem. Eng. News 82(16), 30–3310.1021/cen-v082n016.p030 ↗
13. NYSED, 2004. New york state standards for math, science and technology: NYS Education Department
14. Pilarski L.M., Mehta M.D., Caulfield T., Kaler K.V.I.S., Backhouse C.J. (2004) Microsystems and nanoscience for biomedical applications: A view to the future. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 24(1): 40–4510.1177/0270467604263120 ↗
15. Roco M.C. (2003a) Broader societal issues of nanotechnology. J. Nanoparticle Res. 5(3–4): 181–18910.1023/A:1025548512438 ↗
16. Roco M.C. (2003b) Public affairs forum – national nanotechnology initiative to advance broad societal goals. MRS Bull. 28(6): 41610.1557/mrs2003.120 ↗
17. Roco M.C., Bainbridge W.S. (2005) Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Maximizing human benefit. J. Nanoparticle Res. 7(1): 1–1310.1007/s11051-004-2336-5 ↗
18. Schulz W.G., 2002. Nanotechnology under the scope. Chem. Eng. News 82(10), 23–2410.1021/cen-v080n049.p023 ↗
19. Service R.F., 2004. Nanotech forum aims to head off replay of past blunders. Science 306(5698), 95510.1126/science.306.5698.955a ↗
20. Spencer D., 2003. Evaluating public readiness for and interest in learning new science. (White paper presenting pedagogy guidelines for introducing nano-science based on findings from a national study interviewing over 1000 youth.): EDU Inc
21. Spencer D. & V. Angelotti, 2004. It’s a nano world: A study of use – findings from a summative study: EDU, Inc
22. Waldron A.M., K. Sheppard, C.A. Batt & D. Spencer, 2005. Too small to see: Educating the next generation in nanoscale science and engineering. In: Kumar C.S., Hormes J. and Leuschner C. eds. Nanofabrication towards biomedical applications. Germany: Wiley VCH10.1002/3527603476.ch15 ↗
23. Weil V., Nov 2003. Zeroing in on ethical issues in nanotechnology. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the IEEE10.1109/JPROC.2003.818326 ↗