Tragic Flaws and Practical Wisdom: Public reasoning behind preferences for different genetic technologies

Advanced bioengineering is often described as a transformative field with the potential to reshape aspects of society and environments. However, it remains largely unfamiliar to publics, compounded by its highly abstract and complex technical details. Increasingly, there have been calls for public engagement that grounds the field in concrete, real-world uses. Furthermore, there have been calls to move beyond the limits of archetypal or intrinsic concerns by encouraging people to flesh out and justify their support or lack thereof. This national focus group study investigated views across Australia regarding four novel applications. By presenting these technologies in contextualised scenarios incorporating characters with a range of perspectives, it answers the call for greater frame awareness. We conclude that publics are more than capable of weighing and negotiating between multiple frames at once, providing their own in order to justify whether to accept or reject one of the technologies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Understanding of Science
Published
2025-05-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251333316
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Climate Change Communication and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.60

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Tragic Flaws and Practical Wisdom: Public reasoning behind preferences for different genetic technologies

Lucy Carter, Catherine Waldby, Sujatha Raman, Adrian Mackenzie et al.
3 citations
Public Understanding of Science
Climate Change Communication and Perception
12.60
article

Tragic Flaws and Practical Wisdom: Public reasoning behind preferences for different genetic technologies

Lucy Carter, Catherine Waldby, Sujatha Raman, Adrian Mackenzie, Henry G. W. Dixson
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Advanced bioengineering is often described as a transformative field with the potential to reshape aspects of society and environments. However, it remains largely unfamiliar to publics, compounded by its highly abstract and complex technical details. Increasingly, there have been calls for public engagement that grounds the field in concrete, real-world uses. Furthermore, there have been calls to move beyond the limits of archetypal or intrinsic concerns by encouraging people to flesh out and justify their support or lack thereof. This national focus group study investigated views across Australia regarding four novel applications. By presenting these technologies in contextualised scenarios incorporating characters with a range of perspectives, it answers the call for greater frame awareness. We conclude that publics are more than capable of weighing and negotiating between multiple frames at once, providing their own in order to justify whether to accept or reject one of the technologies.

Public Understanding of ScienceVol. 34(8)
Australian National University (AU), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU), ARC Centre of Excellence in Synthetic Biology (AU), Western Sydney University (AU)
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Climate Change Communication and Perception
12.60
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.