Studies on public reactions to science and technology may help policy makers who seek to involve the public in decision making on issues related to technological or scientific complexity. The paper seeks to understand how research on public reactions to science and technology can be used, addressing the following questions: What is good quality research? Which research offers data that are most useful for decision makers? An evaluation of the approaches used both in research on public reactions and in policy decisions shows that the general public can be considered in different roles; specific dimensions of those roles include the passive vs. active citizen-consumer, and the non-attentive vs. participative citizen. The paper presents a typology which links the research and policy approaches. It concludes that, in order to increase the usability of research on public reactions, the research and policy approaches should match. Equally important, researchers and policy makers should question their assumptions on the public's role rather than take their own assumptions for granted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
M. Van de Vall, “De waardencontext van sociaal beleidsonderzoek: Een theoretisch model,” in Sociaal Beleidsonderzoek, eds. Van de Vall, M. and F. L. Leeuw, 35-56 (Den Haag: VUGA, 1987).
2.
M. Hisschemöller and R. Hoppe, “Coping with Intractable Controversies: The Case for Problem Structuring in Policy Design and Analysis,”Knowledge and Policy8, no. 4 (1996): 40-60.
3.
W. N. Dunn , “Probing the Boundaries of Ignorance in Policy Analysis,”American Behavioral Scientist40, no. 3 (1997): 277-298.
4.
D. Dery , Problem Definition in Policy Analysis (Lawrence: Kansas University Press, 1984).
5.
C. H. Weiss and M. Bucovalas, Social sCience Research and Decision-Making (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980).
6.
D. Schön , The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action (New York: Basic Books, 1983).
7.
R. F. Rich , “Knowledge Creation, Diffusion and Utilization: Perspectives of the Founding Editor of Knowledge,”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization12 (1991): 317-339.
8.
H. M. De Loor, C. J. H. Midden, and M. Hisschemoller, Publieksoordelen over-nieuwe technologie: De bruikbaarheid van publieksonderzoek in Technologie Beleid (Den Haag: NOTA, 1992).
9.
D. Daamen , I. van der Lans, and C. J. H. Midden, “Cognitive Structures in the Perception of Modern Technologies,”Science, Technology, and Human Values15, no. 2 (1990): 202-225.
10.
H. M. De Loor and C. J. H. Midden, Publieksoordelen over kernenergie en kolen: Eindrap-port (Leiden: Extern rapport Werkgroep Energie- en Milieuonderzoek RU Leiden, 1992).
11.
C. J. H. Midden and B. Verplanken, “The Stability of Nuclear Attitudes after Chernobyl,”Journal of Environmental Psychology10, no. 2 (1990): 111-119.
12.
E. M. Rogers , Diffusion of Innovations (New York: Free Press, 1993).
13.
W. H. Weenig and C. J. H. Midden, “Communication Network Influences on Information Diffusion and Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology61, no. 5 (1991): 734-742.
14.
J. D. Miller , The American People and Science Policy: The Role of Public Attitudes in the Policy Process (New York: Pergamon Press, 1983).
15.
J. Durant , G. A. Evans, and G. P. Thomas, “The Public Understanding of Science,”Nature340 (1989): 11-14.
16.
Miller , The American People (cit. n. 14).
17.
National Science Board , “Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding,” in Science & Engineering Indicators, ed. J. D. Miller and L. Pfier, 7.2-7.21, chap. 7 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1996).
18.
E. Wagner , F. Elejabarrietta, and I. Lahnsteiner, “How the sperm dominates the ovum: Objectification by Metaphor in the Social Representation of Conception,”European Journal of Social Psychology25 (1995): 671-688.
19.
De Loor, C. J. H. Midden and M. Hisschemoller, Publieksoordelen over-nieuwe technologie (cit. n. 8).
20.
G. Gardner and P. Stern, Environmental Problems and Human Behavior. (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1996).
21.
S. Simoes , “Description and Explanation of the Greening of the World: A Methodological and Theoretical Challenge for Survey Methodology (as Illustrated by Research in Brazil and Mexico),”Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy, ed. M. Hisschemöller, R. Hoppe, W. N. Dunn, and J. Ravetz, Policy Studies Review Annual (1998, forthcoming).
22.
W. F. Whyte , ed. Participatory Action Research (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1991).
23.
S. Yearley , J. Forrester, and P. Bailey, “Participation and Expert Knowledge: On Scientific Models and their Publics,” Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy, ed. M. Hisschemöller, R. Hoppe, W. N. Dunn, and J. Ravetz, Policy Studies Review Annual (1998, forthcoming).
24.
Hisschemöller and Hoppe, “Coping with Intractable Controversies” (cit. n. 2).
25.
Dunn , “Probing the Boundaries of Ignorance” (cit. n. 3).
26.
Hisschemöller and Hoppe, “Coping with Intractable Controversies” (cit. n. 2).
27.
M. O'Hare , L. Bacow, and D. Sanderson, Facility Siting and Public Opposition (New York: Van Nostrand Reinholt, 1983).
28.
C. Piller , The Fail-Safe Society: Community Defiance and the End of American Technological Optimism (New York: Basic Books, 1991).
29.
I. I. Mitroff , R. O. Mason, and V. P. Barabba, The 1980 Census: Policymaking Amid Turbulance (Lexington: Heath, 1983).
30.
Hisschemöller and Hoppe, “Coping with Intractable Controversies” (cit. n. 2).
31.
J. Gupta and M. Hisschemöller, “Issue Linkage as a Global Strategy Toward Sustainable Development: A Comparative Case Study of Climate Change,”International Environmental Affairs9, no. 4 (1997): 289-309.
32.
L. Scholten and C. J. H. Midden, “Milieubelasting van verpakkingen: Effecten van de `natuurlijkheidsbias' op consumentenoordelen,” in Milieu-Tijdschrift voor Milieukunde (Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Boom, no. 12, 1997), 167-174.
33.
G. Thomas and J. Durant, “Why Should We Promote the Public Understanding of Science?”Scientific Literacy Papers, ed. G. Thomas and J. Durant (Oxford: Alden Press, 1987).
34.
R. S. Read , A. Bostrom, M. G. Morgan, B. Fischhof, and T. Smuts, “What do people know about global climate change? Two studies of educated lay-people,”Risk Analysis14 (1994): 971-982.
35.
H. J. Staats , A. P. Wit, and C. J. H. Midden, “Evaluation of a Mass Media Campaign from a Social Dilemma Perspective,”Journal of Environmental Management45 (1996): 189-203.
36.
A. L. Meijnders , C. J. H. Midden, and H. A. M. Wilke, “Milieuvoorlichting: Het effect van angst op systematische informatieverwerking,” in Sociale psychologie en haar toepassingen, ed. D. Daamen, A. Pruyn, W. Otten, and R. Meertens (Delft: Eburon, 1997), 201-215.
37.
M. M. Berk , C. E. van Daalen, and M. Hisschemöller, “Participative Integrated Assessment and the Utilization of Scientific Knowledge,”Global Air Pollution and Climate Change, published as special issue of Milieu, 13, no. 5, 1998.
