Gene editing in animals: What does the public want to know and what information do stakeholder organizations provide?

被引:2
作者
Kuo, Christine [1 ]
Koralesky, Katherine E. [1 ]
von Keyserlingk, Marina A. G. [1 ]
Weary, Daniel M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, Fac Land & Food Syst, Anim Welf Program, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z6, Canada
关键词
attitudes; consumer education; ethics; genetic modification; knowledge deficit; GENETICALLY-MODIFIED FOOD; CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE; SCIENCE; ENGAGEMENT; TECHNOLOGIES; PERCEPTIONS; ATTENTION; WELFARE; CATTLE;
D O I
10.1177/09636625241227091
中图分类号
G2 [信息与知识传播];
学科分类号
05 ; 0503 ;
摘要
Organizations involved with gene editing may engage with the public to share information and address concerns about the technology. It is unclear, however, if the information shared aligns with what people want to know. We aimed to understand what members of the public want to know about gene editing in animals by soliciting their questions through an open-ended survey question and comparing them with questions posed in Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) webpages developed by gene editing stakeholder organizations. Participants (338 USA residents) asked the most questions about gene editing in general and animal welfare. In contrast, FAQ webpages focused on regulations. The questions survey participants asked demonstrate a range of knowledge and interests. The discrepancy between survey participant questions and the information provided in the FAQ webpages suggests that gene editing stakeholders might engage in more meaningful public engagement by soliciting actual questions from the public and opening up opportunities for real dialogue.
引用
收藏
页码:725 / 739
页数:15
相关论文
共 65 条
  • [1] Consumer Valuation of and Attitudes towards Novel Foods Produced with New Plant Engineering Techniques: A Review
    Beghin, John C.
    Gustafson, Christopher R.
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 13 (20)
  • [2] Benz-Schwarzburg J, 2016, ISSUES SCI TECHNOL, V32, P29
  • [3] Separating the Shirkers from the Workers? Making Sure Respondents Pay Attention on Self-Administered Surveys
    Berinsky, Adam J.
    Margolis, Michele F.
    Sances, Michael W.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2014, 58 (03) : 739 - 753
  • [4] Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?
    Buhrmester, Michael
    Kwang, Tracy
    Gosling, Samuel D.
    [J]. PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2011, 6 (01) : 3 - 5
  • [5] Burall S, 2018, NATURE, V555, P438, DOI 10.1038/d41586-018-03269-3
  • [6] Citizen views on genome editing: effects of species and purpose
    Busch, Gesa
    Ryan, Erin
    von Keyserlingk, Marina A. G.
    Weary, Daniel M.
    [J]. AGRICULTURE AND HUMAN VALUES, 2022, 39 (01) : 151 - 164
  • [7] Production of hornless dairy cattle from genome-edited cell lines
    Carlson, Daniel F.
    Lancto, Cheryl A.
    Zang, Bin
    Kim, Eui-Soo
    Walton, Mark
    Oldeschulte, David
    Seabury, Christopher
    Sonstegard, Tad S.
    Fahrenkrug, Scott C.
    [J]. NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2016, 34 (05) : 479 - 481
  • [8] Co-developing the IPCC frequently asked questions as an effective science communication tool
    Connors, Sarah L.
    Nicolai, Maike
    Berger, Sophie
    Pidcock, Rosalind
    Walsh, Melissa
    Hawtin, Nigel
    [J]. CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2022, 171 (1-2)
  • [9] Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy
    Costa-Font, Montserrat
    Gil, Jose M.
    Traill, W. Bruce
    [J]. FOOD POLICY, 2008, 33 (02) : 99 - 111
  • [10] The social aspects of genome editing: publics as stakeholders, populations and participants in animal research
    Davies, Gail
    Gorman, Richard
    McGlacken, Renelle
    Peres, Sara
    [J]. LABORATORY ANIMALS, 2022, 56 (01) : 88 - 96