Risky Talk: Framing the Analysis of the Social Implications of Nanotechnology
Nanotechnology promises to amend an understanding of elemental properties, alter the basic techniques of manufacturing, and improve disease diagnosis. There is a disconnect among the positive predictions of scientists and researchers, the fears of public interest groups, and the developers of produc...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Bulletin of science, technology & society technology & society, 2007-10, Vol.27 (5), p.349-366 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 366 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 349 |
container_title | Bulletin of science, technology & society |
container_volume | 27 |
creator | Pense, Christine M. Cutcliffe, Stephen H. |
description | Nanotechnology promises to amend an understanding of elemental properties, alter the basic techniques of manufacturing, and improve disease diagnosis. There is a disconnect among the positive predictions of scientists and researchers, the fears of public interest groups, and the developers of products. A new framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will permit a dialogue among interest groups, who currently fail to effectively communicate with one another. Each instance of nanotechnology application will likely have its own unique attributes, but this framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will address three questions: How do problems become visible to the social groups that contribute to the framing of technology? What kind of language do social groups use to express significance? How does risk standardization contribute to technology stabilization? The suggested framework compares the ways that risk is discussed in military applications, consumer products, and workplace safety. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0270467607306592 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20758250</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ774043</ericid><sage_id>10.1177_0270467607306592</sage_id><sourcerecordid>20758250</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1782-f3d64fc5019cd4da02ec26b132970bb2dc01d4ed99e08128deea80a61f152a0b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kLFOwzAURS0EEqWwMzBkYgs8O3acsFVVC0UFJChz5DhO69aJi50M-XvSBjEgMT09nXPvcBG6xnCHMef3QDjQmMfAI4hZSk7QCDNGQoqT6BSNDjg88HN04f0WAAilbIRe3rXfdcFKmN1DMHei0vU6aDYqmNTCdF77wJbH_8NKLUywqPZGS9FoWx_Rq6hto-Smtsauu0t0Vgrj1dXPHaPP-Ww1fQqXb4-L6WQZSswTEpZREdNSMsCpLGghgChJ4hxHJOWQ56SQgAuqijRVkGCSFEqJBESMS8yIgDwao9uhd-_sV6t8k1XaS2WMqJVtfUaAs4Qw6EUYROms906V2d7pSrguw5Addsv-7tZHboaIclr-6rNnzinQqMfhgL1Yq2xrW9cP5f-v-wbda3Ws</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20758250</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Risky Talk: Framing the Analysis of the Social Implications of Nanotechnology</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>Pense, Christine M. ; Cutcliffe, Stephen H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Pense, Christine M. ; Cutcliffe, Stephen H.</creatorcontrib><description>Nanotechnology promises to amend an understanding of elemental properties, alter the basic techniques of manufacturing, and improve disease diagnosis. There is a disconnect among the positive predictions of scientists and researchers, the fears of public interest groups, and the developers of products. A new framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will permit a dialogue among interest groups, who currently fail to effectively communicate with one another. Each instance of nanotechnology application will likely have its own unique attributes, but this framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will address three questions: How do problems become visible to the social groups that contribute to the framing of technology? What kind of language do social groups use to express significance? How does risk standardization contribute to technology stabilization? The suggested framework compares the ways that risk is discussed in military applications, consumer products, and workplace safety.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0270-4676</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-4183</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0270467607306592</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Case Studies ; Chemical Engineering ; Environmental Standards ; Federal Regulation ; Futures (of Society) ; Groups ; Hazardous Materials ; Policy Formation ; Public Opinion ; Science and Society ; Technology</subject><ispartof>Bulletin of science, technology & society, 2007-10, Vol.27 (5), p.349-366</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1782-f3d64fc5019cd4da02ec26b132970bb2dc01d4ed99e08128deea80a61f152a0b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1782-f3d64fc5019cd4da02ec26b132970bb2dc01d4ed99e08128deea80a61f152a0b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0270467607306592$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0270467607306592$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ774043$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pense, Christine M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cutcliffe, Stephen H.</creatorcontrib><title>Risky Talk: Framing the Analysis of the Social Implications of Nanotechnology</title><title>Bulletin of science, technology & society</title><description>Nanotechnology promises to amend an understanding of elemental properties, alter the basic techniques of manufacturing, and improve disease diagnosis. There is a disconnect among the positive predictions of scientists and researchers, the fears of public interest groups, and the developers of products. A new framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will permit a dialogue among interest groups, who currently fail to effectively communicate with one another. Each instance of nanotechnology application will likely have its own unique attributes, but this framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will address three questions: How do problems become visible to the social groups that contribute to the framing of technology? What kind of language do social groups use to express significance? How does risk standardization contribute to technology stabilization? The suggested framework compares the ways that risk is discussed in military applications, consumer products, and workplace safety.</description><subject>Case Studies</subject><subject>Chemical Engineering</subject><subject>Environmental Standards</subject><subject>Federal Regulation</subject><subject>Futures (of Society)</subject><subject>Groups</subject><subject>Hazardous Materials</subject><subject>Policy Formation</subject><subject>Public Opinion</subject><subject>Science and Society</subject><subject>Technology</subject><issn>0270-4676</issn><issn>1552-4183</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kLFOwzAURS0EEqWwMzBkYgs8O3acsFVVC0UFJChz5DhO69aJi50M-XvSBjEgMT09nXPvcBG6xnCHMef3QDjQmMfAI4hZSk7QCDNGQoqT6BSNDjg88HN04f0WAAilbIRe3rXfdcFKmN1DMHei0vU6aDYqmNTCdF77wJbH_8NKLUywqPZGS9FoWx_Rq6hto-Smtsauu0t0Vgrj1dXPHaPP-Ww1fQqXb4-L6WQZSswTEpZREdNSMsCpLGghgChJ4hxHJOWQ56SQgAuqijRVkGCSFEqJBESMS8yIgDwao9uhd-_sV6t8k1XaS2WMqJVtfUaAs4Qw6EUYROms906V2d7pSrguw5Addsv-7tZHboaIclr-6rNnzinQqMfhgL1Yq2xrW9cP5f-v-wbda3Ws</recordid><startdate>200710</startdate><enddate>200710</enddate><creator>Pense, Christine M.</creator><creator>Cutcliffe, Stephen H.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200710</creationdate><title>Risky Talk: Framing the Analysis of the Social Implications of Nanotechnology</title><author>Pense, Christine M. ; Cutcliffe, Stephen H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1782-f3d64fc5019cd4da02ec26b132970bb2dc01d4ed99e08128deea80a61f152a0b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Case Studies</topic><topic>Chemical Engineering</topic><topic>Environmental Standards</topic><topic>Federal Regulation</topic><topic>Futures (of Society)</topic><topic>Groups</topic><topic>Hazardous Materials</topic><topic>Policy Formation</topic><topic>Public Opinion</topic><topic>Science and Society</topic><topic>Technology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pense, Christine M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cutcliffe, Stephen H.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Bulletin of science, technology & society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pense, Christine M.</au><au>Cutcliffe, Stephen H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ774043</ericid><atitle>Risky Talk: Framing the Analysis of the Social Implications of Nanotechnology</atitle><jtitle>Bulletin of science, technology & society</jtitle><date>2007-10</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>349</spage><epage>366</epage><pages>349-366</pages><issn>0270-4676</issn><eissn>1552-4183</eissn><abstract>Nanotechnology promises to amend an understanding of elemental properties, alter the basic techniques of manufacturing, and improve disease diagnosis. There is a disconnect among the positive predictions of scientists and researchers, the fears of public interest groups, and the developers of products. A new framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will permit a dialogue among interest groups, who currently fail to effectively communicate with one another. Each instance of nanotechnology application will likely have its own unique attributes, but this framework for evaluating the social implications of nanotechnology will address three questions: How do problems become visible to the social groups that contribute to the framing of technology? What kind of language do social groups use to express significance? How does risk standardization contribute to technology stabilization? The suggested framework compares the ways that risk is discussed in military applications, consumer products, and workplace safety.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0270467607306592</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0270-4676 |
ispartof | Bulletin of science, technology & society, 2007-10, Vol.27 (5), p.349-366 |
issn | 0270-4676 1552-4183 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20758250 |
source | SAGE Complete |
subjects | Case Studies Chemical Engineering Environmental Standards Federal Regulation Futures (of Society) Groups Hazardous Materials Policy Formation Public Opinion Science and Society Technology |
title | Risky Talk: Framing the Analysis of the Social Implications of Nanotechnology |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T01%3A44%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Risky%20Talk:%20Framing%20the%20Analysis%20of%20the%20Social%20Implications%20of%20Nanotechnology&rft.jtitle=Bulletin%20of%20science,%20technology%20&%20society&rft.au=Pense,%20Christine%20M.&rft.date=2007-10&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=349&rft.epage=366&rft.pages=349-366&rft.issn=0270-4676&rft.eissn=1552-4183&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0270467607306592&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20758250%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20758250&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ774043&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0270467607306592&rfr_iscdi=true |