The perceived familiarity gap hypothesis: examining how media attention and reflective integration relate to perceived familiarity with nanotechnology in Singapore
Source abstract
Abstract
Public level of familiarity with nanotechnology partly determines their acceptance or rejection of the technology. This study examines the differential influence of public attention to science news in the media and reflective integration on perceived familiarity with nanotechnology among people in the higher and lower socioeconomic status (SES) groups in Singapore. Significant three-way interactions among education, science news attention, and reflective integration variables were found. Attention to television science news narrowed the level of perceived familiarity with nanotechnology between the higher and lower SES groups for those who engaged in high elaborative processing. Science newspaper attention, on the other hand, widened the familiarity gap between the higher and lower SES groups among those who engaged in high elaborative processing. Two-way interaction among education and elaborative processing were found—elaborative processing closed the familiarity gap between higher and lower SES groups. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Climate Change Communication and Perception · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Media Influence and Health
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (82)
Show source-provided references
1. Agency for Science, Technology and Research [A*STAR] (2011). Step 2015: science, technology & enterprise plan 2015. http://www.a-star.edu.sg/portals/0/media/otherpubs/step2015_1jun.pdf
2. Allum N, Sturgis P, Tabourazi D, Brunton-Smith I (2008) Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: a meta-analysis. Public Underst Sci 17:35–54. doi: 10.1177/096366250607015910.1177/0963662506070159 ↗
3. Anderson A, Allan S, Petersen A, Wilkinson C (2005) The framing of nanotechnologies in the British newspaper press. Sci Commun 27:200–22010.1177/1075547005281472 ↗
4. Anderson A, Petersen A, Wilkinson C, Allan S (2009) Nanotechnology, risk and communication. Palgrave Macmillan, New York10.1057/9780230234574 ↗
5. Anderson AA, Brossard D, Scheufele DA (2010) The changing information environment for nanotechnology: online audiences and content. J Nanopart Res 12:1083–1094. doi: 10.1007/s11051-010-9860-210.1007/s11051-010-9860-2 ↗
6. Anderson AA, Brossard D, Scheufele DA (2012) News coverage of controversial emerging technologies. Polit Life Sci 31:87–96. doi: 10.2990/31_1-2_8710.2990/31_1-2_87 ↗
7. Attewell P (2001) The first and second digital divides. Sociol Educ 74:252–25910.2307/2673277 ↗
8. Basu R, Chang AL (2005) Singapore’s big splash in small science; Nanotechnology institute and company will boost Singapore’s position as micro-science hub. The Straits Times. Retrieved from the Lexis–Nexis Academic online database
9. Bauer MW, Petkova K (2000) Public knowledge of and attitudes to science: alternative measures that may end the ‘science war’. Sci Technol Hum Values 25:30–5110.1177/016224390002500102 ↗
10. Bennett SE (1994) Changing levels of political information in 1988 and 1990. Polit Behav 16:1–20. doi: 10.1007/BF0154164010.1007/BF01541640 ↗
11. Bodmer W (1985) The public understanding of science. Royal Society, London
12. Bonfadelli H (2002) The internet and knowledge gaps: a theoretical and empirical investigation. Eur J Commun 17:65–84. doi: 10.1177/026732310201700160710.1177/0267323102017001607 ↗
13. Brossard D, Nisbet MC (2007) Deference to scientific authority among a low information public: understanding U.S. opinion on agricultural biotechnology International. J Public Opin Res 19:24–52. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edl00310.1093/ijpor/edl003 ↗
14. Cacciatore MA, Scheufele DA, Corley EA (2011) From enabling technology to applications: the evolution of risk perceptions about nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci 20:385–404. doi: 10.1177/096366250934781510.1177/0963662509347815 ↗
15. Cacciatore MA, Scheufele DA, Corley EA (2014) Another (methodological) look at knowledge gaps and the Internet’s potential for closing them. Public Underst Sci 23:376–394. doi: 10.1177/096366251244760610.1177/0963662512447606 ↗
16. Cobb MD (2005) Framing effects on public opinion about nanotechnology. Sci Commun 27:221–239. doi: 10.1177/107554700528147310.1177/1075547005281473 ↗
17. Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust. J Nanopart Res 6:395–40510.1007/s11051-004-3394-4 ↗
18. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ
19. Condit CM, Parrott R, Harris TM (2002) Lay understandings of the relationship between race and genetics: development of a collectivized knowledge through shared discourse. Public Underst Sci 11:373–387. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/11/4/30510.1088/0963-6625/11/4/305 ↗
20. Donk A, Metag J, Kohring M, Marcinkowski F (2012) Framing emerging technologies: risk perceptions of nanotechnology in the German Press. Sci Commun 34:5–2910.1177/1075547011417892 ↗
21. Downs A (1972) Up and down with ecology—the “issue-attention cycle”. Public Interest 28:38–51
22. Eveland WP (2001) The cognitive mediation model of learning from the news: evidence from nonelection, off-year election, and presidential election contexts. Commun Res 28:571–601. doi: 10.1177/00936500102800500110.1177/009365001028005001 ↗
23. Eveland WP, Hively MH (2009) Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. J Commun 59:205–224. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x ↗
24. Eveland WP, Scheufele DA (2000) Connecting news media use with gaps in knowledge and participation. Polit Commun 17:215–237. doi: 10.1080/10584600041425010.1080/105846000414250 ↗
25. Eveland WP, Thomson T (2006) Is it talking, thinking, or both? A lagged dependent variable model of discussion effects on political knowledge. J Commun 56:523–542. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00299.x10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00299.x ↗
26. Finucane ML, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson SM (2000) The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. J Behav Decis Making 13:1–1710.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200001/03)13:1<1::AID-BDM333>3.0.CO;2-S ↗
27. Gaziano C, Horowitz AM (2001) Knowledge gap on cervical, colorectal cancer exists among U.S. women. Newsp Res J 22:12–2710.1177/073953290102200102 ↗
28. Groboljsek B, Mali F (2012) Daily newspapers’ views on nanotechnology in Slovenia. Sci Commun 34:30–5610.1177/1075547011427974 ↗
29. Hamilton RJ (1997) Effects of three types of elaboration on learning concepts from text Contemporary. Educ Psychol 22:299–318. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1997.0935
30. Handy RD, Shaw BJ (2007) Toxic effects of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: implications for public health, risk assessment and the public perception of nanotechnology. Health Risk Soc 9:125–14410.1080/13698570701306807 ↗
31. Hart Research Associates (2007) Awareness of and attitudes toward nanotechnology and federal regulatory agencies. http://www.nanotechproject.org/process/files/5888/hart_nanopoll_2007.pdf
32. Ho SS (2010) Encyclopedia of Nanoscience and Society. In: Guston D (edn) Sage Publications, New York, pp 714–716
33. Ho SS (2012) The knowledge gap hypothesis in Singapore: the roles of socioeconomic status, mass media, and interpersonal discussion on public knowledge of the H1N1 flu pandemic. Mass Commun Soc 15(5):695–717. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2011.61627510.1080/15205436.2011.616275 ↗
34. Ho SS, Scheufele DA, Corley EA (2010) Making sense of policy choices: understanding the roles of value predispositions, mass media, and cognitive processing in public attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 12:2703–2715. doi: 10.1007/s11051-010-0038-810.1007/s11051-010-0038-8 ↗
35. Ho SS, Scheufele DA, Corley EA (2013) Factors influencing public risk–benefit considerations of nanotechnology: assessing the effects of mass media, interpersonal communication, and elaborative processing. Public Underst Sci 22:606–623. doi: 10.1177/096366251141793610.1177/0963662511417936 ↗
36. Holbrook TM (2002) Presidential campaigns and the knowledge gap. Polit Commun 19:437–454. doi: 10.1080/1058460029010999710.1080/10584600290109997 ↗
37. Hwang Y, Jeong S (2009) Revisiting the knowledge gap hypothesis: a meta-analysis of thirty-five years of research. J Mass Commun Q 86:513–532
38. Jenssen AT (2012) Widening or closing the knowledge gap? NORDICOM Rev 33:19–3610.2478/nor-2013-0002 ↗
39. Jonassen DH, Beissner K, Yacci M (1993) Structural knowledge: techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Structural knowledge: techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Hillsdale, NJ England
40. Kahan DM, Braman D, Slovic P, Gastil J, Cohen G (2009) Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nat Nanotechnol 4:87–9010.1038/nnano.2008.341 ↗
41. Kalyuga S (2009) Knowledge elaboration: a cognitive load perspective. Learn Instr 19:402–41010.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.003 ↗
42. Katz E (1957) The two-step flow of communication: an up-to-date report on an hypothesis. Public Opin Q 21:61–7810.1086/266687 ↗
43. Kennedy JM (1993) A comparison of telephone survey respondent selection procedures. Paper presented at the American Association for Public Opinion Research, St. Charles
44. Kjærgaard R (2010) Making a small country count: nanotechnology in Danish newspapers from 1996 to 2006. Public Underst Sci 19:80–9710.1177/0963662508093090 ↗
45. Kleinnijenhuis J (1991) Newspaper complexity and the knowledge gap. Eur J Commun 6:499–52210.1177/0267323191006004006 ↗
46. Kwak N (1999) Revisiting the knowledge gap hypothesis: education, motivation, and media use. Commun Res 26:385–413. doi: 10.1177/00936509902600400210.1177/009365099026004002 ↗
47. Ladwig P, Dalrymple KE, Brossard D, Scheufele DA, Corley EA (2012) Perceived familiarity or factual knowledge? Comparing operationalizations of scientific understanding. Sci Public Policy 39:761–774. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scs04810.1093/scipol/scs048 ↗
48. Lee CJ (2009) The role of internet engagement in the health-knowledge gap. J Broadcast Electron Media 53:365–382. doi: 10.1080/0883815090310275810.1080/08838150903102758 ↗
49. Lee CJ (2010) The interplay between media use and interpersonal communication in the context of healthy lifestyle behaviors: reinforcing or substituting? Mass Commun Soc 13:48–66. doi: 10.1080/15205430802694869
50. Lee CJ, Scheufele DA (2006) The influence of knowledge and deference toward scientific authority: a media effects model for public attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Mass Commun Q 83:819–834
51. Liang X et al. (2013) Value predispositions as perceptual filters: comparing of public attitudes toward nanotechnology in the United States and Singapore. Public Underst Sci. doi: 10.1177/096366251351085810.1177/0963662513510858 ↗
52. Lin S, Lin H, Wu Y (2013) Validation and exploration of instruments for assessing public knowledge of and attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Sci Educ Technol 22:548–559. doi: 10.1007/s10956-012-9413-910.1007/s10956-012-9413-9 ↗
53. Liu YI, Eveland WP (2005) Education, need for cognition, and campaign interest as moderators of news effects on political knowledge: an analysis of the knowledge gap. J Mass Commun Q 82:910–929
54. Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N (2001) Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull 127:267–286. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.26710.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267 ↗
55. Lu W, Hindman DB (2011) Does the digital divide matter more? Comparing the effects of new media and old media use on the education-based knowledge gap. Mass Commun Soc 14:216–235. doi: 10.1080/1520543100364270710.1080/15205431003642707 ↗
56. Mansoori GA, Mohazzabi P, McCormack P, Jabbari S (2007) Nanotechnology in cancer prevention, detection and treatment: bright future lies ahead. World Rev Sci Technol Sustain Develop 4:226–257. http://www.inderscience.com/wrstsd/10.1504/WRSTSD.2007.013584 ↗
57. Mares ML, Cantor J, Steinbach JB (1999) Using television to foster children’s interest in science. Sci Commun 20:283–29710.1177/1075547099020003001 ↗
58. Maynard A (2006) Nanotechnology: assessing the risks. Nano Today 1:22–3310.1016/S1748-0132(06)70045-7 ↗
59. Mielby H, Sandøe P, Lassen J (2013) The role of scientific knowledge in shaping public attitudes to GM technologies. Public Underst Sci 22:155–168. doi: 10.1177/096366251143057710.1177/0963662511430577 ↗
60. Ministry of Trade and Industry Singapore (2006) Science and technology plan 2010. http://www.mti.gov.sg/ResearchRoom/Pages/Science-and-Technology-Plan-2010.asp
61. Nelkin D (1995) Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. W. H. Freeman, New York
62. Neuman WR, Just MR, Crigler AN (1992) Common knowledge: news and the construction of political meaning. University of Chicago Press, Chicago10.7208/chicago/9780226161174.001.0001 ↗
63. Nisbet MC, Scheufele DA, Shanahan J, Moy P, Brossard D, Lewenstein BV (2002) Knowledge, reservations, or promise?: a media effects model for public perceptions of science and technology. Commun Res 29:584–608. doi: 10.1177/00936500223619610.1177/009365002236196 ↗
64. O’Mathúna DP (2009) Nanoethics: Big ethical issues with small technology. Continuum International Publishing Group, London
65. Petersen A (2009) Opening the black box: scientists’ views on the role of the news media in the nanotechnology debate. Public Underst Sci 18:51210.1177/0963662507084202 ↗
66. Powell MC (2007) New risk or old risk, high risk or no risk? How scientists’ standpoints shape their nanotechnology risk frames. Health Risk Soc 9:173–190. doi: 10.1080/1369857070130687210.1080/13698570701306872 ↗
67. Powell M, Dunwoody S, Griffin R, Neuwirth K (2007) Exploring lay uncertainty about an environmental health risk. Public Underst Sci 16:323–343. doi: 10.1177/096366250707449110.1177/0963662507074491 ↗
68. Prior M (2007) Post-broadcast democracy. How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge10.1017/CBO9781139878425 ↗
69. Retzbach A, Marschall J, Rahnke M, Otto L, Maier M (2011) Public understanding of science and the perception of nanotechnology: the roles of interest in science, methodological knowledge, epistemological beliefs, and beliefs about science. J Nanopart Res 13:6231–6244. doi: 10.1007/s11051-011-0582-x10.1007/s11051-011-0582-x ↗
70. Robinson JP, Levy MR (1996) News media use and the informed public: a 1990s update. J Commun 46:129–13510.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01478.x ↗
71. Satterfield T, Kandlikar M, Beaudrie CEH, Conti J, Harthorn BH (2009) Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies. Nat Nanotechnol 4:752–758. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2009.26510.1038/nnano.2009.265 ↗
72. Scheufele DA (2002) Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior. Commun Res 29:46–6510.1177/009365020202900103 ↗
73. Scheufele D, Lewenstein B (2005) The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanopart Res 7:659–667. doi: 10.1007/s11051-005-7526-210.1007/s11051-005-7526-2 ↗
74. Shim M (2008) Connecting internet use with gaps in cancer knowledge. Health Commun 23:448–461. doi: 10.1080/1041023080234214310.1080/10410230802342143 ↗
75. Singapore Business Review (2010) Nielsen: media consumption levels in Singapore remain healthy. http://sbr.com.sg/media-marketing/news/nielsen-media-consumption-levels-in-singapore-remain-healthy
76. Stamm KR, Clark F, Eblacas PR (2000) Mass communication and public understanding of environmental problems: the case of global warming. Public Underst Sci 9:219–237. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/9/3/30210.1088/0963-6625/9/3/302 ↗
77. Su LYF, Cacciatore MA, Scheufele DA, Brossard D, Xenos MA (2014) Inequalities in scientific understanding: differentiating between factual and perceived knowledge gaps. Sci Commun 36:352–378. doi: 10.1177/107554701452909310.1177/1075547014529093 ↗
78. Tichenor PJ, Donohue GA, Olien CN (1970) Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opin Q 34:159–17010.1086/267786 ↗
79. Viswanath K, Finnegan JR (1995) The knowledge gap hypothesis: Twenty-five years later. In: Burleson B (ed) Communication yearbook 19. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 187–228
80. Wilkinson C, Allan S, Anderson A, Petersen A (2007) From uncertainty to risk?: scientific and news media portrayals of nanoparticle safety. Health Risk Soc 9:145–157. doi: 10.1080/1369857070130682310.1080/13698570701306823 ↗
81. Yang J, Grabe ME (2011) Knowledge acquisition gaps: a comparison of print versus online news sources. New Media Soc 13:1211–1227. doi: 10.1177/146144481140170810.1177/1461444811401708 ↗
82. Yang J, Stone G (2003) The powerful role of interpersonal communication in agenda setting. Mass Commun Soc 6:57–7410.1207/S15327825MCS0601_5 ↗