General science‐technology orientation, specific benefit–risk assessment frame, and public acceptance of gene drive biotechnology

Optimism and pessimism toward science: A new way to look at the public’s evaluations of science and technology discoveries and recommendations

(2023) Ki Eun Kang et al.   Politics and the Life Sciences

Gene Drives in the U.K., U.S., and Australian Press (2015–2019): How a New Focus on Responsibility Is Shaping Science Communication

(2022) Aleksandra Stelmach et al.   SCIENCE COMMUNICATION

Stakeholder Views on Engagement, Trust, Performance, and Risk Considerations About Use of Gene Drive Technology in Agricultural Pest Management

(2022) Carol L. Goldsmith et al.   Health Security

Stakeholder engagement to inform the risk assessment and governance of gene drive technology to manage spotted-wing drosophila

(2022) Adam E. Kokotovich et al.   JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

California Residents’ Perceptions of Gene Drive Systems to Control Mosquito-Borne Disease

(2022) Cynthia E. Schairer et al.   Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology

Public deliberation and the regulation of gene drive in the USA

(2022) William F West et al.   Science and Public Policy

Conservation pest control with new technologies: public perceptions

(2021) Edith Anne MacDonald et al.   JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND

Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research

(2020) Michael Siegrist et al.   RISK ANALYSIS

Impact of Abstract Versus Concrete Conceptualization of Genetic Modification (GM) Technology on Public Perceptions

(2020) Meghnaa Tallapragada et al.   RISK ANALYSIS

Promises and perils of gene drives: Navigating the communication of complex, post-normal science

(2019) Dominique Brossard et al.   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Public views about gene editing wildlife for conservation

(2019) Patrice A. Kohl et al.   CONSERVATION BIOLOGY

Does the U.S. public support using gene drives in agriculture? And what do they want to know?

(2019) Michael S. Jones et al.   Science Advances

Cheating evolution: engineering gene drives to manipulate the fate of wild populations

(2016) Jackson Champer et al.   NATURE REVIEWS GENETICS

A CRISPR-Cas9 gene drive system targeting female reproduction in the malaria mosquito vector Anopheles gambiae

(2015) Andrew Hammond et al.   NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY

Opinion: Is CRISPR-based gene drive a biocontrol silver bullet or global conservation threat?: Fig. 1.

(2015) Bruce L. Webber et al.   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Conflict or Caveats? Effects of Media Portrayals of Scientific Uncertainty on Audience Perceptions of New Technologies

(2015) Andrew R. Binder et al.   RISK ANALYSIS

Understanding Public Opinion in Debates over Biomedical Research: Looking beyond Political Partisanship to Focus on Beliefs about Science and Society

(2014) Matthew Nisbet et al.   PLoS One

Regulating gene drives

(2014) K. A. Oye et al.   SCIENCE

Concerning RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild populations

(2014) Kevin M Esvelt et al.   eLife

The influence of political ideology on trust in science

(2013) Aaron M McCright et al.   Environmental Research Letters

The effect of perceived and assessed knowledge of climate change on public policy concerns: An empirical comparison

(2013) James W. Stoutenborough et al.   ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY

Disentangling the Influence of Value Predispositions and Risk/Benefit Perceptions on Support for Nanotechnology Among the American Public

(2013) Jiyoun Kim et al.   RISK ANALYSIS

Left brain, right brain

(2012) Chris Mooney   NEW SCIENTIST

The 2010 Eurobarometer on the life sciences

(2011) George Gaskell et al.   NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY

Hype and Public Trust in Science

(2011) Zubin Master et al.   SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS

Heuristic Decision Making

(2010) Gerd Gigerenzer et al.   Annual Review of Psychology

The Association of Knowledge with Concern About Global Warming: Trusted Information Sources Shape Public Thinking

(2009) Ariel Malka et al.   RISK ANALYSIS