Are attitudes toward labeling nano products linked to attitudes toward GMO? Exploring a potential ‘spillover’ effect for attitudes toward controversial technologies

ABSTRACT

We present an analysis of how citizens form attitudes about labeling nanotechnology, building on previous work on the socio-cultural dynamics under publics’ perceptions of risks and governance of emerging technologies. We examine whether individuals’ views about labeling nanotechnology products are correlated with their attitudes about genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which we argue offers preliminary support for a ‘spillover’ effect, such that individuals may anchor their judgments about nanotechnology to their attitudes about the more publicized GMO issue. Using data from a representative sample of U.S. adults, we find that GMO risk perceptions are associated with support for labeling nano-enabled products, and evidence that publics’ perceptions of GMOs’ benefits moderate the extent that nanotechnology benefit perceptions guide these attitudes. A tendency to defer to scientific authority also affects the extent to which individuals use their GMO risk and benefit perceptions to make a judgment about labeling. We conclude by discussing the implications of a possible technology spillover effect for responsible and anticipatory regulation and policy for emerging technologies.

KEYWORDS:

• Emerging technologies
• risk perception
• labeling
• nanotechnology
• genetically modified organisms

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Heather Akin (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison) is an Assistant Professor in the School of Journalism and the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources at the University of Missouri. Her research focuses on political communication and public opinion, specifically related to science, health, and environmental issues.

Sara K. Yeo (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Utah and a faculty affiliate with the Global Change and Sustainability Center and the Environmental Humanities Program at the U. Her research interests include science communication, public opinion of STEM issues, and information seeking and processing.

Christopher D. Wirz is a doctoral student in the Department of Life Sciences Communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Chris is interested in the public opinion, (social) media discourse, and networks involved in the communication of science, health, and risk-related topics, especially as the issues become controversial and politicized. He is also interested in applying modern methods and computational tools to analyze how people get information and make decisions in evolving communication landscapes.

Dietram A. Scheufele is the John E. Ross Professor in Science Communication and Vilas Distinguished Achievement Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and in the Morgridge Institute for Research. His research deals with the interface of media, policy and public opinion.

Dominique Brossard is professor and chair in the Department of Life Sciences Communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and an affiliate of the UW-Madison Robert & Jean Holtz Center for Science and Technology Studies, the UW-Madison Center for Global Studies and the Morgridge Institute for Research. She is an internationally known expert in public opinion dynamics related to controversial scientific issues.

Michael A. Xenos is Communication Arts Partners Professor and Chair of the Department of Communication Arts, and also an affiliate faculty member in Life Sciences Communication. His research and teaching interests are centered on the effects of new media on political engagement and public deliberation.

Elizabeth A. Corley is the Lincoln Professor of Public Policy, Ethics & Emerging Technologies and Associate Professor in the School of Public Affairs (SPA) at ASU. Her research interests focus on technology policy and environmental policy.

ORCID

Heather Akin http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1215-6347

Sara K. Yeo http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2043-8400

Notes

1. The question wording presenting the anti-labeling perspective first is as follows:

“Some scientists oppose labeling requirements for products containing nanotechnology because they believe that labeling would be confusing to customers and make products more expensive. However, other scientists say that products containing nanotechnology should be labeled because consumers have a right to know such information about the products they buy. How much do you agree that products containing nanotechnology should be labeled?”

Additional information

Funding

This material is based upon work supported by grants from the National Science Foundation to the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University [grant number SES-0937591] and the UW-Madison Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center in Templated Synthesis and Assembly at the Nanoscale [grant number SES-DMR-0832760]; Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences [grant Number SES-DMR-0832760]; Division of Social and Economic Sciences [grant Number SES-0937591]. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.