Media attention to GM food cases: An innovation perspective

Volunteer Plants' Occurrence and the Environmental Adaptability of Genetically Modified Fodder Corn upon Unintentional Release into the Environment

The number of corn cultivars that have been improved using genetically modified technology continues to increase. However, concerns about the unintentional release of living-modified organisms (LMOs) into the environment still exist. Specifically, there are cases where LMO crops grown as fodder are released into the environment and form a volunteer plant community, which raises concerns about their safety. In this study, we analyzed the possibility of weediness and volunteer plants' occurrence when GMO fodder corn grains distributed in Korea are unintentionally released into the environment. Volunteer plants' occurrence was investigated by directly sowing grains in an untreated field. The results showed that the germination rate was extremely low, and even if a corn seed germinated, it could not grow into an adult plant and would die due to weed competition. In addition, the germination rate of edible and fodder grains was affected by temperature (it was high at 20 °C and 30 °C but low at 40 °C and extremely low at 10 °C), and it was higher in the former than in the latter. And the germination rate was higher in Daehakchal (edible corn grains) than in Gwangpyeongok (fodder corn grains). The environmental risk assessment data obtained in this study can be used for future evaluations of the weediness potential of crops and the development of volunteer plant suppression technology in response to unintentional GMO release.

An Experimental Evidence on Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food through Advertisement Framing on Health and Environmental Benefits, Objective Knowledge, and Risk Reduction

Owing to the emerging challenges on global food security and the decade of controversies over genetically modified food (hereafter GMF), the present study aims to explore the effects of advertisement framing on health and environmental benefits, sources of perceived risk reduction, and domain-specific knowledge on the acceptance of GMF. The study conducted a quasi-experimental factorial 2 (advertisement message framing: health vs. environmental benefits) × 2 (expert endorsement: present vs. absent) between-subject design involving 300 adult participants from Pakistan. Using a multi-group structural equation model, the four conditions were assigned to each participant group (n = 75) to test the hypothesized relationships. The quasi-experiment results suggested that the advertisement messages (ad-framed) incorporated with the health and environmental benefits, as delineated by experts, can be a viable communication strategy in developing effortless cognitive cues towards GMF acceptance. The pioneer findings validate the significant efficacy of advertisement messages (ad-framed with expert opinions) in reducing perceived risk through augmented objective knowledge that activates the mechanism of favorable development of attitude and acceptance of GMF. The study findings offer strategic directions to policymakers, marketers, and food technologists in raising greater awareness and acceptance towards GMF products.

Distinguishing scientific knowledge: The impact of different measures of knowledge on genetically modified food attitudes

The impact of knowledge on public attitudes toward scientific issues remains unclear, due in part to ill-defined differences in how research designs conceptualize knowledge. Using genetically modified foods as a framework, we explore the impacts of perceived familiarity and factual knowledge, and the moderating roles of media attention and a food-specific attitudinal variable (food consciousness), in shaping these relationships. Based on the differential effects on "negative attitudes" toward genetically modified foods, we provide further evidence that the measures of knowledge are separate concepts and argue against a one-dimensional view of scientific knowledge. We discuss implications for understanding the relationship between knowledge and science attitudes.

An Overview of Attitudes Toward Genetically Engineered Food

Genetically engineered food has had its DNA, RNA, or proteins manipulated by intentional human intervention. We provide an overview of the importance and regulation of genetically engineered food and lay attitudes toward it. We first discuss the pronaturalness context in the United States and Europe that preceded the appearance of genetically engineered food. We then review the definition, prevalence, and regulation of this type of food. Genetically engineered food is widespread in some countries, but there is great controversy worldwide among individuals, governments, and other institutions about the advisability of growing and consuming it. In general, life scientists have a much more positive view of genetically engineered food than laypeople. We examine the bases of lay opposition to genetically engineered food and the evidence for how attitudes change. Laypeople tend to see genetically engineered food as dangerous and offering few benefits. We suggest that much of the lay opposition is morally based. One possibility is that, in some contexts, people view nature and naturalness as sacred and genetically engineered food as a violation of naturalness. We also suggest that for many people these perceptions of naturalness and attitudes toward genetically engineered food follow the sympathetic magical law of contagion, in which even minimal contact between a natural food and an unnatural entity, either a scientist or a piece of foreign DNA, pollutes or contaminates the natural entity and renders it unacceptable or even immoral to consume.

Basic-education mexican teachers' knowledge of biotechnology and attitudes about the consumption of genetically modified foods

Over the past few years, a new research field has emerged, focusing on the social-scientific criteria for the study of opinions toward genetically modified foods (GMFs), since these may be limiting factors for the success or failure of these products. Basic education is the first step in the Mexican education system, and teachers may wield an outsized influence on the attitudes and preferences of children, prospective future consumers of these products. To better understand the current state of knowledge of biotechnology issues and opinions toward the consumption of GMF of Mexican teachers, a questionnaire was distributed, and 362 Mexican teachers of basic education responded. The survey included questions about the benefits and risks of consuming GMF. The mean percentage of teachers expressing knowledge of a given topic in biotechnology was 50%. More than 60% of teachers believed that GMFs would be useful in preventing world hunger, while 39.2% considered GMF to be hazards for future generations. Although 47.0% reported not having enough knowledge about these topics, almost all (90.3%) respondents expressed an interest and willingness to learn about biotechnology. In light of the fact that teachers of basic education represent the first and potentially most lasting stage in the education of young children, this survey establishes the urgent need to develop strategies to improve the scientific knowledge of teachers and to facilitate decision making and the promotion of scientific and technological advances for their students. © 2017 by The International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 45(5):396-402, 2017.

How scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy

Several studies provide evidence of the role of written communication in influencing public perception towards genetically modified organisms, whereas visual communication has been sparsely investigated. This article aims to evaluate the exposure of the Italian population to scary genetically modified organism-related images. A set of 517 images collected through Google are classified considering fearful attributes, and an index that accounts for the scary impact of these images is built. Then, through an ordinary least-squares regression, we estimate the relationship between the Scary Impact Index and a set of variables that describes the context in which the images appear. The results reveal that the first (and most viewed) Google result images contain the most frightful contents. In addition, the agri-food sector in Italy is strongly oriented towards offering a negative representation of genetically modified organisms. Exposure to scary images could be a factor that affects the negative perception of genetically modified organisms in Italy.

Stakeholders' rationales for representing uncertainties of biotechnological research

Although various stakeholders are involved in public communication about science and technology, research so far has focused on scientists, journalists, and the public. Based on representative telephone surveys of the spokespersons of 55 German companies, 31 government agencies, 43 public interest groups, as well as 105 scientists, we investigated actors' intentions to point out the scientific uncertainty of biotechnological research in their public communications. The different groups of actors' intentions to mention uncertain aspects of biotechnological research in public are guided by different rationales. Scientists and company representatives' intentions to point out uncertainty are strengthened by their hope to promote biotechnological research and weakened by their fear to increase public criticism. Public interest groups' intentions are strengthened by their hope to increase public criticism and are weakened by their fear to promote biotechnological research. Representatives of government agencies are predominantly influenced by their will to do justice to their organizations' interests.

Responsible Reporting: Neuroimaging News in the Age of Responsible Research and Innovation

Besides offering opportunities in both clinical and non-clinical domains, the application of novel neuroimaging technologies raises pressing dilemmas. 'Responsible Research and Innovation' (RRI) aims to stimulate research and innovation activities that take ethical and social considerations into account from the outset. We previously identified that Dutch neuroscientists interpret "responsible innovation" as educating the public on neuroimaging technologies via the popular press. Their aim is to mitigate (neuro)hype, an aim shared with the wider emerging RRI community. Here, we present results of a media-analysis undertaken to establish whether the body of articles in the Dutch popular press presents balanced conversations on neuroimaging research to the public. We found that reporting was mostly positive and framed in terms of (healthcare) progress. There was rarely a balance between technology opportunities and limitations, and even fewer articles addressed societal or ethical aspects of neuroimaging research. Furthermore, neuroimaging metaphors seem to favour oversimplification. Current reporting is therefore more likely to enable hype than to mitigate it. How can neuroscientists, given their self-ascribed social responsibility, address this conundrum? We make a case for a collective and shared responsibility among neuroscientists, journalists and other stakeholders, including funders, committed to responsible reporting on neuroimaging research.

The Role of Public Opinion in Shaping Trajectories of Agricultural Biotechnology

Science and technology are not autonomous entities and research trajectories are largely influenced by public opinion. The role of political decisions becomes especially evident in light of rapidly developing new breeding techniques (NBTs) and other genome editing methods for crop improvement. Decisions on how those new techniques should be regulated may not be based entirely on scientific rationale, and even if it is decided that crops produced by NBTs do not fall under the umbrella of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), their commercialization is by no means certain at this time. If and when adopted regulations do not comply with the public's perception of risks, policy makers will find themselves under pressure to ban or restrict the use of the respective products.

Attitudes to genetically modified food over time: How trust in organizations and the media cycle predict support

This research examined public opinion toward genetically modified plants and animals for food, and how trust in organizations and media coverage explained attitudes toward these organisms. Nationally representative samples (N=8821) over 10 years showed Australians were less positive toward genetically modified animals compared to genetically modified plants for food, especially in years where media coverage was high. Structural equation modeling found that positive attitudes toward different genetically modified organisms for food were significantly associated with higher trust in scientists and regulators (e.g. governments), and with lower trust in watchdogs (e.g. environmental movement). Public trust in scientists and watchdogs was a stronger predictor of attitudes toward the use of genetically modified plants for food than animals, but only when media coverage was low. Results are discussed regarding the moral acceptability of genetically modified organisms for food, the media's role in shaping public opinion, and the role public trust in organizations has on attitudes toward genetically modified organisms.

Retraction of a study on genetically modified corn: Expert investigations should speak louder during controversies over safety

Over the past few years, genetically modified organisms (GMO) have gradually become more familiar after numerous reports of problems with GMO safety, such as genetically modified (GM) potatoes disrupting immunity, GM corn inducing tumors, and GM rice being fed to unwitting Chinese children. Every time, these reports cause panic among the population and lead to objections to GMO in various fora. After each incident, the scientific community has delivered its academic appraisal and refuted rumors through slow and cautious investigations and evaluations. Unfortunately, during each event media outlets quickly scare the public about food safety and ignore the ensuing comments from scientists. Although scientists have investigated each GMO crisis and reached scientific and rational conclusions, they have less ability to disseminate information than the media, so the public is not promptly informed of their rational and objective viewpoints as experts. Thus, scientists need greater ability to disseminate information from scientific investigations and evaluations in order to correct the intemperate reporting by attention-seeking media.

Setting up spaces for collaboration in industry between researchers from the natural and social sciences

Policy makers call upon researchers from the natural and social sciences to collaborate for the responsible development and deployment of innovations. Collaborations are projected to enhance both the technical quality of innovations, and the extent to which relevant social and ethical considerations are integrated into their development. This could make these innovations more socially robust and responsible, particularly in new and emerging scientific and technological fields, such as synthetic biology and nanotechnology. Some researchers from both fields have embarked on collaborative research activities, using various Technology Assessment approaches and Socio-Technical Integration Research activities such as Midstream Modulation. Still, practical experience of collaborations in industry is limited, while much may be expected from industry in terms of socially responsible innovation development. Experience in and guidelines on how to set up and manage such collaborations are not easily available. Having carried out various collaborative research activities in industry ourselves, we aim to share in this paper our experiences in setting up and working in such collaborations. We highlight the possibilities and boundaries in setting up and managing collaborations, and discuss how we have experienced the emergence of 'collaborative spaces.' Hopefully our findings can facilitate and encourage others to set up collaborative research endeavours.

Surveys suck: Consumer preferences when purchasing genetically engineered foods

Many studies have attempted to gauge consumers' acceptance of genetically engineered or modified (GM) foods. Surveys, asking people about attitudes and intentions, are easy-to-collect proxies of consumer behavior. However, participants tend to respond as citizens of society, not discrete individuals, thereby inaccurately portraying their potential behavior. The Theory of Planned Behavior improved the accuracy of self-reported information, but its limited capacity to account for intention variance has been attributed to the hypothetical scenarios to which survey participants must respond. Valuation methods, asking how much consumers may be willing to pay or accept for GM foods, have revealed that consumers are usually willing to accept them at some price, or in some cases willing to pay a premium. Ultimately, it's consumers' actual--not intended--behavior that is of most interest to policy makers and business decision-makers. Real choice experiments offer the best avenue for revealing consumers' food choices in normal life.