Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Marcu, A.
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Gaspar, R., Rutsaert, P., Seibt, C., Flecther, D., Verbeke, W., Barnett, J.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/9351
Resumo: Drawing on social representations theory, we explore how the public make sense of the unfamiliar, taking as the example a novel technology: synthetic meat. Data from an online deliberation study and eighteen focus groups in Belgium, Portugal and the UK indicated that the various strategies of sense-making afforded different levels of critical thinking about synthetic meat. Anchoring to genetic modification, metaphors like ‘Frankenfoods’ and commonplaces like ‘playing God’ closed off debates around potential applications of synthetic meat, whereas asking factual and rhetorical questions about it, weighing up pragmatically its risks and benefits, and envisaging changing current mentalities or behaviours in order to adapt to scientific developments enabled a consideration of synthetic meat’s possible implications for agriculture, environment, and society. We suggest that research on public understanding of technology should cultivate a climate of active thinking and should encourage questioning during the process of sense-making to try to reduce unhelpful anchoring.
id RCAP_f23b15211e4d81986dcd537add432638
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/9351
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str
spelling Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meatAnchoringCommonplacesMetaphorsOnline deliberationSocial representationsSynthetic meatDrawing on social representations theory, we explore how the public make sense of the unfamiliar, taking as the example a novel technology: synthetic meat. Data from an online deliberation study and eighteen focus groups in Belgium, Portugal and the UK indicated that the various strategies of sense-making afforded different levels of critical thinking about synthetic meat. Anchoring to genetic modification, metaphors like ‘Frankenfoods’ and commonplaces like ‘playing God’ closed off debates around potential applications of synthetic meat, whereas asking factual and rhetorical questions about it, weighing up pragmatically its risks and benefits, and envisaging changing current mentalities or behaviours in order to adapt to scientific developments enabled a consideration of synthetic meat’s possible implications for agriculture, environment, and society. We suggest that research on public understanding of technology should cultivate a climate of active thinking and should encourage questioning during the process of sense-making to try to reduce unhelpful anchoring.SAGE Publications Ltd2015-07-20T09:46:57Z2015-01-01T00:00:00Z20152019-05-03T17:54:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/9351eng0963-662510.1177/0963662514521106Marcu, A.Gaspar, R.Rutsaert, P.Seibt, C.Flecther, D.Verbeke, W.Barnett, J.info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-25T17:23:53ZPortal AgregadorONG
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
title Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
spellingShingle Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
Marcu, A.
Anchoring
Commonplaces
Metaphors
Online deliberation
Social representations
Synthetic meat
title_short Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
title_full Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
title_fullStr Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
title_full_unstemmed Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
title_sort Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: lay sense-making around synthetic meat
author Marcu, A.
author_facet Marcu, A.
Gaspar, R.
Rutsaert, P.
Seibt, C.
Flecther, D.
Verbeke, W.
Barnett, J.
author_role author
author2 Gaspar, R.
Rutsaert, P.
Seibt, C.
Flecther, D.
Verbeke, W.
Barnett, J.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Marcu, A.
Gaspar, R.
Rutsaert, P.
Seibt, C.
Flecther, D.
Verbeke, W.
Barnett, J.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Anchoring
Commonplaces
Metaphors
Online deliberation
Social representations
Synthetic meat
topic Anchoring
Commonplaces
Metaphors
Online deliberation
Social representations
Synthetic meat
description Drawing on social representations theory, we explore how the public make sense of the unfamiliar, taking as the example a novel technology: synthetic meat. Data from an online deliberation study and eighteen focus groups in Belgium, Portugal and the UK indicated that the various strategies of sense-making afforded different levels of critical thinking about synthetic meat. Anchoring to genetic modification, metaphors like ‘Frankenfoods’ and commonplaces like ‘playing God’ closed off debates around potential applications of synthetic meat, whereas asking factual and rhetorical questions about it, weighing up pragmatically its risks and benefits, and envisaging changing current mentalities or behaviours in order to adapt to scientific developments enabled a consideration of synthetic meat’s possible implications for agriculture, environment, and society. We suggest that research on public understanding of technology should cultivate a climate of active thinking and should encourage questioning during the process of sense-making to try to reduce unhelpful anchoring.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-07-20T09:46:57Z
2015-01-01T00:00:00Z
2015
2019-05-03T17:54:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10071/9351
url http://hdl.handle.net/10071/9351
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 0963-6625
10.1177/0963662514521106
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
eu_rights_str_mv embargoedAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv SAGE Publications Ltd
publisher.none.fl_str_mv SAGE Publications Ltd
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1777303943267745792