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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bulletin of science, technology & society technology & society, 2007-10, Vol.27 (5), p.349-366
Hauptverfasser: Pense, Christine M., Cutcliffe, Stephen H.
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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