Quantitative and qualitative studies among 469 high school students of average age 17
years were conducted. The students’ attitudes to four practical applications of
biotechnology were examined: genetically modified plants (Bt corn), genetically
modified animals (salmon), and hemophilia germ line and somatic gene therapy. Each of
the four applications was examined from three different viewpoints: usefulness, moral
acceptability and risk perception. Bt corn production proved to be the most
acceptable in terms of both usefulness and risk perception. Values for genetically
modified salmon and germ line gene therapy were comparable, but much lower than those
for the other two applications; this was true for both usefulness and moral
acceptability. In addition, students found genetically modified salmon to be
ethically much less acceptable than Bt corn. Significant gender differences were
observed in the case of germ line gene therapy and genetically modified salmon.
Chen, S.-Y. and Raffan, J. ( 1999) "Biotechnology: Students’ Knowledge and
Attitudes in UK and Taiwan," Journal of Biological
Education34(1):
17-23.
2.
Dawson, V. and Schibeci, R. ( 2003) "Western Australian High School Students’
Attitudes towards Biotechnology Processes," Journal of
Biological Education38(1): 7-12.
3.
Dawson, V. and Taylor, P. ( 2000) "Do Adolescents’ Bioethical Decisions
Differ from those of Experts?," Journal of Biological
Education34(4):
184-8.
4.
Eldridge, J.J. and Gluck, J.P. ( 1996) "Gender Differences in Attitudes toward
Animal Research ," Ethics and Behavior6(3):
239-56.
5.
Gaskell, G., Allansdottir, A., Allum, N., Corchero, C., Fischler, C., Hampel, J., Jackson, J., Kronberger, N., Mejlgaard, N., Revuelta, G., Schreiner, C., Stares, S., Torgersen, H. and Wagner, W. ( 2006) Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns
and Trends . URL (accessed 15 July 2008): http://ec.europa.eu/research/press/2006/pdf/pr1906_eb_64_3_final_report-may2006_en.pdf
6.
Gunter, B., Kinderlerer, J. and Beyleveld, D. ( 1998) "Teenagers and Biotechnology: A Survey of
Understanding and Opinion in Britain," Studies in Science
Education32: 81-112.
7.
Hallman, W.K. ( 1996) "Public Perceptions of Biotechnology:
Another Look," Bio/Technology14: 35-8.
8.
Hill, R., Stanisstreet, M., O’Sullivan, H. and Boyes, E. ( 1999) "Genetic Engineering of Animals for
Medical Research: Students’ Views," School Science
Review80(293):
23-9.
9.
Hoban, T.J. and Kendall, P.A. ( 1992) "Consumer Attitudes about the Use of
Biotechnology in Agriculture and Food Production."
Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State
University.
10.
Institute of Food Technologists (2000) "IFT Expert Report on Biotechnology and
Foods." URL (accessed 15 July 2008): http://www.ift.org/cms/
11.
Kirinčič, S. and Tivadar, B. ( 2005) "Attitudes of Slovenian
Inhabitants towards Consumption of Genetically Modified Foods,"
2nd International Symposium on Recent Advances in Food
Analysis, Prague, Czech Republic, Book of
Abstracts, p. 112.
12.
Klop, T. and Severiens, S. ( 2007) "An Exploration of Attitudes towards
Modern Biotechnology: A Study among Dutch Secondary School
Students," International Journal of Science
Education29(5):
663-79.
13.
Lewis, J.M. and Leach, J.T. ( 2006) "Reasoning about Socio-Scientific Issues
in the Science Classroom: The Role of Scientific Knowledge,"
International Journal of Science Education28(11):
1267-88.
14.
Lewis, J.M., Driver, R.H., Leach, J.T. and Wood-Robinson, C. ( 1997) "Opinions on and Attitudes
towards Genetic Engineering. Acceptable Limits: A Discussion
Task," Working Paper 7 of the Young People’s Understanding
of, and Attitudes to, "The New Genetics" Project. Centre for Studies
in Science and Mathematics Education, University of Leeds.
15.
Lock, R. and Miles, C. ( 1993) "Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering:
Students’ Knowledge and Attitudes," Journal of Biological
Education27(4):
267-73.
16.
Lock, R., Miles, C. and Hughes, S. ( 1995) "The Influence of Teaching on Knowledge
and Attitudes in Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Contexts: Implications for
Teaching Controversial Issues and the Public Understanding of
Science," School Science Review76: 47-50.
17.
Massarani, L. and Moreira, I. ( 2005) "Attitudes towards Genetics: An
Application Example among Brazilian High School Students,"
Public Understanding of Science14(2):
201-12.
18.
Napolitano, C.L. and Ogunseitan, O.A. ( 1999) "Gender Differences in the Perception of
Genetic Engineering Applied to Human Reproduction," Social
Indicators Research46(2):
191-204.
19.
National Centre for Social Research (2005) What do People Think about Gene Therapy? A report
published by the Wellcome Trust. URL (accessed 15 July 2008): http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/stellent/groups/corporatesite/@msh_peda/documents/web_document/wtx026421.pdf
20.
Prokop, P., Leškova, A., Kubiatko, M. and Diran, C. ( 2007) "Slovakian Students’ Knowledge of and
Attitude toward Biotechnology," International Journal of
Science Education29(7):
895-907.
21.
Qin, W. and Brown, J.L. ( 2007) "Public Reactions to Information about
Genetically Engineered Foods: Effects of Information Formats and Male/Female
Differences," Public Understanding of Science16; 471-88.
22.
Reiss, M. and Straughan, R. ( 1996) Improving Nature? The Science and Ethics of
Genetic Engineering . Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
23.
Sjöberg, L. ( 2004a) "Principles of Risk Perception Applied
to Gene Technology ," EMBO Report5 (Suppl. 1):
S47-S51.
24.
Sjöberg, L. ( 2004b) "Gene Technology in the Eyes of the Public and
Experts ," URL (accessed 15 July 2008): http://swoba.hhs.se/hastba/papers/hastba2004_007.pdf
25.
Todt, E. and Götz, C. ( 1998) "Interesse von Jugendlichen an der
Gentechnologie," Zeitschrift für Didaktik der
Naturwissenschaften4(1): 3-11.
26.
Vičar, M. ( 2005) "Dejavniki zaznave tveganja v biotehnologiji in
genskem inženiringu," Master’s thesis, 179 pp.,
Faculty of Social Sciences,
Ljubljana. (In Slovene.)
27.
Zechendedorf, B. ( 1994) "What the Public Thinks about
Biotechnology," Biotechnology12: 871-5.
