Students’ knowledge and attitudes towards GMOs and nanotechnology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate knowledge and attitudes toward genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and nanotechnology among the Canadian youth demographic. The primary objective of this pilot study was to investigate the knowledge and attitudes toward GMOs and nanotechnology among first year university students. The secondary objective was to compare knowledge and attitudes toward GMOs and nanotechnology among students studying nutrition as to students who do not study nutrition. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire was developed by researchers and student volunteers. This questionnaire was distributed to first year university classes at Western University. The multiple-choice questions were analyzed using SAS, and open-ended questions were analyzed using theme analysis. Findings GMO knowledge was strong for both populations, however questions related to the percentage of GM foods grown in Canada indicated nutrition students had a stronger GMO knowledge (p = 0.031). Open-ended questions revealed overall attitudes toward GMOs were either unsure or negative between both populations. Nutrition students had a more positive attitude toward nanotechnology, and a slightly stronger knowledge regarding applications of nanotechnology (p = 0.006). Theme analysis indicated that participants enrolled in nutritional studies were less apprehensive toward GMOs. No differences were indicated in open-ended questions related to nanotechnology between both groups, which may be due to the lack of awareness related to the novelty of the technology. Research limitations/implications Without a validated questionnaire, this reduces the reliability of the results from the questionnaire. The questionnaire was carefully designed by combining previous studies questionnaires, as well as producing questions from related literature, which increases the reliability and accuracy of the questionnaire. In addition, the questionnaires underwent several rounds of pre-piloting as well as multiple revisions with current health-care professions to increase the reliability and accuracy of the questionnaire. Practical implications This study will assist in understanding the current knowledge of GMOs and nanotechnology among first year university students. This will then allow us to understand if knowledge has a factor in altering students’ attitudes toward these technologies. If students do not have a strong knowledge toward these technologies, then this may lead to the potential implementation of education regarding GMOs and nanotechnology. As these technologies are emerging and being used in everyday food items, individuals should be aware of the implications, as well as the benefits of these technologies. Originality/value This is the first study regarding this topic in Canada. Results from this study provide baseline data that may be used to conduct future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".