References
- Agar, N. 2010. Humanity's End: Why We Should Reject Radical Enhancement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Allum, N., P. Sturgis, D. Tabourazi, and I. Brunton-Smith. 2008. “Science Knowledge and Attitudes Across Cultures: A Meta-Analysis.” Public Understanding of Science 17 (1): 35–54. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506070159.
- Angus Reid Institute. 2019. Designer Babies? Canadians Say Modifying Genes in Embryos Acceptable Only in Certain Circumstances. Vancouver: Angus Reid Institute.
- Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. 2018. The December 2018 AP-NORC Center Poll. Chicago: AP-NORC Center.
- Barcelos, M. C. S., F. B. Lupki, G. A. Campolina, D. L. Nelson, and G. Molina. 2018. “The Colors of Biotechnology: General Overview and Developments of White, Green and Blue Areas.” FEMS Microbiology Letters 365 (21): fny239. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fny239.
- Bauer, M. W. 2005. “Distinguishing Red and Green Biotechnology: Cultivation Effects of the Elite Press.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 17 (1): 63–89. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edh057.
- Blendon, R. J., and G. Gil. 2015. The Public and Genetic Editing, Testing, and Therapy. Cambridge, MA: STAT-Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
- Chu, H., and J. Z. Yang. 2019. “Emotion and the Psychological Distance of Climate Change.” Science Communication 41 (6): 761–789. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019889637.
- Condit, C. M. 1999. The Meanings of the Gene: Public Debates About Human Heredity. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
- Condit, C. M. 2010. “Public Attitudes and Beliefs About Genetics.” Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 11: 339–359. doi:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genom-082509-141740.
- Criger, B. 2011. “Attitudes Toward Germline Engineering.” Master’s Thesis, Queen’s University, Canada.
- Critchley, C., D. Nicol, G. Bruce, J. Walshe, T. Treleaven, and B. Tuch. 2019. “Predicting Public Attitudes Toward Gene Editing of Germlines: The Impact of Moral and Hereditary Concern in Human and Animal Applications.” Frontiers in Genetics 9: 704. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00704.
- Cumming, D., H. Fabrice, M. Elodie, and A. Schwienbacher. 2020. “Testing-The-Waters Policy with Hypothetical Investment: Evidence from Equity Crowdfunding.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720932522.
- Delhove, J., I. Osenk, I. Prichard, and M. Donnelley. 2020. “Public Acceptability of Gene Therapy and Gene Editing for Human Use: A Systematic Review.” Human Gene Therapy 31 (1-2): 20–46. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/hum.2019.197.
- “Editing humanity.”. 2015. The Economist, August 22. https://www.economist.com/leaders/2015/08/22/editing-humanity.
- Evans, J. H. 2002. Playing god?: Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of Public Bioethical Debate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Friedmann, T., E. C. Jonlin, N. M. P. King, B. E. Torbett, N. A. Wivel, Y. Kaneda, and M. Sadelain. 2015. “ASGCT and JSGT Joint Position Statement on Human Genomic Editing.” Molecular Therapy 23 (8): 1282. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/mt.2015.118.
- Fukuyama, F. 2002. Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
- Funk, C., and M. Hefferon. 2018a. “Public Views of Gene Editing for Babies Depend on How it Would be Used.” Pew Research Center, July 26. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2018/07/26/public-views-of-gene-editing-for-babies-depend-on-how-it-would-be-used/.
- Funk, C., and M. Hefferon. 2018b. “Most Americans Accept Genetic Engineering of Animals That Benefits Human Health, but Many Oppose Other Uses.” Pew Research Center, August 16. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2018/08/16/most-americans-accept-genetic-engineering-of-animals-that-benefits-human-health-but-many-oppose-other-uses/.
- Funk, C., B. Kennedy, and E. Sciupac. 2016. “US Public Wary of Biomedical Technologies to ‘Enhance’human Abilities.” Pew Research Center, July 26. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/07/26/u-s-public-wary-of-biomedical-technologies-to-enhance-human-abilities/.
- Funk, C., L. Rainie, B. Kennedy, M. Anderson, M. Duggan, K. Olmstead, A. Perrin, et al. 2015. “Americans, Politics and Science Issues.” Pew Research Center, July 1. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2015/07/01/americans-politics-and-science-issues/.
- Funk, C., and M. Strauss. 2018. “Majority of Americans Believe it is Essential that the U.S. Remain a Global Leader in Space.” Pew Research Center, June 6. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2018/06/06/majority-of-americans-believe-it-is-essential-that-the-u-s-remain-a-global-leader-in-space/.
- Gaskell, G., I. Bard, A. Allansdottir, R. V. da Cunha, P. Eduard, J. Hampel, E. Hildt, et al. 2017. “Public Views on Gene Editing and Its Uses.” Nature Biotechnology 35: 1021–1023. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3958.
- Habermas, J. 2003. The Future of Human Nature. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
- Hart Research Associates. 2015. Public Attitudes Regarding New Technology for Editing DNA. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
- Hendriks, S., N. A. A. Giesbertz, A. L. Bredenoord, and S. Repping. 2018. “Reasons for Being in Favour of or Against Genome Modification: A Survey of the Dutch General Public.” Human Reproduction Open 2018 (3), doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoy008.
- Krejcie, R. V., and D. W. Morgan. 1970. “Determining Sample Size for Research Activities.” Educational and Psychological Measurement 30 (3): 607–610. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308.
- McCaughey, T., D. M. Budden, P. G. Sanfilippo, G. E. Gooden, L. Fan, E. Fenwick, G. Rees, et al. 2019. “A Need for Better Understanding is the Major Determinant for Public Perceptions of Human Gene Editing.” Human Gene Therapy 30 (1): 36–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/hum.2018.033.
- McCaughey, T., P. G. Sanfilippo, G. E. Gooden, D. M. Budden, L. Fan, E. Fenwick, G. Rees, et al. 2016. “A Global Social Media Survey of Attitudes to Human Genome Editing.” Cell Stem Cell 18 (5): 569–572. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2016.04.011.
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Human Genome Editing: Science, Ethics, and Governance. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
- Ormond, K. E., D. P. Mortlock, D. T. Scholes, Y. Bombard, L. C. Brody, W. A. Faucett, N’A Garrison, et al. 2017. “Human Germline Genome Editing.” American Journal of Human Genetics 101 (2): 167–176. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.012.
- Regalado, A. 2018. “Exclusive: Chinese Scientists are Creating CRISPR Babies.” MIT Technology Review, November 25. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612458/exclusive-chinese-scientists-are-creating-crispr-babies/.
- Robillard, J. M., D. Roskams-Edris, B. Kuzeljevic, and J. Illes. 2014. “Prevailing Public Perceptions of the Ethics of Gene Therapy.” Human Gene Therapy 25 (8): 740–746. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/hum.2014.030.
- Roux, C., and U. Bockenholt. 2012. “Attitudes and Behaviors Assessment: The Impact of the Hypothetical Bias.” Advances in Consumer Research 38: 876–876.
- Sandel, M. J. 2007. The Case Against Perfection. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Scheufele, D. A., M. A. Xenos, E. L. Howell, K. M. Rose, D. Brossard, and B. W. Hardy. 2017. “US Attitudes on Human Genome Editing.” Science 357 (6351): 553–554. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan3708.
- Soderberg, C. K., S. P. Callahan, A. O. Kochersberger, E. Amit E, and A. Ledgerwood. 2015. “The Effects of Psychological Distance on Abstraction: Two Meta-Analyses.” Psychological Bulletin 141 (3): 525–548. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000005.
- Todorov, A., A. Goren, and Y. Trope. 2007. “Probability As a Psychological Distance: Construal and Preferences.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43 (3): 473–482. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002.
- Tonn, B., A. Hemrick, and F. Conrad. 2006. “Cognitive Representations of the Future: Survey Results.” Futures 38 (7): 810–829. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2005.12.005.
- Trope, Y., and N. Liberman. 2010. “Construal-Level Theory of Psychological Distance.” Psychological Review 117 (2): 440–463. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963.
- Uchiyama, M., A. Nagai, and K. Muto. 2018. “Survey on the Perception of Germline Genome Editing among the General Public in Japan.” Journal of Human Genetics 63 (6): 745–748. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-018-0430-2.
- van Mil, A., H. Hopkins, and S. Kinsella. 2017. Potential Uses for Genetic Technologies: Dialogue and Engagement Research Conducted on Behalf of the Royal Society Findings Report. London: Hopkins Van Mil.
- Wang, S., M. J. Hurlstone, Z. Leviston, I. Walker, and C. Lawrence. 2019. “Climate Change from a Distance: An Analysis of Construal Level and Psychological Distance from Climate Change.” Frontiers in Psychology, doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00230.
- Wang, J. H., R. Wang, J. H. Lee, T. W. U. Iao, X. Hu, Y. M. Wang, L. L. Tu, et al. 2017. “Public Attitudes Toward Gene Therapy in China.” Molecular Therapy-Methods & Clinical Development 6: 40–42. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omtm.2017.05.008.
- Weisberg, S. M., D. Badgio, and A. Chatterjee. 2017. “A CRISPR New World: Attitudes in the Public Toward Innovations in Human Genetic Modification.” Frontiers in Public Health 5: 117. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00117.
- Zaiontz, C. 2018. “Real Statistics Using Excel.” Real Statistics Using Excel. Accessed 14 May 2018. http://www.real-statistics.com/.
- Zhou, Y., J. Sharma, Q. Ke, R. Landman, J. Yuan, H. Chen, D. S. Hayden, et al. 2019. “Atypical Behaviour and Connectivity in SHANK3-Mutant Macaques.” Nature 570: 326–331. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1278-0.