Research into Genetically Modified Organisms in New Zealand: An Examination of a Sociotechnical Controversy

Edwards, Sarah

doi:10.1525/cse.2017.000547

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A 2013 random postal survey of New Zealanders reported that 42.2% agreed that 'GM poses a significant risk to the health and safety of humans' and only 12.7% of respondents agreed that 'GM products are safe for human consumption' (Chikazhe, 2015). Opposition to GM crops in New Zealand became pronounced in the early 2000s and is speculated to be driven by regulatory lapses and perceived conflict with 'clean and green' environmental values (Edwards, 2017).…”

Section: Gm Foodmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…New Zealand legislation currently prohibits the release of live genetically modified organisms into the wider environment and the importation of fresh GM fruit, vegetables or meat (Ministry for the Environment, n.d.). Some commentators have warned that this position limits New Zealand's competitiveness in the global agricultural market (Edwards, 2017;Fritsche, Poovaiah, MacRae, & Thorlby, 2018). More broadly, proponents of GM crops argue that GM foods can be beneficial on a global level.…”

Section: Gm Foodmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why do we argue about science? Exploring the psychological antecedents of rejection of science

Kerr¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Science is recognised and accepted as an important tool for understanding the world in which we live, yet some people hold beliefs that go against the best available scientific evidence. For example, many people believe human-caused climate change is not occurring, or that vaccines are ineffective and dangerous. Previous research has investigated a range of possible drivers of this ‘rejection of science’ (Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, 2013), including ignorance, distrust of scientists, and ideological motivations. The studies in this thesis extend this line of inquiry, focusing first on the role of perceptions of scientific agreement. I report experimental evidence that people base their beliefs on ‘what they think scientists think’ (Study 1). However, an analysis of longitudinal data (Study 2) suggests that our personal beliefs may also skew our perceptions of scientific agreement. While the results of Study 1 and Study 2 somewhat conflict, they do converge on one finding: perceptions of consensus alone do not fully explain rejection of science. In the remainder of the thesis I cast a wider net, examining how ideological beliefs are linked to rejection of science. Study 3 draws on social media data to reveal that political ideology is associated with rejection of science in the context of who people choose to follow on the platform Twitter. A final set of studies (4, 5, and 6) examine the role of two motivational antecedents of political ideology, Right-wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), in rejection of science across five publicly debated issues. I also explore several potential mediators which might explain these effects. I report, for the first time, that RWA and SDO predict rejection of science across a range of issues and one mediator emerges as a consistent link: distrust of scientists. People who are less opposed to authoritarian (RWA) or hierarchical (SDO) values are less trusting of scientists and, in turn, more likely to reject specific scientific findings. I discuss potential strategies to address or circumvent this ideologically-motivated distrust of science. Taken as whole, this thesis extends our understanding of why people disagree with an established scientific consensus on socially important issues. Knowledge of the scientific consensus matters, but our deeper beliefs about society can also draw us closer to, or push us further from evidence-based conclusions.</p>

show abstract

Section: Gm Foodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gm Foodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do we argue about science? Exploring the psychological antecedents of rejection of science

Kerr¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Impacts of growing and utilising genetically modified crops and forages – a New Zealand perspective

Caradus¹

2022

New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceptions of plant breeding methods–from ‘phenotypic selection’ to ‘genetic modification’ and ‘new breeding technologies’

Caradus¹

2023

New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research into Genetically Modified Organisms in New Zealand: An Examination of a Sociotechnical Controversy

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Why do we argue about science? Exploring the psychological antecedents of rejection of science

Why do we argue about science? Exploring the psychological antecedents of rejection of science

Impacts of growing and utilising genetically modified crops and forages – a New Zealand perspective

Perceptions of plant breeding methods–from ‘phenotypic selection’ to ‘genetic modification’ and ‘new breeding technologies’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About