Difference between revisions of "Team:Warwick/PracticesPerception"

 
(21 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 45: Line 45:
  
  
−
<p>_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________</p>
+
<p style="padding-bottom:2px;margin-bottom:0px;">_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________</p>
−
<br><h5><b>Interview: John Pickering, Psychologist, University of Warwick, 27/08/2015
+
<br><h5 style="margin-top:1px; padding-top:1px;"><b>Interview: Insights synthetic biologists should consider whilst interacting with the public
 +
John Pickering, Psychologist, University of Warwick, 27/08/2015
 
</b></h5>
 
</b></h5>
 +
<p>
 +
<br>
 +
We wanted to hear about what the current opinions and ethical debates surrounding synthetic biology and gene technologies were in order to frame our investigation. So, after a little research, we found Warwick’s own John Pickering, a psychologist whose interests lie in cognitive science and transhumanism - the belief of improving the human condition beyond its current physical and mental limitations. .
 +
<br>
 +
After introducing ourselves, the iGEM competition and Brixells - our project - we had an immediate insight generated from our resident psychologist:
 +
<br><br><div class="boxed">
 +
“The thing that I find interesting that’s missing, and this is not an accusation, but it’s fear; people are very afraid. A fear of monstrous things being cooked up in the laboratories which will turn out to be biologically dangerous and perhaps morally unacceptable”</div>
 +
<br><br>
 +
This insight helped us design our investigation into the public’s perception of gene technologies; it ensured we included preparing for the ‘fear’ response that members of the public may exhibit and informed us of what thoughts and concerns the public may have.
 +
<br>
 +
We then moved on to discuss possible applications of our tool to which we had another insight:
 +
<br><br><div class="boxed">
 +
“You’re researching a tool, and the thing about tools is you don't know who is going to use it for what. Once you make something and release it, it ceases to be your property; you lose control over it”
 +
<br></div>
 +
<br><br>
 +
This is rather significant, and with iGEM this is often an issue that is thought about regularly -  for instance, the implementation of ‘kill switches’ or ‘switch off’ genes once a microorganism with a useful trait leaves the specific area where it is beneficial for society.
 +
<br>
 +
A concluding significant insight also sparked thoughts about how we present our data and findings whilst writing press releases or interacting with the public.
 +
<br><br><div class="boxed">
 +
“If they mention the long term implications to the media – immediately those long term implications are brought much much closer to home you know. We’ve got to be careful about the language that we use to ensure that people don't take away too much” 
 +
<br></div>
 +
<br>
 +
For researchers, all of these considerations are worth bearing in mind. This was incredibly useful for our investigation into public perceptions as it provided an insight into the current perceptions.
 +
<br><br>
 +
 +
 +
Key messages:
 +
<div class="boxed">
 +
<br>“I like the idea of a wiki, it's what science should be, it's real sharing, you might find that somebody the other side of the world can recognise value in something that you do.” John Pickering, Psychologist, University of Warwick, 27/08/2015.
 +
<br>
 +
<br>“Highly protected... [corporate research] is actually not very good science because if you protect research you shield it from scrutiny; for instance other teams might spot something wrong or might help develop it”
 +
<br>
 +
<br>“If they mention the long term implications to the media – immediately those long term implications are brought much much closer to home you know. We’ve got to be careful about the language that we use to ensure that people don't take away too much”
 +
</div>
 +
</p>
  
  
Line 72: Line 108:
 
<br>2) There is a need for rules and regulations that can keep up with the rate of development in the area.
 
<br>2) There is a need for rules and regulations that can keep up with the rate of development in the area.
 
<br>3) Synthetic biology could lead to an offence against nature
 
<br>3) Synthetic biology could lead to an offence against nature
−
<br>4) It is looked on positively as something that could provide many solutions to current major issues – particularly in the field of medicine and in replacing finite materials eg fuels.
+
<br>4) It is looked on positively as something that could provide many solutions to current major issues – particularly in the field of medicine and in replacing finite materials e.g. fuels.
 
<br>5) It is not always certain that the intentions of scientists are good, and there is concerns of misuse eg bioterrorism
 
<br>5) It is not always certain that the intentions of scientists are good, and there is concerns of misuse eg bioterrorism
 
<br>6) Synthetic biology could go really well or lead to some disasters
 
<br>6) Synthetic biology could go really well or lead to some disasters
Line 122: Line 158:
 
<p>We aimed to assess the link between source of information and influence on opinion of gene technologies and biotechnologies.</p>
 
<p>We aimed to assess the link between source of information and influence on opinion of gene technologies and biotechnologies.</p>
  
−
<imgsrc="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/1/10/SourcevsMeanOpinionScoreTablewarwickiGEM.png>
+
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/1/10/SourcevsMeanOpinionScoreTablewarwickiGEM.png">
 +
 
 +
<br><br>School or further education ranked the highest positive perception of biotechnology and synthetic biology. This was closely followed by newspaper and TV Whilst internet had an overall lower score, and from books gave a minus score, meaning participants mostly disagreed.
 +
<br>As in an academic setting the uses and applications of biotechnology may be stressed, and give a myth-busting of any misunderstandings this may not be surprising to gain.
 +
<br><br>We also found that there was a relationship between source of information about synthetic biology and views on synthetic biology.
 +
 
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/2/22/AgevsMeanTableiGEM.png">
 +
 
 +
<br><p>We found that there was a <b>loose correlation</b> between age and opinion of biotechnology.</p>
 +
<br>
  
 +
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/f/f3/PublicPerceptionWordMapiGEM.png" height="600px" width="600px">
 +
<p> <i>A word map depicting the most popular words people associated with synthetic biology.</i> </p>
  
 
</div><!-- end main content-->
 
</div><!-- end main content-->

Latest revision as of 23:42, 17 September 2015

Warwick iGEM 2015

Open Menu