Of risks and regulations: how leading U.S. nanoscientists form policy stances about nanotechnology

Even though there is a high degree of scientific uncertainty about the risks of nanotechnology, many scholars have argued that policy-making cannot be placed on hold until risk assessments are complete (Faunce, Med J Aust 186(4):189–191, 2007; Kuzma, J Nanopart Res 9(1):165–182, 2007; O’Brien and Cummins, Hum Ecol Risk Assess 14(3):568–592, 2008; Powell et al., Environ Manag 42(3):426–443, 2008). In the absence of risk assessment data, decision makers often rely on scientists’ input about risks and regulation to make policy decisions. The research we present here goes beyond the earlier descriptive studies about nanotechnology regulation to explore the heuristics that the leading U.S. nanoscientists use when they make policy decisions about regulating nanotechnology. In particular, we explore the relationship between nanoscientists’ risk and benefit perceptions and their support for nanotech regulation. We conclude that nanoscientists are more supportive of regulating nanotechnology when they perceive higher levels of risks; yet, their perceived benefits about nanotechnology do not significantly impact their support for nanotech regulation. We also find some gender and disciplinary differences among the nanoscientists. Males are less supportive of nanotech regulation than their female peers and materials scientists are more supportive of nanotechnology regulation than scientists in other fields. Lastly, our findings illustrate that the leading U.S. nanoscientists see the areas of surveillance/privacy, human enhancement, medicine, and environment as the nanotech application areas that are most in need of new regulations

Mental models of the earth, sun, and moon: Indian children's cosmologies

This study reports data on the acquisition of knowledge about astronomy in children from India. Based on prior research, we hypothesized that the cosmological models that children construct are influenced by both first-order and second-order constraints on knowledge acquisition. First-order constraints are the implicit assumptions that govern the construction of initial cosmological models. Examples of such constraints include the assumptions that the earth is flat and supported. Such first-order constraints are presumed to be universal. Second-order constraints arise from the specific properties ascribed to cosmological objects. For example, representations of the earth’s shape and location relative to the sun and moon constrain the kinds of mechanisms that are generated to account for the day-night cycle. We hypothesized that in cultures where both folk cosmologies and the scientific cosmological model are accessible to children, aspects of folk models are likely to be incorporated in children’s cosmologies if they provide a psychologically easier way of satisfying first-order constraints. This hypothesis is supported by our findings with regard to universality and culture specificity in children’s cosmologies. Indian children’s cosmologies honor a variety of universal first-order constraints. These include constraints on the shape of the earth (e.g., support and flatness) and on the relative locations and motions of objects in the cosmology (e.g., continuity). However, many Indian children borrow the idea that the earth is supported by an ocean or a body of water from fork cosmology. This solution to the support constraint on the shape of the earth is not found in American children’s initial cosmologies