This paper analyzes data from a 2005 telephone survey of 1200 people in the US that included questions about attitudes toward stem cell research and a broad range of communication variables. After all controls, trust in university scientists and religious leaders, exposure to national television news, familiarity, and religious service attendance produced statistically significant main effects on perception of research benefits, together explaining about 31% of the variance. Interpersonal communication may also have contingent effects.
Allum, N., Boy, D. and Bauer, M.W. ( 2002) "European Regions and the Knowledge Deficit Model," in M.W. Bauer and G. Gaskell (eds) Biotechnology: The Making of a Great Controversy , pp. 224-43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Bubela, T.M. and Caulfield, T.A. ( 2004) "Do the Print Media ‘Hype’ Genetic Research? A Comparison of Newspaper Stories and Peer-reviewed Research Papers," Canadian Medical Association Journal170(9): 1399-407.
3.
Chaffee, S.H. ( 1986) "Mass Media and Interpersonal Channels: Competitive, Convergence or Complementary?" in G. Gumpert and R. Cathcart (eds) Inter/Media: Interpersonal Communication in a Media World, 3rd edn, pp. 62-80. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
Cobb, M.D. and Macoubrie, J. ( 2004) "Public Perceptions about Nanotechnology: Risks, Benefits and Trust," Journal of Nanoparticle Research: An Interdisciplinary Forum for Nanoscale Science and Technology6(4): 395-405.
5.
Coleman, C.L. ( 1993) "The Influence of Mass Media and Interpersonal Communication on Societal and Personal Risk Judgments," Communication Research20(4): 611-28.
6.
Dunwoody, S. and Neuwirth, K. ( 1991) "Coming to Terms with the Impact of Communication on Scientific and Technological Risk Judgments," in L. Wilkins and P. Patterson (eds) Risk Business: Communicating Issues of Science, Risk, and Public Policy, pp. 11-30. New York: Greenwood.
7.
Dunwoody, S. and Peters, H.P. ( 1992) "Mass Media Coverage of Technological and Environmental Risks: A Survey of Research in the United States and Germany," Public Understanding of Science1: 199-230.
8.
Fiske, S.T. and Taylor, S.E. ( 1991) Social Cognition, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
Gamson, W.A. and Modigliani, A. ( 1989) "Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach," American Journal of Sociology45(1): 1-37.
10.
Gans, H.J. ( 1980) Deciding What’s News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. New York: Vintage.
11.
Gaskell, G., Einsiedel, E., Hallman, W., Priest, S., Jackson, J. and Olsthoorn, J. ( 2005) "Social Values and the Governance of Science," Science310: 1908-9.
12.
Hwang, Y. and Southwell, B.G. ( 2007) "Can a Personality Trait Predict Talk about Science? Sensation Seeking as a Science Communication Targeting Variable," Science Communication29: 198-216.
13.
Iyengar, S. ( 1991) Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14.
Lee, C., Scheufele, D.A. and Lewenstein, B. ( 2005) "Public Attitudes toward Emerging Technologies: Examining the Interactive Effects of Cognitions and Affect on Public Support for Nanotechnology ," Science Communication27(2): 240-67.
15.
Lenart, S. ( 1994) Shaping Political Attitudes: The Impact of Interpersonal Communication and Mass Media. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
16.
Macoubrie, J. ( 2006) "Nanotechnology: Public Concerns, Reasoning and Trust in Government," Public Understanding of Science15: 221-41.
17.
Mazur, A. ( 1981) "Media Coverage and Public Opinion on Scientific Controversies ," Journal of Communication31(2): 106-15.
18.
Mazur, A. and Hall, G.S. ( 1990) "Effects of Social Influence and Measured Exposure Level on Response to Radon," Sociological Inquiry60(3): 274-84.
19.
Midden, C., Boy, D., Einsiedel, E., Fjoestad, B., Liakopoulos, M., Miller, J.D., Ohman, S. and Wagner, W. ( 2002) "The Structure of Public Perceptions," in M.W. Bauer, and G. Gaskell (eds) Biotechnology: The Making of a Great Controversy , pp. 203-23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Miller, J.D. and Kimmel, L. ( 2001) Biomedical Communications: Purposes, Audiences, and Strategies . New York: Academic Press.
21.
Miller, J.D., Augenbraun, E., Schulhof, J. and Kimmel, L. ( 2006) "Adult Science Learning from Local Television Newscasts ," Science Communication28(2): 216-42.
22.
Moy, P. and Pfau, M. ( 2000) With Malice toward All? The Media and Public Confidence in Democratic Institutions. Westport, CT: Praeger.
23.
Nelkin, D. ( 1995) Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology . New York: Freeman.
24.
Nisbet, M.C. ( 2005) "The Competition for World Views: Values, Information, and Public Support for Stem Cell Research," International Journal of Public Opinion17(1): 90-112.
25.
Nisbet, M.C. and Goidel, R.K. ( 2007) "Understanding Citizen Perceptions of Science Controversy: Bridging the Ethnographic-Survey Divide," Public Understanding of Science16: 421-40.
26.
Nisbet, M.C. and Lewenstein, B.V. ( 2002) "Biotechnology and the American Media," Science Communication23(4): 359-91.
27.
Nisbet, M.C., Scheufele, D.A., Shanahan, J., Moy, P., Brossard, D. and Lewenstein, B.V. ( 2002) "Knowledge, Reservations, or Promise? A Media Effects Model for Public Perceptions of Science and Technology," Communication Research29(5): 584-608.
28.
Nisbet, M.C., Brossard, D. and Kroepsch, A. ( 2003) "Framing Science: The Stem Cell Controversy in an Age of Press/Politics," Press/Politics8(2): 36-70.
29.
Price, V. and Neijens, P. ( 1997) "Opinion Quality in Public Opinion Research," International Journal of Public Opinion9(4): 336-60.
30.
Priest, S.H. ( 1990) "Television’s Nova and the Construction of Scientific Truth," Critical Studies in Mass Communication7: 11-23.
31.
Priest, S.H. ( 1995) "Information Equity, Public Understanding of Science, and the Biotechnology Debate," Journal of Communication45(1): 39-54.
32.
Priest, S.H. ( 2001a) "Cloning: A Study in News Production," Public Understanding of Science10: 59-69.
33.
Priest, S.H. ( 2001b) "Misplaced Faith: Communication Variables as Predictors of Encouragement for Biotechnology Development," Science Communication23(2): 97-110.
34.
Priest, S.H. ( 2006) "The Public Opinion Climate for Gene Technologies in Canada and the United States: Competing Voices, Contrasting Frames," Public Understanding of Science15: 55-71.
35.
Priest, S. and Fussell, H. ( 2006) "Nanotechnology: Public Constructions and Constructing the Public," Poster presentation, Science Communication Interest Group, Association for Education in Journalism and Public Communication , San Francisco, August.
36.
Priest, S.H. and Ten Eyck, T.A. ( 2004) "Peril or Promise: News Media Framing of the Biotechnology ," in N. Stehr (ed.) Biotechnology: Between Commerce and Civil Society, pp. 175-86. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
37.
Priest, S.H., Bonfadelli, H. and Rusanen, M. ( 2003) "The ‘Trust Gap’ Hypothesis: Predicting Support for Biotechnology across National Cultures as a Function of Trust in Actors ," Risk Analysis23(4): 751-66.
38.
Rokeach, S.J.B. and DeFleur, M.L. ( 1976) "A Dependency Model of Mass-media Effects," Communication Research3(1): 3-21.
39.
Scheufele, D.A. ( 1999) "Framing as a Theory of Media Effects," Journal of Communication49(1): 103-22.
40.
Scheufele, D.A. and Lewenstein, B. ( 2005) "The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies," Journal of Nanoparticle Research7(6): 659-67.
41.
Science and Engineering Indicators (2006) URL: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind06/c7/c7s1.htm
42.
Solomon, M.R. ( 2004) Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having and Being, 6th edn. New York: Prentice Hall.
43.
Sturgis, P. and Allum, N. ( 2004) "Science in Society: Re-evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitude," Public Understanding of Science13(1): 55-74.
44.
Ten Eyck, T.A. ( 2005) "The Media and Public Opinion on Genetics and Biotechnology: Mirrors, Windows, or Walls?," Public Understanding of Science14(3): 305-16.
45.
Ten Eyck, T.A. and Williment, M. ( 2003) "The National Media and Things Genetic: Coverage in the New York Times (1971-2001) and the Washington Post (1977-2001)," Science Communication25(2): 129-52.
46.
Williams, C., Kitzinger, J. and Henderson, L. ( 2003) "Envisaging the Embryo in Stem Cell Research: Discursive Strategies and Media Reporting of the Ethical Debates," Sociology of Health and Illness25: 793-814.
