The current study explores interpersonal discussion following participation in a novel program of citizen engagement about nanotechnology. Participants answered closed- and open-ended questions about their discursive behavior in a postengagement survey. The study seeks to address whether organizers of citizen engagement can expect participants to extend the impacts of engagement beyond direct participants through interpersonal discussion. Respondents reported moderate levels of postengagement discussion and appeared to say positive things about both nanotechnology and the experts who contributed to the engagement program. Respondents also reported primarily talking about nanotechnology in terms of scientific progress while using a range of fairness and competence frames to discuss experts and the program.
Message sidedness, including its later format inoculation, and conclusion explicitness have been identified by researchers as two prominent message factors that may influence advocating effects. Two-sided messages, which contain both supporting and opposing information about the issue, particularly those containing inoculation components that refute the negative side, are found to be more effective than one-sided messages. Messages with explicit conclusions are also found to be more persuasive than those that let the audience draw the conclusions themselves. This study tested the persuasion effectiveness of message inoculation and conclusion explicitness on a new scientific concept, the water–energy–food (WEF) nexus, of which the public has little knowledge. This study used five randomly assigned groups (total N = 524) and found that messages with explicit conclusions are more persuasive than those with implicit conclusions; however, it found no difference between the effectiveness of one-sided messages and of refutational two-sided messages. The study suggests that a clear conclusion is necessary to communicate the WEF nexus for a better approach to managing the megacrisis of water, energy, and food security.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.