Citations (35)
Keep up to date with the latest research on this topic with citation updates for this article.
Read on this site (4)
Andy Alaszewski. (2020) Reflecting on and celebrating 21 years of Health, Risk & Society. Health, Risk & Society 22:2, pages 107-117.
Read now
Read now
Elham Kiani, Mitra Pashootanizadeh & Azarnoush Ansari. (2018) Analyzing the Influence of Marketing Intelligence and Risk-Taking of the Librarians of Kids/Teens Libraries on Competitive Advantage and User Loyalty. Public Library Quarterly 37:4, pages 441-460.
Read now
Read now
Raquel Bertoldo, Claire Mays, Marc Poumadère, Nina Schneider & Claus Svendsen. (2016) Great deeds or great risks? Scientists’ social representations of nanotechnology. Journal of Risk Research 19:6, pages 760-779.
Read now
Read now
Vanessa Chenel, Patrick Boissy, Marie-Sol Poirier, Jean-Pierre Cloarec & Johane Patenaude. (2015) The acceptability of nanocarriers for drug delivery in different contexts of use: perceptions of researchers and research trainees in the field of new technologies. International Journal of Nanomedicine 10, pages 2125-2139.
Read now
Read now
Articles from other publishers (31)
Christopher D. Wirz, Emily L. Howell, Dietram A. Scheufele, Dominique Brossard & Michael A. Xenos. (2023) Examining expertise: Synthetic biology experts’ perceptions of risk, benefit, and the public for research and applications regulation. Public Understanding of Science, pages 096366252311666.
Crossref
Crossref
Jianbin Jin, Xiaoxiao Cheng & Zhaohui Li. 2021. Science Cultures in a Diverse World: Knowing, Sharing, Caring. Science Cultures in a Diverse World: Knowing, Sharing, Caring
209
232
.
Britte Bouchaut & Lotte Asveld. (2020) Safe‐by‐Design: Stakeholders’ Perceptions and Expectations of How to Deal with Uncertain Risks of Emerging Biotechnologies in the Netherlands. Risk Analysis 40:8, pages 1632-1644.
Crossref
Crossref
Christina Ndoh, Christopher L. Cummings & Jennifer Kuzma. 2020. Synthetic Biology 2020: Frontiers in Risk Analysis and Governance. Synthetic Biology 2020: Frontiers in Risk Analysis and Governance
351
370
.
Simon Larsson, Magnus Jansson & Åsa Boholm. (2019) Expert stakeholders’ perception of nanotechnology: risk, benefit, knowledge, and regulation. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 21:3.
Crossref
Crossref
Rickard Arvidsson, Max Boholm, Mikael Johansson & Monica Lindh de Montoya. (2018) “Just Carbon”: Ideas About Graphene Risks by Graphene Researchers and Innovation Advisors. NanoEthics 12:3, pages 199-210.
Crossref
Crossref
Regula Valérie Burri. (2018) Models of Public Engagement: Nanoscientists’ Understandings of Science–Society Interactions. NanoEthics 12:2, pages 81-98.
Crossref
Crossref
Indrani Mahapatra, Julian R. A. Clark, Peter J. Dobson, Richard Owen, Iseult Lynch & Jamie R. Lead. (2018) Expert perspectives on potential environmental risks from nanomedicines and adequacy of the current guideline on environmental risk assessment. Environmental Science: Nano 5:8, pages 1873-1889.
Crossref
Crossref
Mikael Johansson & Åsa Boholm. (2017) Scientists’ Understandings of Risk of Nanomaterials: Disciplinary Culture Through the Ethnographic Lens. NanoEthics 11:3, pages 229-242.
Crossref
Crossref
Georgia Miller & Fern Wickson. (2015) Risk Analysis of Nanomaterials: Exposing Nanotechnology's Naked Emperor. Review of Policy Research 32:4, pages 485-512.
Crossref
Crossref
Edmund W. J. Lee & Shirley S. Ho. (2015) The perceived familiarity gap hypothesis: examining how media attention and reflective integration relate to perceived familiarity with nanotechnology in Singapore. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 17:5.
Crossref
Crossref
Vanessa Chenel, Patrick Boissy, Jean-Pierre Cloarec & Johane Patenaude. (2015) Effects of disciplinary cultures of researchers and research trainees on the acceptability of nanocarriers for drug delivery in different contexts of use: a mixed-methods study. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 17:4.
Crossref
Crossref
Christian E. H. Beaudrie, Terre Satterfield, Milind Kandlikar & Barbara H. Harthorn. (2014) Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials. PLoS ONE 9:9, pages e106365.
Crossref
Crossref
Steffen Foss Hansen, Andrew Maynard, Anders Baun, Joel A. Tickner & Diana M. Bowman. 2014. Nanotechnology Environmental Health and Safety. Nanotechnology Environmental Health and Safety
9
24
.
Christian E. H. Beaudrie, Terre Satterfield, Milind Kandlikar & Barbara H. Harthorn. (2013) Expert Views on Regulatory Preparedness for Managing the Risks of Nanotechnologies. PLoS ONE 8:11, pages e80250.
Crossref
Crossref
Deborah R. Bassett. (2011) Notions of Identity, Society, and Rhetoric in a Speech Code of Science Among Scientists and Engineers Working in Nanotechnology. Science Communication 34:1, pages 115-159.
Crossref
Crossref
Shawn H. E. Harmon, Shang-Yung Yen & Shu-Mei Tang. (2011) Invigorating ‘Nanoethics’: Recommendations for Improving Deliberations in Taiwan and Beyond. NanoEthics 5:3, pages 309-318.
Crossref
Crossref
Rye Senjen & Steffen Foss Hansen. (2011) Towards a nanorisk appraisal framework. Comptes Rendus Physique 12:7, pages 637-647.
Crossref
Crossref
Mihail C. Roco, Barbara Harthorn, David Guston & Philip Shapira. (2011) Innovative and responsible governance of nanotechnology for societal development. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13:9, pages 3557-3590.
Crossref
Crossref
Helena Silva CostaSebastian Sethe, Ana P Pêgo & I Anna S Olsson. (2011) Scientists’ perception of ethical issues in nanomedicine: a case study. Nanomedicine 6:4, pages 681-691.
Crossref
Crossref
Shirley S. HoDietram A. Scheufele & Elizabeth A. Corley. (2010) Value Predispositions, Mass Media, and Attitudes Toward Nanotechnology: The Interplay of Public and Experts. Science Communication 33:2, pages 167-200.
Crossref
Crossref
David Rejeski. 2011. The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and Legal-Ethical Oversight. The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and Legal-Ethical Oversight
47
59
.
Mihail C. Roco, Mark C. Hersam & Chad A. MirkinMihail C. Roco, Barbara Harthorn, David Guston & Philip Shapira. 2011. Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020. Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020
561
617
.
Steffen Foss Hansen. (2010) Multicriteria mapping of stakeholder preferences in regulating nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 12:6, pages 1959-1970.
Crossref
Crossref
Arianna Ferrari. (2010) Developments in the Debate on Nanoethics: Traditional Approaches and the Need for New Kinds of Analysis. NanoEthics 4:1, pages 27-52.
Crossref
Crossref
Kristen Lyons & James Whelan. (2009) Community Engagement to Facilitate, Legitimize and Accelerate the Advancement of Nanotechnologies in Australia. NanoEthics 4:1, pages 53-66.
Crossref
Crossref
Susanna Priest, Ted Greenhalgh & Victoria Kramer. (2009) Risk perceptions starting to shift? U.S. citizens are forming opinions about nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 12:1, pages 11-20.
Crossref
Crossref
Elizabeth A. Corley, Dietram A. Scheufele & Qian Hu. (2009) Of risks and regulations: how leading U.S. nanoscientists form policy stances about nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 11:7, pages 1573-1585.
Crossref
Crossref
Christopher Groves. (2009) Nanotechnology, Contingency and Finitude. NanoEthics 3:1, pages 1-16.
Crossref
Crossref
Cyrus C. M. Mody. (2008) The larger world of nano. Physics Today 61:10, pages 38-44.
Crossref
Crossref
Alan Petersen & Alison Anderson. (2007) A Question of Balance or Blind Faith?: Scientists’ and Science Policymakers’ Representations of the Benefits and Risks of Nanotechnologies. NanoEthics 1:3, pages 243-256.
Crossref
Crossref