The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology

A causal model explaining acceptance of gene technology was tested. It was hypothesized that trust in institutions using gene technology or using modified products has a positive impact on perceived benefit and a negative influence on perceived risk of this technology. Furthermore, perceived benefit and perceived risk determine acceptance of biotechnology. In other words, trust has an indirect influence on the acceptance of the technology. The postulated model was tested using structural equation modeling procedures and data from a random quota sample of 1001 Swiss citizens between 18 and 74 years old. Results indicated that the proposed model fits the data very well. The same causal model explains females' and males' acceptance of gene technology. Gender differences were found for the latent variables trust, perceived benefit, and acceptance of gene technology. Females indicated more trust, perceived less benefit, and demonstrated less acceptance than did males. No significant difference was observed for perceived risk. The implications of the results are discussed.

[1]  S. Streufert.  Trust. A Mechanism for the Reduction of Social Complexity , 1968 .

[2]  Jan A. J. Stolwijk,et al.  Risk and Benefit Perceptions, Acceptability Judgments, and Self-Reported Actions toward Nuclear Power , 1982 .

[3]  Kenneth H. Craik,et al.  Contemporary Worldviews: Personal and Policy Implications12 , 1983 .

[4]  Charles J. Brody,et al.  Differences by Sex in Support for Nuclear Power , 1984 .

[5]  R. G. Vleeming.  Factors affecting attitudes toward nuclear power in the Netherlands , 1985 .

[6]  B. Baird,et al.  Tolerance for environmental health risks: the influence of knowledge, benefits, voluntariness, and environmental attitudes. , 1986, Risk Analysis.

[7]  P. Slovic.  Perception of risk. , 1987, Science.

[8]  Pieter Jan M. Stallen,et al.  Public Concern About Industrial Hazards , 1988 .

[9]  P Slovic,et al.  Perceived Risk, Trust, and the Politics of Nuclear Waste , 1991, Science.

[10]  Public opposition to genetic engineering. , 1992, Rural sociology.

[11]  Confidence in Science: The Gender Gap. , 1992 .

[12]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Trust as a Determinant of Opposition to a High‐Level Radioactive Waste Repository: Analysis of a Structural Model , 1992 .

[13]  Etienne Mullet,et al.  Societal risk as seen by the French public , 1993 .

[14]  J. S. Long,et al.  Testing Structural Equation Models , 1993 .

[15]  R. Gregory,et al.  Perceived Risk, Dread, and Benefits , 1993 .

[16]  William R. Freudenburg,et al.  Risk and Recreancy: Weber, the Division of Labor, and the Rationality of Risk Perceptions , 1993 .

[17]  J. S. Long,et al.  Testing Structural Equation Models , 1993 .

[18]  Lynn J. Frewer,et al.  Gene technology, food production, and public opinion: A UK study , 1994 .

[19]  Isaac Rabino,et al.  How European and U.S. Genetic Engineering Scientists View the Impact of Public Attention on Their Field: A Comparison , 1994, Science, technology & human values.

[20]  P. Slovic,et al.  A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[21]  B. Zechendorf.  What the Public Thinks About Biotechnology , 1994, Bio/Technology.

[22]  C. K. Mertz,et al.  Gender, race, and perception of environmental health risks. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[23]  R Shepherd,et al.  Public perceptions of the potential hazards associated with food production and food consumption: an empirical study. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[24]  A. Panter,et al.  Writing about structural equation models. , 1995 .

[25]  George R. Franke,et al.  Structural Equation Modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows , 1995 .

[26]  M R Greenberg,et al.  Gender differences in risk perception: effects differ in stressed vs. non-stressed environments. , 1995, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[27]  Timothy C. Earle,et al.  Social Trust , 1995 .

[28]  D. Davidson,et al.  Gender and Environmental Risk Concerns , 1996 .

[29]  R Shepherd,et al.  What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. , 1996, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[30]  P. Slovic,et al.  The Role of Affect and Worldviews as Orienting Dispositions in the Perception and Acceptance of Nuclear Power1 , 1996 .

[31]  R. Shepherd,et al.  The influence of realistic product exposure on attitudes towards genetic engineering of food , 1996 .

[32]  Richard Shepherd,et al.  Public Concerns in the United Kingdom about General and Specific Applications of Genetic Engineering: Risk, Benefit, and Ethics , 1997, Science, technology & human values.

[33]  Timothy C. Earle,et al.  Culture, Cosmopolitanism, and Risk Management , 1997 .

[34]  M. Siegrist.  Belief in gene technology : The influence of environmental attitudes and gender , 1998 .

[35]  R. Löfstedt,et al.  Social Trust and the Management of Risk , 1999 .

[36]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  Die Wahrnehmung verschiedener gentechnischer Anwendungen: Ergebnisse einer MDS-Analyse , 1999 .

[37]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  A Causal Model Explaining the Perception and Acceptance of Gene Technology1 , 1999 .

[38]  Alfons Bora,et al.  Biotechnology in the public sphere. , 2000 .