Special Eurobarometer 401: survey summary on responsible research and innovation, science and technology
Special Eurobarometer 401: survey summary on responsible research and innovation, science and technology
复制标题
特别欧洲晴雨表 401：负责任的研究与创新、科学技术调查总结
DOI：
10.1080/23299460.2014.882553
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Eden G
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Eden G
特别欧洲晴雨表401（Special Eurobarometer 401）是应欧盟委员会（EC 2013）的要求于2013年春季进行的民意调查。"特别"报告是侧重于特定专题领域的报告。在这种情况下，研究和创新总局委托进行了这项调查，作为2010年调查欧洲公民对科学和技术（S & T）的一般态度的后续行动。欧洲晴雨表1建立于1973年，旨在衡量欧洲在欧盟范围和国家层面对各种问题的态度。在这项调查中，来自28个欧盟成员国不同社会和人口群体的27，000多名参与者参加了面对面的访谈。本文审查的32页摘要包括在欧盟一级和按国家分析的调查结果。2尽管数据集相当大，但在试图理解和审查大规模调查数据摘要时，有几个注意事项，因为不能假定数据数量与数据质量有直接关系。例如，有人批评欧洲晴雨表调查的"黑箱方法"。使公布结果的可靠性和有效性受到限制的关切（Nissen 2012年）包括以下方面的不确定性：样本组成;调查问题的措辞、翻译和反译;结果的分析、解释和介绍;以及欧洲晴雨表可能被用作促进欧共体议程的政治工具。事实上，特别欧洲晴雨表401的实施是为了"更好地让公民参与科学、研究和创新，并促进负责任的研究和创新"，3从而使这项工作的目标不仅是收集数据，而且是促进公众更多地参与科学技术并进行科学技术交流。特别欧洲晴雨表401将与负责任的研究和创新（RRI）相关的主题整合到一项调查中，该调查以前曾涉及社会中更广泛的科学问题。目前的调查有七个部分，前三个部分侧重于参与、影响和态度，其余四个部分侧重于道德、青年、性别和开放获取。在第一部分（参与）中，有两个问题与RRI特别相关，其中与会者被问到："当涉及到有关科学和技术的决策时，公民应该参与到什么程度？" "哪些人或群体最有资格解释科学技术发展对社会的影响？"分析显示，支持公民参与，37%的人认为"不需要公共对话"，55%的人认为"需要公共对话"。大约三分之二的答复者还表示，大学和政府实验室的科学家最有资格解释科技对社会的影响。因此，欧盟公民似乎有兴趣与这些合格的科学家进行更多的接触。这种更广泛的参与已经在英国通过"市政厅"进行了试点，专家和公民聚集在一起讨论新的研究，包括纳米技术，合成生物学和地球工程。在某些情况下，这些会议的反馈意见已经改变了特别是在纳米技术领域的资金需求。此外，在欧盟，第4次"声音"协商开始审查让公民大规模参与对话的技术。
The Special Eurobarometer 401 is an opinion poll undertaken in Spring 2013 at the request of the European Commission (EC 2013). A “special” report is one that focuses on a specific thematic area. In this case, the Directorate-General for Research and Innovation commissioned the survey as a follow-on to the 2010 survey that examined European citizens’ general attitudes towards science and technology (S&T). The Eurobarometer 1 was established in 1973 and is meant to measure European attitudes on a variety of issues at both a European Union (EU)-wide and national level. For this survey, more than 27,000 participants from different social and demographic groups across the 28 EU member states took part in face-to-face interviews. The 32-page summary reviewed here includes findings analysed both at the EU level and by country. 2Even though the data set is quite large, there are several caveats in attempting to understand and review a summary of large-scale survey data where no presumption can be made that data quantity has a direct correlation to data quality. For instance, there have been criticisms of the “black-boxed methodology” of Eurobarometer surveys. Concerns that render the reliability and validity of published results limited (Nissen 2012) include uncertainties about the composition of the sample; the wording, translation and back-translation of survey questions; the analysis, interpretation and presentation of results; and the Eurobarometer’s potential use as a political tool to promote EC agendas. Indeed, Special Eurobarometer 401 was conducted “to better engage citizens with science, research and innovation and promote responsible research and innovation”, 3 thus making the goal of the exercise not just to collect data but also to facilitate greater pubic inclusion in, and communication of, S&T. Special Eurobarometer 401 has integrated topics related to responsible research and innovation (RRI) into a survey that had previously attended to broader issues in science in society. The current survey has seven sections, with the first three focused on engagement, impact and attitudes and the remaining four focused on ethics, young people, gender and open access. In Section I (engagement), two questions are particularly relevant to RRI in which participants were asked:“What is the level of involvement citizens should have when it comes to decisions made about science and technology?” and “Which people or groups are the best qualified to explain the impact of scientific and technological developments on society?” The analysis reveals support for citizen involvement, with 37% feeling that “public dialogue is NOT required” and 55% feeling that “Public dialogue is required”. Roughly two-thirds of respondents also indicated that scientists at university and government laboratories are best qualified to explain the impacts of S&T to society. Thus, there appears to be an appetite amongst EU citizens for greater engagement with those well-qualified scientists themselves. Such broader engagement has been piloted in the UK through “town halls” in which experts and citizens come together to discuss novel research including nanotechnology, synthetic biology and geoengineering. In some cases, feedback from these meetings has reshaped funding calls specifically in the area of nanotechnology. Additionally, in the EU the VOICES consultation 4 is beginning to examine techniques for including citizens in dialogue on a large scale.
科学社会研究中技术的转向
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1991
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
S. Woolgar
通讯作者：
S. Woolgar
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Sylke Nissen
通讯作者：
Sylke Nissen