颠覆性科技的负责任创新:公众信任和社会期望的作用

IF 10.1 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL ISSUES Technology in Society Pub Date : 2024-09-08 DOI:10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102709
Rod McCrea , Rebecca Coates , Elizabeth V. Hobman , Sarah Bentley , Justine Lacey
{"title":"颠覆性科技的负责任创新:公众信任和社会期望的作用","authors":"Rod McCrea ,&nbsp;Rebecca Coates ,&nbsp;Elizabeth V. Hobman ,&nbsp;Sarah Bentley ,&nbsp;Justine Lacey","doi":"10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>As the world increasingly faces intersecting and complex environmental, social, and economic challenges, there are rising demands on emerging science and technology to produce innovative and potentially disruptive solutions. However, these solutions may also introduce different problems, uncertainties, and risks. Responsible innovation (RI) offers a way to identify and mitigate the social and ethical risks associated with new science and technology developments while delivering socially desirable and responsible outcomes. But how does the public view RI? In this paper, we argue that those undertaking disruptive science and technology research need a better understanding of the drivers of public trust in the research and innovation sector, and broader societal expectations of what constitutes socially responsible outcomes arising from their work. Few studies have explored if and how RI, trust, and social expectations are interrelated in the eyes of the public. This research investigates public perceptions of RI relevant to the development of novel and potentially disruptive science and technology, and their relationships with two key social outcomes: (1) public trust in the research and innovation sector; and (2) public expectations that innovative and potentially disruptive research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Through surveying 4080 Australians, this research identifies how these four elements of RI – (i) practices of scientists, (ii) institutional compliance with research ethics, (iii) risk management effectiveness, and (iv) governance arrangements – are associated with public trust and expectations of socially responsible outcomes. Our best fitting path model showed that these elements of RI explain a large proportion of variability in trust in scientists and research institutions undertaking disruptive science, and most of the variability in public expectations that such research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Of the four elements of RI, practices of scientists are most important for explaining trust in the research and innovation sector, and risk management effectiveness is most important for expectations of socially responsible outcomes from disruptive science and technology.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47979,"journal":{"name":"Technology in Society","volume":"79 ","pages":"Article 102709"},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24002574/pdfft?md5=5f0901f65b79ffc23b8e8ab0b010cf02&pid=1-s2.0-S0160791X24002574-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations\",\"authors\":\"Rod McCrea ,&nbsp;Rebecca Coates ,&nbsp;Elizabeth V. Hobman ,&nbsp;Sarah Bentley ,&nbsp;Justine Lacey\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102709\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>As the world increasingly faces intersecting and complex environmental, social, and economic challenges, there are rising demands on emerging science and technology to produce innovative and potentially disruptive solutions. However, these solutions may also introduce different problems, uncertainties, and risks. Responsible innovation (RI) offers a way to identify and mitigate the social and ethical risks associated with new science and technology developments while delivering socially desirable and responsible outcomes. But how does the public view RI? In this paper, we argue that those undertaking disruptive science and technology research need a better understanding of the drivers of public trust in the research and innovation sector, and broader societal expectations of what constitutes socially responsible outcomes arising from their work. Few studies have explored if and how RI, trust, and social expectations are interrelated in the eyes of the public. This research investigates public perceptions of RI relevant to the development of novel and potentially disruptive science and technology, and their relationships with two key social outcomes: (1) public trust in the research and innovation sector; and (2) public expectations that innovative and potentially disruptive research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Through surveying 4080 Australians, this research identifies how these four elements of RI – (i) practices of scientists, (ii) institutional compliance with research ethics, (iii) risk management effectiveness, and (iv) governance arrangements – are associated with public trust and expectations of socially responsible outcomes. Our best fitting path model showed that these elements of RI explain a large proportion of variability in trust in scientists and research institutions undertaking disruptive science, and most of the variability in public expectations that such research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Of the four elements of RI, practices of scientists are most important for explaining trust in the research and innovation sector, and risk management effectiveness is most important for expectations of socially responsible outcomes from disruptive science and technology.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technology in Society\",\"volume\":\"79 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102709\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24002574/pdfft?md5=5f0901f65b79ffc23b8e8ab0b010cf02&pid=1-s2.0-S0160791X24002574-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technology in Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24002574\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL ISSUES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology in Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24002574","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着世界越来越多地面临相互交织的复杂环境、社会和经济挑战,对新兴科学和技术提出创新性和潜在颠覆性解决方案的要求也越来越高。然而,这些解决方案也可能带来不同的问题、不确定性和风险。负责任的创新(RI)提供了一种方法,可以识别并降低与新科技发展相关的社会和道德风险,同时提供对社会有益且负责任的成果。但公众如何看待责任创新?在本文中,我们认为从事颠覆性科技研究的人员需要更好地了解公众对研究与创新部门信任的驱动因素,以及社会对其工作所产生的社会负责任成果的更广泛期望。很少有研究探讨公众眼中的社会责任、信任和社会期望是否以及如何相互关联。本研究调查了公众对与新型和潜在颠覆性科技发展相关的 RI 的看法,以及它们与两个关键社会成果之间的关系:(1) 公众对研究和创新部门的信任;(2) 公众对创新和潜在颠覆性研究能够带来对社会负责的成果的期望。通过对 4080 名澳大利亚人进行调查,本研究确定了研究创新的四个要素--(i) 科学家的实践,(ii) 机构对研究伦理的遵守,(iii) 风险管理的有效性,以及 (iv) 治理安排--如何与公众信任和对社会负责成果的期望相关联。我们的最佳拟合路径模型显示,这些 RI 要素可以解释对科学家和从事颠覆性科学研究的机构的信任度的大部分变化,以及公众对此类研究能够产生对社会负责的成果的期望值的大部分变化。在 RI 的四个要素中,科学家的实践对于解释对研究与创新部门的信任最为重要,而风险管理的有效性对于期望颠覆性科学与技术产生对社会负责的成果最为重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations

As the world increasingly faces intersecting and complex environmental, social, and economic challenges, there are rising demands on emerging science and technology to produce innovative and potentially disruptive solutions. However, these solutions may also introduce different problems, uncertainties, and risks. Responsible innovation (RI) offers a way to identify and mitigate the social and ethical risks associated with new science and technology developments while delivering socially desirable and responsible outcomes. But how does the public view RI? In this paper, we argue that those undertaking disruptive science and technology research need a better understanding of the drivers of public trust in the research and innovation sector, and broader societal expectations of what constitutes socially responsible outcomes arising from their work. Few studies have explored if and how RI, trust, and social expectations are interrelated in the eyes of the public. This research investigates public perceptions of RI relevant to the development of novel and potentially disruptive science and technology, and their relationships with two key social outcomes: (1) public trust in the research and innovation sector; and (2) public expectations that innovative and potentially disruptive research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Through surveying 4080 Australians, this research identifies how these four elements of RI – (i) practices of scientists, (ii) institutional compliance with research ethics, (iii) risk management effectiveness, and (iv) governance arrangements – are associated with public trust and expectations of socially responsible outcomes. Our best fitting path model showed that these elements of RI explain a large proportion of variability in trust in scientists and research institutions undertaking disruptive science, and most of the variability in public expectations that such research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Of the four elements of RI, practices of scientists are most important for explaining trust in the research and innovation sector, and risk management effectiveness is most important for expectations of socially responsible outcomes from disruptive science and technology.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.90
自引率
14.10%
发文量
316
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Technology in Society is a global journal dedicated to fostering discourse at the crossroads of technological change and the social, economic, business, and philosophical transformation of our world. The journal aims to provide scholarly contributions that empower decision-makers to thoughtfully and intentionally navigate the decisions shaping this dynamic landscape. A common thread across these fields is the role of technology in society, influencing economic, political, and cultural dynamics. Scholarly work in Technology in Society delves into the social forces shaping technological decisions and the societal choices regarding technology use. This encompasses scholarly and theoretical approaches (history and philosophy of science and technology, technology forecasting, economic growth, and policy, ethics), applied approaches (business innovation, technology management, legal and engineering), and developmental perspectives (technology transfer, technology assessment, and economic development). Detailed information about the journal's aims and scope on specific topics can be found in Technology in Society Briefings, accessible via our Special Issues and Article Collections.
期刊最新文献
Modeling ICT adoption and electricity consumption in emerging digital economies: Insights from the West African Region Artificial Intelligence: Intensifying or mitigating unemployment? Technology shock of ChatGPT, social attention and firm value: Evidence from China Exploring determinants influencing artificial intelligence adoption, reference to diffusion of innovation theory Advanced cryopreservation as an emergent and convergent technological platform
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1