» Articles » PMID: 28597721

Dynamics of Problem Setting and Framing in Citizen Discussions on Synthetic Biology

Overview
Date 2017 Jun 10
PMID 28597721
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Synthetic biology is an emerging scientific field where engineers and biologists design and build biological systems for various applications. Developing synthetic biology responsibly in the public interest necessitates a meaningful societal dialogue. In this article, we argue that facilitating such a dialogue requires an understanding of how people make sense of synthetic biology. We performed qualitative research to unravel the underlying dynamics of problem setting and framing in citizen discussions on synthetic biology. We found that most people are not inherently for or against synthetic biology as a technology or development in itself, but that their perspectives are framed by core values about our relationships with science and technology and that sensemaking is much dependent on the context and general feelings of (dis)content. Given that there are many assumptions focused on a more binary idea of the public's view, we emphasize the need for frame awareness and understanding in a meaningful dialogue.

Citing Articles

Public attitudes to potential synthetic cells applications: Pragmatic support and ethical acceptance.

Rook O, Zwart H, Dogterom M PLoS One. 2025; 20(2):e0319337.

PMID: 40014593 PMC: 11867391. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319337.


A SynBio community comes of age: Political, academical, industrial, and societal developments in the Netherlands.

Bhatt D, Crooijmans M, Coenradij J, Macia Valero A, Lubbers M, Asin-Garcia E Biotechnol Notes. 2024; 3:62-69.

PMID: 39416458 PMC: 11446357. DOI: 10.1016/j.biotno.2022.07.004.


Presenting wicked problems in a science museum: A methodology to study interest from a dynamic perspective.

Franse R, Sachisthal M, Raijmakers M Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1113019.

PMID: 36844312 PMC: 9951591. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1113019.


Genetically engineered heat-resistant coral: An initial analysis of public opinion.

Hobman E, Mankad A, Carter L, Ruttley C PLoS One. 2022; 17(1):e0252739.

PMID: 35061663 PMC: 8782467. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252739.


Meaning of Ambiguity: A Japanese Survey on Synthetic Biology and Genome Editing.

Hibino A, Yoshizawa G, Minari J Front Sociol. 2021; 4:81.

PMID: 33869403 PMC: 8022501. DOI: 10.3389/fsoc.2019.00081.


References
1.
de Lorenzo V, Danchin A . Synthetic biology: discovering new worlds and new words. EMBO Rep. 2008; 9(9):822-7. PMC: 2529360. DOI: 10.1038/embor.2008.159. View

2.
Barns I, Schibeci R, Davison A, Shaw R . "What do you think about genetic medicine?" Facilitating sociable public discourse on developments in the new genetics. Sci Technol Human Values. 2004; 25(3):283-308. DOI: 10.1177/016224390002500302. View

3.
Douglas C, Stemerding D . Governing synthetic biology for global health through responsible research and innovation. Syst Synth Biol. 2014; 7(3):139-50. PMC: 3740102. DOI: 10.1007/s11693-013-9119-1. View

4.
Keulartz J, Schermer M, Korthals M, Swierstra T . Ethics in technological culture: a programmatic proposal for a pragmatist approach. Sci Technol Human Values. 2005; 29(1):3-29. DOI: 10.1177/0162243903259188. View

5.
Dabrock P . Playing God? Synthetic biology as a theological and ethical challenge. Syst Synth Biol. 2009; 3(1-4):47-54. PMC: 2759421. DOI: 10.1007/s11693-009-9028-5. View