The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke
To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Carlo, George L. [verfasserIn] Lee, Nora L. [verfasserIn] Sund, Kelly G. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erschienen: |
Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd ; 1992 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
Online-Ressource |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
2006 ; Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Risk analysis - Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981, 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:12 ; year:1992 ; number:1 ; pages:0 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ242017118 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ242017118 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210707145022.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 120427s1992 xx |||||o 00| ||und c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ242017118 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Carlo, George L. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke |
| 264 | 1 | |a Oxford, UK |b Blackwell Publishing Ltd |c 1992 | |
| 300 | |a Online-Ressource | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. | ||
| 533 | |d 2006 |f Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |7 |2006|||||||||| | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Dioxin | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lee, Nora L. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Sund, Kelly G. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Pettygrove, Sydney D. |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Risk analysis |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981 |g 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)NLEJ243926847 |w (DE-600)2001458-2 |x 1539-6924 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:12 |g year:1992 |g number:1 |g pages:0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x |q text/html |x Verlag |z Deutschlandweit zugänglich |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-DJB | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 12 |j 1992 |e 1 |h 0 | ||
| author_variant |
g l c gl glc n l l nl nll k g s kg kgs |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:15396924:1992----::hitrlyfcecvleadxeineaogcetssseteautteaadodoir |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
1992 |
| publishDate |
1992 |
| allfields |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242017118 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Carlo, George L. verfasserin aut The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1992 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. 2006 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2006|||||||||| Dioxin Lee, Nora L. verfasserin aut Sund, Kelly G. verfasserin aut Pettygrove, Sydney D. oth In Risk analysis Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926847 (DE-600)2001458-2 1539-6924 nnns volume:12 year:1992 number:1 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 12 1992 1 0 |
| spelling |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242017118 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Carlo, George L. verfasserin aut The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1992 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. 2006 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2006|||||||||| Dioxin Lee, Nora L. verfasserin aut Sund, Kelly G. verfasserin aut Pettygrove, Sydney D. oth In Risk analysis Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926847 (DE-600)2001458-2 1539-6924 nnns volume:12 year:1992 number:1 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 12 1992 1 0 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242017118 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Carlo, George L. verfasserin aut The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1992 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. 2006 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2006|||||||||| Dioxin Lee, Nora L. verfasserin aut Sund, Kelly G. verfasserin aut Pettygrove, Sydney D. oth In Risk analysis Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926847 (DE-600)2001458-2 1539-6924 nnns volume:12 year:1992 number:1 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 12 1992 1 0 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242017118 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Carlo, George L. verfasserin aut The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1992 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. 2006 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2006|||||||||| Dioxin Lee, Nora L. verfasserin aut Sund, Kelly G. verfasserin aut Pettygrove, Sydney D. oth In Risk analysis Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926847 (DE-600)2001458-2 1539-6924 nnns volume:12 year:1992 number:1 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 12 1992 1 0 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242017118 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Carlo, George L. verfasserin aut The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 1992 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. 2006 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2006|||||||||| Dioxin Lee, Nora L. verfasserin aut Sund, Kelly G. verfasserin aut Pettygrove, Sydney D. oth In Risk analysis Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243926847 (DE-600)2001458-2 1539-6924 nnns volume:12 year:1992 number:1 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 12 1992 1 0 |
| source |
In Risk analysis 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 volume:12 year:1992 number:1 pages:0 |
| sourceStr |
In Risk analysis 12(1992), 1, Seite 0 volume:12 year:1992 number:1 pages:0 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Dioxin |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Risk analysis |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Carlo, George L. @@aut@@ Lee, Nora L. @@aut@@ Sund, Kelly G. @@aut@@ Pettygrove, Sydney D. @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
1992-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ243926847 |
| id |
NLEJ242017118 |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ242017118</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210707145022.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120427s1992 xx |||||o 00| ||und c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ242017118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carlo, George L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Oxford, UK</subfield><subfield code="b">Blackwell Publishing Ltd</subfield><subfield code="c">1992</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2006</subfield><subfield code="f">Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005</subfield><subfield code="7">|2006||||||||||</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dioxin</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lee, Nora L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sund, Kelly G.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pettygrove, Sydney D.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Risk analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981</subfield><subfield code="g">12(1992), 1, Seite 0</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ243926847</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2001458-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1539-6924</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:12</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1992</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x</subfield><subfield code="q">text/html</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">Deutschlandweit zugänglich</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-DJB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">12</subfield><subfield code="j">1992</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |
| author |
Carlo, George L. |
| spellingShingle |
Carlo, George L. misc Dioxin The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke |
| authorStr |
Carlo, George L. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ243926847 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
NL |
| publishPlace |
Oxford, UK |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1539-6924 |
| topic_title |
The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke Dioxin |
| publisher |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
| publisherStr |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
| topic |
misc Dioxin |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Dioxin |
| topic_browse |
misc Dioxin |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
s d p sd sdp |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Risk analysis |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ243926847 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Risk analysis |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ243926847 (DE-600)2001458-2 |
| title |
The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ242017118 |
| title_full |
The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke |
| author_sort |
Carlo, George L. |
| journal |
Risk analysis |
| journalStr |
Risk analysis |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
1992 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
0 |
| author_browse |
Carlo, George L. Lee, Nora L. Sund, Kelly G. |
| container_volume |
12 |
| physical |
Online-Ressource |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Carlo, George L. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
the interplay of science, values, and experiences among scientists asked to evaluate the hazards of dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke |
| title_auth |
The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke |
| abstract |
To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. |
| abstractGer |
To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| container_issue |
1 |
| title_short |
The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Lee, Nora L. Sund, Kelly G. Pettygrove, Sydney D. |
| author2Str |
Lee, Nora L. Sund, Kelly G. Pettygrove, Sydney D. |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ243926847 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth |
| doi_str |
10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T00:34:53.958Z |
| _version_ |
1803787796703346688 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ242017118</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210707145022.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120427s1992 xx |||||o 00| ||und c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ242017118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carlo, George L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Oxford, UK</subfield><subfield code="b">Blackwell Publishing Ltd</subfield><subfield code="c">1992</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists’ evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p= 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p<0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p<0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p<0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%,p<0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p<0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2006</subfield><subfield code="f">Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005</subfield><subfield code="7">|2006||||||||||</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dioxin</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lee, Nora L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sund, Kelly G.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pettygrove, Sydney D.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Risk analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1981</subfield><subfield code="g">12(1992), 1, Seite 0</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ243926847</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2001458-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1539-6924</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:12</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1992</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01305.x</subfield><subfield code="q">text/html</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">Deutschlandweit zugänglich</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-DJB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">12</subfield><subfield code="j">1992</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3979836 |