Peer-reviewed articles 17,970 +


Title: SHAPING THE FUTURE: UNIVERSITY STUDENT?S PERCEPTIONS OF NANOTECHNOLOGY RISKS AND BENEFIT
SHAPING THE FUTURE: UNIVERSITY STUDENT?S PERCEPTIONS OF NANOTECHNOLOGY RISKS AND BENEFIT

PlumX Article Metrics by Elsevier
Marika Svrckova; Dobesova Cakirpaloglu; Ondrej Holy ; Jarmila Zimmermannova; Tereza Schovankova
10.5593/sgem2024v/6.2/s23.05
10.5593/sgem2024v/6.2
1314-2704
978-619-7603-78-1
English
24
6.2
•    Prof. DSc. Oleksandr Trofymchuk, UKRAINE 
•    Prof. Dr. hab. oec. Baiba Rivza, LATVIA
Micro and Nano Technologies for Sustainable Development
Nanotechnology plays a crucial role in the development of innovative products, yet public apprehension regarding its potential risks remains a significant barrier to its acceptance. This study investigates the knowledge, attitudes, and fears associated with nanomaterials among university students in the Czech Republic, aiming to inform policy formulation that aligns with public interests. Focusing on this demographic is essential, as university students are poised to influence future public discourse and innovation trends. Utilizing a cross-sectional online survey, we assessed perceptions of risks and benefits related to nanotechnology while considering sociodemographic factors such as gender and field of study. The sample comprised 107 university students aged 19-26 from diverse academic backgrounds. Our findings reveal a moderate overall familiarity with nanomaterials, while attitudes toward nanotechnology were generally positive. These insights highlight the necessity for targeted communication and educational strategies to address diverse viewpoints within society. As future decision-makers, understanding university students' perspectives is crucial for developing public policies that promote the responsible advancement and regulation of nanotechnology. Further research is needed to explore the underlying factors influencing these perceptions and to enhance public understanding of nanotechnology's benefits and risks.
[1] Brossard D.A., Nisbet M.C., Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Public Engaged in Controversial Science: The Case of Nanotechnology, Public Understanding of Science, UK, vol. 16/issue 3, pp. 279-295, 2007.

[2] Byrnes J.P., Miller D.C., Schafer W.D., Gender Differences in Risk Taking: A Meta-Analytic Review of Behavioral and Social Science Research, Psychological Bulletin, USA, vol. 125/issue 3, pp. 367-383, 1999.
[3] Gaskell G., Wright D., Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology: A Review of the Evidence from 2006 to 2014, NanoEthics, Netherlands, vol. 9/issue 2, pp. 145-157, 2015.
[4] Joubert C., Consumer Reactions to Unfamiliar Technologies: Mental and Social Formation of Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Nano and GM Products, Journal of Risk Research, UK, vol. 23/issue 9, pp. 1175-192, 2020.
[5] Kahan D.M., Carl S., The Cultural Cognition of Scientific Consensus, Journal of Risk Research, UK, vol. 14/issue 2, pp. 147-174, 2010.
[6] Mobasser A., Firoozi M., Knowledge, Perceptions, and Attitudes of Medical Residents Towards Nanomedicine: Defining the Gap, BMC Public Health, UK, vol. 21/issue 1, pp. 1-8, 2017.
[7] Pelaz B., Perceptions of Risk from Nanotechnologies and Trust in Stakeholders: A Comparative Study on Public Attitudes Towards Nanotechnology in Food and Cosmetics, BMC Public Health, UK, vol. 15/issue 1, pp. 179-189, 2017.
[8] Peters H.P., The Role of Public Engagement in the Governance of Emerging Technologies: The Case of Nanotechnology in Europe, Technology in Society, Netherlands, vol. 30/issue 3, pp. 192-203, 2008.
[9] Roco M.C., Bainbridge W.S., Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology, and Cognitive Science, National Science Foundation, USA, vol. 1/issue 1, pp. 1-468, 2005.
[10] van der Sluijs J.P., Risk Perception of Nanotechnology: A Comparative Study Among Different Stakeholders in Europe, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, Switzerland, vol. 12/issue 8, pp. 2673-2688, 2010.
[11] Scheufele, D.A., & Lewenstein, B.V., The public understanding of science communication: A grant proposal for the National Science Foundation. Journal of Science Communication, 8(2), 1-10, 2009.
The work was supported from ERDF/ESF project TECHSCALE (No. CZ.02.01.01/00/22_008/0004587).
conference
https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2024v/6.2/s23.05
Download PDF
Proceedings of 24th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2024
24th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2024, 27 - 30 November, 2024
Proceedings Paper
STEF92 Technology
International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM
SWS Scholarly Society; Acad Sci Czech Republ; Latvian Acad Sci; Polish Acad Sci; Russian Acad Sci; Serbian Acad Sci and Arts; Natl Acad Sci Ukraine; Natl Acad Sci Armenia; Sci Council Japan; European Acad Sci, Arts and Letters; Acad Fine Arts Zagreb Croatia; Croatian Acad Sci and Arts; Acad Sci Moldova; Montenegrin Acad Sci and Arts; Georgian Acad Sci; Acad Fine Arts and Design Bratislava; Russian Acad Arts; Turkish Acad Sci.
35-42
27 - 30 November, 2024
website
10157
Nanotechnology; Public perception; Risk-benefit analysis; University students; Sociodemographic factors

25th SGEM International Conference on Earth & Planetary Sciences


International GeoConference SGEM2025
27 June - 6 July, 2025 / Albena, Bulgaria

Read More		   

SGEM Vienna GREEN "Green Science for Green Life"


Extended Scientific Sessions SGEM Vienna GREEN
3 -6 December, 2025 / Vienna, Austria

Read More
   

A scientific platform for Art-Inspired Scientists!


The Magical World Where Science meets Art
Vienna, Austria

Read More