Uses of Knowledge and Values in Technical Controversies: The Case of Nuclear Reactor Safety in the US

This paper addresses some sociological and political factors related to the creation, use, and control of knowledge and information in technical disputes. This is accomplished by way of a content analysis of testimony of pro- and anti-nuclear witnesses speaking on nuclear reactor safety before the US Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy in 1973-74. The analysis attempts to show how competing social groups impose their `world views' as cognitive, non-evaluative definitions of reality, and that some groups are in a better political position to achieve this through the use of influence and power. The findings suggest that the use of evaluative intelligence in the hearings is a function of location in the political process rather than simply a function of group affiliation as such. It is concluded that the state of cognitive knowledge itself may play a more limited role than we think in determining the kinds of informational inputs to the policy process. Future research should concentrate on the ways in which groups and individuals succeed in anchoring their claims in culture, socioeconomic arrangements, and in political parties, as well as on the ways in which opposing groups control the use of knowledge in order to validate their own world views as cognitive definitions of the situation.