There’s an interesting study out of Arizona State University and University of Wisconsin-Madison (researchers Elizabeth Corley and Dietram Scheufele) about the public understanding of nanotechnology. From the report,

Scholars, policy-makers, and outreach specialists in the nanotechnology community may be struggling with toxicological data and regulatory frameworks, but they seem to be able to agree on one thing: The public is unaware of the new technology and uninformed about the science behind it.

Ironically, this conclusion may not be supported by data.

The researchers go on to suggest that the problem is not a general lack of information and awareness but rather that key segments of the population are not being informed. The key segments are broken down into two categories: less than high school graduate and at least college degree. (What happened to high school graduates?) In other words, certain socio-economic classes are not informed (in both senses of the word, neither knowledgeable nor given information) about nanotechnology.

You can find a news item about the research here and the (brief and easy reading) research article itself here.

This outcome seems fairly predictable. As the researchers note, a lot of the nanotechnology informal education takes place in museums and science centres which are frequented by a very specific portion of the population. The daily newspapers (which are struggling for survival these days) don’t regularly feature a lot of information about science unless it’s health-related. If you want to read about nanotechnology, you might be reading The Economist or, interestingly enough, a fashion magazine but these magazines attract very specific audiences.

I’m glad to see a more sophisticated analysis than the usual ‘low public awareness of nanotechnology’ approach to the polling data.

As I alluded to in my posting about the recent recommendations for communication (in the Nanotechnologies and food report from the House of Lords Science, Technology and Industry Committee), yet another poll on public attitudes doesn’t seem necessary. That is, unless a new approach is taken to the questions and analysis.

I’m still finding material on food and nanotechnology. For a sampling you can go here (care2 make a difference) and look at the comments or for the Nanotechnology in Food? WTF! story  go here all published in January 2010. I thought they might be a response to the recently published House of Lords report but they point to the Nanotechnology: The new asbestos? article here on Food navigator-usa which was published June 11, 2009.