Abstract
In May 2016, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) released the report “Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects,” summarizing scientific consensus on genetically engineered crops and their implications. NASEM reports aim to give the public and policymakers information on socially relevant science issues. Their impact, however, is not well understood. This analysis combines national pre- and post-report survey data with a large-scale content analysis of Twitter discussion to examine the report’s effect on public perceptions of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). We find that the report’s release corresponded with reduced negativity in Twitter discourse and increased ambivalence in public risk and benefit perceptions of GMOs, mirroring the NASEM report’s conclusions. Surprisingly, this change was most likely for individuals least trusting of scientific studies or university scientists. Our findings indicate that NASEM consensus reports can help shape public discourse, even in, or perhaps because of, the complex information landscape of traditional and social media.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Public Administration,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Sociology and Political Science
Reference36 articles.
1. 15 C. Funk and L. Rainie , “Public and scientists’ views on science and society,” Pew Research Center, January 29, 2015, http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society/, accessed May 8, 2018.
2. 23 Pew Research Center, “Assessing the representativeness of public opinion surveys,” May 15, 2012, http://www.people-press.org/2012/05/15/assessing-the-representativeness-of-public-opinion-surveys/, accessed May 8, 2018.
3. Do Citizens Want to Have Their Say? Media, Agricultural Biotechnology, and Authoritarian Views of Democratic Processes in Science
4. A Method of Automated Nonparametric Content Analysis for Social Science
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献