View Item 

Show simple item record

The Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World
dc.contributor.authorRaimi, Kaitlin T.
dc.contributor.authorWolske, Kimberly S.
dc.contributor.authorHart, P. Sol
dc.contributor.authorCampbell‐arvai, Victoria
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-17T18:30:07Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_13_MONTHS
dc.date.available2020-03-17T18:30:07Z
dc.date.issued2020-03
dc.identifier.citationRaimi, Kaitlin T.; Wolske, Kimberly S.; Hart, P. Sol; Campbell‐arvai, Victoria (2020). "The Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World." Risk Analysis 40(3): 638-656.
dc.identifier.issn0272-4332
dc.identifier.issn1539-6924
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/154364
dc.description.abstractPeople differ in their comfort with tampering with the natural world. Although some see altering nature as a sign of human progress, others see it as dangerous or hubristic. Across four studies, we investigate discomfort with tampering with the natural world. To do so, we develop the Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale, a short scale that is the first to directly measure this discomfort. We identify six activities that people believe tamper with nature (geoengineering, genetically modified organisms, pesticides, cloning, gene therapy, and nanoparticles) and show that ATN scores are associated with opposition to these activities. Furthermore, the ATN Scale predicts actual behavior: donations to an antiâ tampering cause. We demonstrate that ATN is related to previously identified constructs including trust in technology, naturalness bias, purity values, disgust sensitivity, aversion to playing God, and environmental beliefs and values. By illuminating who is concerned about tampering with nature and what predicts these beliefs, the ATN Scale provides opportunities to better understand public opposition to technological innovations, consumer preferences for â naturalâ products, and strategies for science communication.
dc.publisherSage Publications
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.othertechnology support
dc.subject.otherEnvironmental beliefs
dc.subject.otherpurity
dc.subject.otherscience communication
dc.subject.othertampering with nature
dc.titleThe Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelBusiness (General)
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelBusiness and Economics
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154364/1/risa13414_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154364/2/risa13414.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/risa.13414
dc.identifier.sourceRisk Analysis
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchultz, P. W. ( 2002 ). Inclusion with nature: The psychology of humanâ nature relations. Psychology of Sustainable Development, 61 â 78. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0995-0_4
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNadelson, L., & Jorcyk, C. ( 2014 ). I just don’t trust them: The development and validation of an assessment instrument to measure trust in science and scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 114 ( 2 ), 76 â 86. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12051
dc.identifier.citedreferencePadillaâ Walker, L. M., & Jensen, L. A. ( 2016 ). Validation of the longâ and shortâ form of the Ethical Values Assessment (EVA). International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40 ( 2 ), 181 â 192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025415587534
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRosa, E. A., Renn, O., & McCright, A. M. ( 2013 ). The risk society revisited: Social theory and governance. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRozin, P. ( 2005 ). The meaning of â naturalâ : Process more important than content. Psychological Science, 16 ( 8 ), 652 â 658. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01589.x
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRozin, P., Fischler, C., & Shieldsâ Argelès, C. ( 2012 ). European and American perspectives on the meaning of natural. Appetite, 59 ( 2 ), 448 â 455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.06.001
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRozin, P., Lowery, L., Imada, S., & Haidt, J. ( 1999 ). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76 ( 4 ), 574 â 586. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.574
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRozin, P., Spranca, M., Krieger, Z., Neuhaus, R., Surillo, D., Swerdlin, A., & Wood, K. ( 2004 ). Preference for natural: Instrumental and ideational/moral motivations, and the contrast between foods and medicines. Appetite, 43 ( 2 ), 147 â 154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2004.03.005
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRudski, J. M., Osei, W., Jacobson, A. R., & Lynch, C. R. ( 2011 ). Would you rather be injured by lightning or a downed power line? Preference for natural hazards. Judgment and Decision Making, 6 ( 4 ), 314 â 322. Retrieved from http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~baron/journal/11/10809/jdm10809.pdf
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchwartz, S. H. ( 1977 ). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221 â 279 ). New York, NY: Academic Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceScott, S. E., Inbar, Y., & Rozin, P. ( 2016 ). Evidence for absolute moral opposition to genetically modified food in the United States. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11 ( 3 ), 315 â 324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615621275
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSiegrist, M. ( 2000 ). The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 20 ( 2 ), 195 â 203. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.202020
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSiegrist, M., Cousin, M. E., Kastenholz, H., & Wiek, A. ( 2007 ). Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: The influence of affect and trust. Appetite, 49 ( 2 ), 459 â 466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2007.03.002
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSiegrist, M., & Sütterlin, B. ( 2014 ). Human and natureâ caused hazards: The affect heuristic causes biased decisions. Risk Analysis, 34 ( 8 ), 1482 â 1494. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12179
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSjöberg, L. ( 2000 ). Perceived risk and tampering with nature. Journal of Risk Research, 3 ( 4 ), 353 â 367. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870050132568
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSlovic, P. ( 1987 ). Perception of risk. Science, 236 ( 4799 ), 280 â 285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSquires, N. ( 2014 ). Pope Francis denounces euthanasia as â sin against God.â The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/the-pope/11233347/Pope-Francis-denounces-euthanasia-as-sin-against-God.html
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSteiger, J. H. ( 1980 ). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87 ( 2 ), 245 â 251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Guagnano, G. A. ( 1998 ). A brief inventory of values. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58 ( 6 ), 984 â 1001. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058006008
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. ( 2001 ). Using multivariate statistics ( 4th ed. ). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTenbült, P., De Vries, N. K., Dreezens, E., & Martijn, C. ( 2005 ). Perceived naturalness and acceptance of genetically modified food. Appetite, 45 ( 1 ), 47 â 50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2005.03.004
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVandermoere, F., Blanchemanche, S., Bieberstein, A., Marette, S., & Roosen, J. ( 2010 ). The morality of attitudes toward nanotechnology: About God, technoâ scientific progress, and interfering with nature. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 12 ( 2 ), 373 â 381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-009-9809-5
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWaytz, A., & Young, L. ( 2019 ). Aversion to playing God scale and moral condemnation of technology and science. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0041.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWolske, K. S., Raimi, K. T., Campbellâ Arvai, V., & Hart, P. S. ( 2019 ). Public support for carbon dioxide removal strategies: The role of tampering with nature perceptions. Climatic Change, 152 ( 3â 4 ), 345 â 361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02375-z
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAchterberg, P. ( 2014 ). The changing face of public support for hydrogen technology explaining declining support among the Dutch (2008â 2013). International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 39 ( 33 ), 18711 â 18717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.08.053
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBassarak, C., Pfister, H. R., & Böhm, G. ( 2017 ). Dispute and morality in the perception of societal risks: Extending the psychometric model. Journal of Risk Research, 20 ( 3 ), 299 â 325. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2015.1043571
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeck, U. ( 1992 ). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London, UK: Sage Publications.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBusch, L. ( 2008 ). Nanotechnologies, food, and agriculture: Next big thing or flash in the pan? Agriculture and Human Values, 25 ( 2 ), 215 â 218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9119-z
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCohen, J. ( 1988 ). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences ( 2nd ed. ). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCohen, J. ( 1992 ). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112 ( 1 ), 155 â 159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
dc.identifier.citedreferenceConnor, M., & Siegrist, M. ( 2010 ). Factors influencing people’s acceptance of gene technology: The role of knowledge, health expectations, naturalness, and social trust. Science Communication, 32 ( 4 ), 514 â 538. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547009358919
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCorner, A., Parkhill, K., Pidgeon, N., & Vaughan, N. E. ( 2013 ). Messing with nature? Exploring public perceptions of geoengineering in the UK. Global Environmental Change, 23 ( 5 ), 938 â 947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.06.002
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDiBonaventura, M. D., & Chapman, G. B. ( 2008 ). Do decision biases predict bad decisions? Omission bias, naturalness bias, and influenza vaccination. Medical Decision Making, 28 ( 4 ), 532 â 539. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X08315250
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDietz, T. ( 2015 ). Environmental values. In T. Bosch & D. Sander (Eds.), Oxford handbook of values (pp. 329 â 349 ). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDragojlovic, N., & Einsiedel, E. ( 2013 ). Framing synthetic biology. Science Communication, 35 ( 5 ), 547 â 571. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012470707
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. ( 1978 ). The â New Environmental Paradigm.â The Journal of Environmental Education, 9 ( 4 ), 10 â 19. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.40.1.19-28
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. ( 2000 ). Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56 ( 3 ), 425 â 442. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. ( 2007 ). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77 â 83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrancis, Z., Schwartz, S., & Inbar, Y. ( 2016 ). Development of the Technology Attitudes Scale. Unpublished manuscript.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrewer, L. J., Howard, C., & Shepherd, R. ( 1997 ). Public concerns in the United Kingdom about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: Risk, benefit, and ethics. Science, Technology & Human Values, 22 ( 1 ), 98 â 124. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399702200105
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrady, D. ( 2017 ). F.D.A. approves first geneâ altering leukemia treatment, costing $475,000. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/30/health/gene-therapy-cancer.html?mcubz=3&_r=0
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGraham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. ( 2011 ). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101 ( 2 ), 366 â 385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021847
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHaidt, J., McCauley, C., & Rozin, P. ( 1994 ). Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: A scale sampling seven domains of disgust elicitors. Personality and Individual Differences, 16 ( 5 ), 701 â 713. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90212-7
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamilton, L. C., & Saito, K. ( 2014 ). A fourâ party view of US environmental concern. Environmental Politics, 1 â 16. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.976485
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHansen, A. ( 2006 ). Tampering with nature: â Natureâ and the â naturalâ in media coverage of genetics and biotechnology. Media, Culture & Society, 28 ( 6 ), 811 â 834. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443706067026
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHartman, L. M. ( 2017 ). Climate engineering and the playing God critique. Ethics & International Affairs, 31 ( 3 ), 313 â 333. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679417000223
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHelbing, D., Frey, B. S., Gigerenzer, G., Hafen, E., Hagner, M., Hofstetter, Y., â ¦ Zwitter, A. ( 2017 ). Will democracy survive big data and artificial intelligence? Scientific American. Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-democracy-survive-big-data-and-artificial-intelligence/
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHenneman, L., Timmermans, D. R. M., & Wal, G. Van Der ( 2006 ). Public attitudes toward genetic testing: Perceived benefits and objections. Genetic Testing, 10 ( 2 ), 139 â 145. https://doi.org/10.1089/gte.2006.10.139
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHornsey, M. J., & Fielding, K. S. ( 2017 ). Attitude roots and Jiu Jitsu persuasion: Understanding and overcoming the motivated rejection of science. American Psychologist, 72 ( 5 ), 459 â 473. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040437
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHoyle, R. H. ( 2011 ). Structural equation modeling for social and personality psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceInbar, Y., Pizarro, D. A., Knobe, J., & Bloom, P. ( 2009 ). Disgust sensitivity predicts intuitive disapproval of gays. Emotion, 9 ( 3 ), 435 â 439. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015960
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKrosnick, J. A., & Presser, S. ( 2009 ). Question and questionnaire design. In J. D. Wright & P. V. Marsden (Eds.), Handbook of survey research ( 2nd ed., pp. 263 â 314 ). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLi, M., & Chapman, G. B. ( 2012 ). Why do people like natural? Instrumental and ideational bases for the naturalness preference. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42 ( 12 ), 2859 â 2878. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00964.x
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLink, H.â J. ( 2013 ). Playing God and the intrinsic value of life: Moral problems for synthetic biology? Science and Engineering Ethics, 19 ( 2 ), 435 â 448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-012-9353-z
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. ( 2004 ). The Connectedness to Nature Scale: A measure of individualsâ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24 ( 4 ), 503 â 515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMeyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. ( 2013 ). Applied multivariate research ( 2nd ed. ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
risa13414_am.pdf
Size:
837.7KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
risa13414.pdf
Size:
201.8KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.