scholarly journals Revisiting public debate on Genetic Modification and Genetically Modified Organisms. Explanations for contemporary Dutch public attitudes

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (04) ◽  
pp. A01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucien Hanssen ◽  
Anne Dijkstra ◽  
Susanne Sleenhoff ◽  
Lynn Frewer ◽  
Jan M. Gutteling

Genetic Modification (GM) has been a topic of public debates during the 1990s and 2000s. In this paper we explore the relative importance of two hypothesized explanations for these controversies: (i) people's general attitude toward science and technology and (ii) their trust in governance, in GM actors, and in GM regulations, in explaining the Dutch public's Attitude toward GM applications, and in addition to that, the public's GM Information seeking behaviour. This will be conducted through the application of representative survey methodology. The results indicate that Attitudes toward GM applications are best predicted by both the attitude toward science and technology and three trust measures. GM information seeking is predicted by gender and educational level, as well as attitude toward science and technology, trust in organisations and trust in regulations (negative). Overall, psychological variables seem better predictors than demographics. Implications for future research on information seeking behaviour are discussed.

IFLA Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 034003522093187
Author(s):  
Olayinka Babayemi Makinde ◽  
Glenrose Velile Jiyane ◽  
Tinashe Mugwisi

The science and technology sector plays an important role in the growth and diversification of the Nigerian economy. This article examines the information-seeking behaviour of science and technology researchers in Nigeria in order for the right approach to be taken with respect to information provision. A survey methodology was used for the study and 114 multidisciplinary science and technology researchers at the Federal Institute of Industrial Research Oshodi served as the respondents. The findings of the study revealed that science and technology researchers frequently sourced information from journals and knowledgeable persons; the Internet was the most frequent information source. The science and technology researchers used information for carrying out research and solving personal needs, among other things. The challenges identified in using information sources included outdated books and lack of adoption of electronic services. The study recommended that efforts should be directed at improving researchers’ access to information and the establishment of an institutional electronic database should be encouraged.


Kybernetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 888-905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladislav Valentinov ◽  
Stefan Hielscher ◽  
Sebastian Everding ◽  
Ingo Pies

Purpose Public debates on the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are strongly influenced by the nongovernmental organization (NGO)-led advocacy, most of which is harshly critical of genetic engineering. This advocacy has resulted in discourse failures marked by the disregard for the scientific consensus on the risks and benefits of GMOs. This paper aims to present a theoretical inquiry into this phenomenon. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on American institutionalism and Niklas Luhmann social systems theory, the paper explains these discourse failures in terms of the problematic relationship between institutions and technology. Findings Clarence Ayres would likely see these discourse failures as a form of “institutional resistance” to the progress of science and technology. In contrast, Marc Tool’s social value principle stresses the importance of democratic legitimation and public acceptance of new technologies, while being sensitive to the possibility of ideologically biased discourses. It is argued that the institutionalist understanding of the interplay between democracy, science and technology would benefit from a better account of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of “complexity reduction”. Social implications The study shows that some NGOs are powerful enough to actively shape, if not manipulate, public attitudes and sentiments against GMOs. Originality/value The case of the anti-GMO advocacy calls for a new conceptualization of how democracy, science and technology fit together.


2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Laura Newton Miller

A Review of: Jamali, H. R., & Asadi, S. (2010). Google and the scholar: The role of Google in scientists' information seeking behaviour. Online Information Review, 34(2), 282-294. Objective – To determine how Google’s general search engine impacts the information-seeking behaviour of physicists and astronomers. Design – Using purposive stratified non-random sampling, a mixed-methods study was conducted which included one-on-one interviews, information-event cards, and an online questionnaire survey. Setting – Department of Physics and Astronomy at University College London. Subjects – The researchers interviewed 26 PhD students and 30 faculty members (23% of the department’s 242 faculty and students), and 24 of those participants completed information-event cards. A total of 114 respondents (47.1% of the department members) participated in the online survey. Methods – The researchers conducted 56 interviews which lasted an average of 44 minutes each. These were digitally recorded, fully transcribed, and coded. The researchers asked questions related to information-seeking behaviour and scholarly communication. Four information-event cards were given to volunteer interviewees to gather critical incident information on their first four information-seeking actions after the interview. These were to be completed preferably within the first week of receiving the cards, with 82 cards completed by 24 participants. Once initial analysis of the interviews was completed, the researchers sent an online survey to the members of the same department. Main Results – This particular paper examined only the results related to the scholars’ information-seeking behaviour in terms of search engines and web searching. Details of further results are examined in Jamali (2008) and Jamali and Nicholas (2008). The authors reported that 18% of the respondents used Google on a daily basis to identify articles. They also found that 11% searched subject databases, and 9% searched e-journal websites on a daily basis. When responses on daily searching were combined with those from participants who searched two to three times per week, the most popular method for finding research was by tracking references at the end of an article (61%). This was followed by Google (58%) and ToC email alerts (35%). Responses showed that 46% never used Google Scholar to discover research articles. When asked if they intentionally searched Google to find articles, all except two participants answered that they do not, instead using specific databases to find research. The researchers noted that finding articles in Google was not the original intention of participants’ searches, but more of a by-product of Google searching. In the information-event card study, two categories emerged based on the kinds of information required. This included participants looking for general information on a specific topic (64%, with 22 cases finding this information successfully), and participants knowing exactly what piece of information they were seeking (36%, with 28 cases finding information successfully). There was no occurrence of using Google specifically to conduct a literature search or to search for a paper during this information-event card study, although the researchers say that Google is progressively showing more scholarly information within its search results. (This cannot be ascertained from these specific results except for one response from an interviewee.) The researchers found that 29.4% of respondents used Google to find specific pieces of information, although it was not necessarily scholarly. Conclusion – Physics and astronomy researchers do not intentionally use Google’s general search engine to search for articles, but, Google seems to be a good starting point for problem-specific information queries.


2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Perryman

A Review of: Brown, Cecilia M. and Ortega, Lina. “Information-Seeking Behavior of Physical Science Librarians: Does Research Inform Practice?” College & Research Libraries (2005). 66:231-47. Objective – As part of a larger study exploring the information environments of physical science librarians (Ortega & Brown), the authors’ overall objective for this study is to profile physical science librarians’ information behaviours. The authors’ two-part hypothesis was that first, peer-reviewed journals would be preferred over all other sources for research dissemination, resembling the preferences of scientists, and second, that peer-to-peer consultation would predominate for practice-oriented decisions. Design – Mixed methods: survey questionnaire followed by citation and content analysis. Setting – Five internationally disseminated professional association electronic mailing lists whose readership comprised those with interests in science librarianship: the American Library Association (ALA) Science and Technology Section; the American Society for Information Science & Technology (ASIST) Science and Technology Information Special Interest Group; the Special Library Association (SLA) Chemistry Division and its Physics-Astronomy-Mathematics Division; and the American Geological Institute Geoscience Information Society. Subjects – Seventy-two physical science librarians voluntarily responding to an online survey. Methods – A questionnaire was distributed to inquire about physical science librarians’ professional reading practices as well as their perceptions about the applicability of research to their work. Participants were asked to rank preferences among 11 resource types as sources supporting daily business, including personal communication, conference attendance, electronic mailing lists, and scholarly journals. Differences between the mean rankings of preferences were tested for significance by applying the Friedman test with p>0.0005. Journals identified most frequently were analyzed using the Institute for Scientific Information’s (ISI) Web of Science index and Ulrich’s Periodical Index to measure proportions of research and non-research citations, as well as the general topic areas covered by the journals. Next, content analysis was performed for the years 1995, 1997, and 2000 in order to characterize research methodologies used in the previously identified journals according to a previously tested schema (Buscha & Harter). Results from this portion of the study were compared with participants’ responses about journal usage. Main Results – Librarians reported using personal communication (both face-to-face and electronic mailing lists) more frequently as a means of information gathering than professional journals, Web sites, conferences, trade publications, monographs, or ‘other’ resources. Variations in responses appeared to correlate with years in the profession and in the respondents’ time in their current positions, although there are indications that the importance of all information resources to practice and research declines over time. The relative importance of resources is also shown in time spent reading journal literature, less than 5 hours per week for 86% of participants. Conclusion – For the first hypothesis, the authors found that unlike scientists, survey participants did not prefer research publications as vehicles for dissemination of their research results. For the second, librarians ranked peer-reviewed journals third in preference after personal communication and electronic mailing lists as sources of information supporting daily practice, supporting the second hypothesis that respondents would emulate the information use practices of mathematicians.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julinawati Suanda ◽  
Mohamad Rezal Hamzah ◽  
Zamzaliza A. Mulud ◽  
Suffian Hadi Ayub ◽  
Husna Afifi Mohd Yusoff

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document