Showing 1 – 12 of 12 results.
Curated
Eurobarometer 35.1: Public Transportation and Biotechnology, March-April 1991 (ICPSR 9698)
Released/updated on: 2002-08-16
Geographic coverage: Europe, United Kingdom, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 1991-03-28--1991-04-30
This round of Eurobarometer surveys focused on transportation and biotechnology (genetic engineering). In addition, respondents were queried on standard Eurobarometer measures, such as whether they attempted to persuade others close to them to share their views on subjects they held strong opinions about, whether they discussed political matters, what their country's goals should be for the next ten or fifteen years, and whether their country had benefited from being a member of the European Community (EC). With respect to transportation issues, the survey assessed how residents of urban areas perceived the increase in car traffic and how they felt about its consequences, including effects on air quality and the risk of accidents. Ratings were sought on the effectiveness of various proposals for solving traffic congestion. Respondents were asked to indicate how well political decision-makers judged the feelings of the public on transportation issues, and which types of transport should be preferred in policy decisions: cars versus public transportation, cars versus cyclists, and cars versus pedestrians. They were asked to indicate how frequently they used various types of transportation and their reasons for using and for not using public transportation. Biotechnology was described as the recent efforts of scientists to change human cells, micro-organisms like yeast, crops, and farm animals. Respondents were asked whether such science and technology in general was likely to improve life in the next 20 years. They were also asked for their views on the morality of applying biotechnology to animals and the value of specific areas of research like plant and animal breeding and the development of hardier micro-organisms for food and waste processing. A series of questions tested respondents' objective knowledge of biotechnology, asking them to state whether particular domains such as cancer research or the treatment of hereditary human diseases were linked to biotechnology. In addition, self-ratings of competency on these questions were obtained, and respondents indicated and evaluated their sources of information on technology and development. This survey also introduced a new set of questions on individuals' personal experience with the Single European Market through the purchase of goods or services from other member states of the EC. Respondents were asked to provide objective information on the particular kinds of products or services bought or sold, and methods of payment used. They evaluated their satisfaction with such transactions, and assessed the levels of quality and standards expected from each of the EC member countries with which they had dealt. Demographic data collected on respondents include gender, age, marital status, occupation, religion and religiosity, age at completion of education, left-right political self-placement, political and trade union participation, household income, number of people in household, number of children under 15 in household, subjective membership in social class, home ownership, type of community, size of locality, and region of residence. Actively employed respondents were asked a series of questions (A.1 to A.34) regarding health and safety at work. For results see EURO-BAROMETER 35A: WORKING CONDITIONS, MARCH-APRIL 1991 [ICPSR 9696].
Curated
Euro-barometer 39.1: Energy Policies, Biotechnology, and Genetic Engineering, May-June 1993 (ICPSR 6196)
Released/updated on: 1996-12-10
Geographic coverage: Europe, United Kingdom, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 1993-05-01--1993-06-01
This round of Euro-Barometer surveys queried respondents on standard Euro-Barometer measures such as public awareness of and attitudes toward the Common Market and the European Community (EC), and also focused on biotechnology, genetic engineering, and energy policies. Respondents were questioned about their opinions regarding the application of biotechnology and genetic engineering to humans, animals, and plants. Opinions were also gathered on the need for ethical rules for the application of biotechnology, the use of biotechnology for changing hereditary characteristics, the need to balance animal and human welfare, the effectiveness of traditional breeding methods compared to genetic engineering, protection of the environment, and the influence of people and groups on the development of biotechnology. Energy-related topics covered the efficiency of public bodies in acting to conserve energy, the responsibility for energy investment decisions, the importance of stable energy prices, reliable energy supplies, and low pollution risks, and proposals to increase taxes on energy consumption and on packaging that pollutes the environment. In addition, respondents were queried about their satisfaction with their current housing, the area in which they lived, and the travel time from home to work. Respondent willingness to move in order to find or change jobs and their reasons for moving or not moving were also probed. On EC matters, respondents were asked about their satisfaction with and expectations for product purchases in other EC countries, whether national institutions of the relevant EC country or EC institutions were better able to solve potential buying or selling problems with other EC member states, and whether the respondent lived within 30 kilometres of another EC country. Demographic and other background information was gathered on number of people residing in the home, size of locality, home ownership, trade union membership, region of residence, and occupation of the head of household, as well as the respondent's age, sex, marital status, education, occupation, work sector, religiosity, subjective social class, left-right political self-placement, and opinion leadership.
Curated
Eurobarometer 46.1: Modern Biotechnology, Privacy on Computer Networks, and the Common European Currency, October-November 1996 (ICPSR 6940)
Released/updated on: 2000-12-14
Geographic coverage: Europe, United Kingdom, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 1996-10-18--1996-11-22
This round of Eurobarometer surveys queried respondents on standard Eurobarometer measures such as public awareness of and attitudes toward the European Union (EU), and also focused on modern biotechnology, the common European currency, and privacy on computer networks. With respect to modern biotechnology issues, respondents were asked for their opinions regarding which organizations should regulate modern biotechnology, and the likelihood that in the next 20 years biotechnology would lead to events such as reducing environmental pollution and world hunger, creating dangerous new diseases, solving more crimes through genetic fingerprinting, curing genetic diseases, and producing designer babies. Computer network privacy issues covered respondents' worries about leaving "electronic tracks" of personal identifying information when using computer network services and concerns about the use of information collected from network services for advertising, or by shops, insurance companies, or public bodies. Other data protection questions probed for respondents' willingness to use new communication technologies and electronic services considering that someone else might use their personal information, awareness and concern about using a means of payment on networks that might leave tracks, awareness of laws that protect privacy, the importance of the EU trying to protect personal information, and the importance of worldwide privacy of personal information. Also covered were respondent interest in on-screen computer or television network technologies and in the capabilities these technologies provide, such as getting a medical opinion on a health issue, an on-line guided tour of a museum, receiving instant access to newspapers, taking part in a training program, making it easier to look for a job, taking part in discussion groups, receiving and sending electronic mail, managing bank and financial accounts, and organizing a trip. Common European currency items included whether respondents were for or against one European currency in all member states and why, how well-informed they felt about the common European currency, their knowledge of the conditions member countries must meet in order to join the European Economic and Monetary Union, when notes and coins in the European currency would be introduced, their own country's ability to take part in the Single European Currency in 1999, the consequences for not participating, and what the rate of introduction should be for the common European currency. Questions asked only in Sweden concerned attitudes toward expanding or reducing nuclear power, the respondent's three favorite activities, and highest level of education completed. Demographic items include age, gender, marital status, household size, monthly income, age when stopped full-time education, and occupation.
Curated
Eurobarometer 52.1: Modern Biotechnology, Quality of Life, and Consumers' Access to Justice, November-December 1999 (ICPSR 2893)
Released/updated on: 2010-05-05
Geographic coverage: Europe, United Kingdom, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 1999-11-01--1999-12-15
This round of Eurobarometer surveys queried respondents on standard Eurobarometer measures such as public awareness of and attitudes toward the European Union (EU), and also focused on applications of modern biotechnology, quality of life and lifestyle, the EC symbol, and consumers' access to justice. Respondents were asked whether they believed that new, developing technologies such as biotechnology and genetic engineering, computers and information technology, telecommunications, the Internet, new materials and substances, solar energy, space exploration, and nuclear energy would improve their lives over the next 20 years. They were also prompted for what came to mind when they thought of modern biotechnology, and if they had a positive or negative opinion about specific areas of biotechnology such as the cloning of animals or humans, health research, and genetically engineered food. Those queried were asked to indicate whether a number of statements having to do with modern biotechnology were true or false, including "There are bacteria that live in waste water" and "Yeast for brewing beer consists of living organisms." They were also asked to agree or disagree that various applications of modern biotechnology are useful, a risk for society, morally acceptable, or should be encouraged. Agreement/disagreement was also sought on a number of statements, such as "Cloning animals will bring benefits to a lot of people," "Genetically modified food will bring benefits to a lot of people," "I would buy genetically modified fruits if they tasted better," and "I feel sufficiently informed about biotechnology." Respondents were asked if they felt that the various entities involved in modern technology (i.e., newspapers and magazines, the biotechnology industry, ethics committees, consumer organizations, environmental groups, the government, shops, farmers, churches, and doctors) were doing a good job for society and which sources, if any, they could trust to tell the truth about modern biotechnology. Regarding quality of life, respondents were asked about their satisfaction with life in general, their health, the health care system, family life, social life, personal safety, their financial situation, employment situation, home, and neighborhood. They were asked how their current satisfaction in these areas compared to two years ago and if they thought they would be more or less satisfied in these areas two years from now. From a list of 15 choices, respondents were asked to select three factors that contributed most to their current quality of life and three that would most improve it. Given a list of places people might visit (e.g., work, a health center, the hospital, the supermarket, etc.), respondents were asked how long it would take to get there and to which places they would walk. Other questions queried respondents about their current standard of living and monthly income, whether they had a healthy lifestyle, had a good diet, exercised, drank alcohol, smoked, or were stressed, whether in the last 12 months they had consulted a family doctor, a dentist, or a medical specialist, whether they had been a patient in a hospital or clinic for overnight or longer, and if they had any long-standing illness, disability, or infirmity that limited their activities. They were also asked what types of leisure activities they participated in and which they would do, or do more of, if they had more time. In addition, respondents were asked if the Internet, personal computers, or mobile phones were positive or negative in terms of their quality of life, if the government should spend more to ensure everyone access to these new technologies, and if respondents had participated in training activities related to these new technologies. Several questions about the poor and the socially excluded asked if respondents had given money, goods, or their time to help these groups and if, in their opinion, housing authorities, employment services, social services, religious institutions, charities, businesses, trade unions, their family, the European Union, or the poor themselves currently provided the most help. Another series of questions asked respondents about the EC symbol -- its meaning, who put it on products, on which items they had seen the symbol, and how often they took the symbol into account when they bought products. They were asked how well informed they felt as consumers, in what form they would like to get information on their rights as a consumer (i.e., an outline, a detailed booklet, a complete description, a videotape, etc.), if they had ever had to complain about a purchase, whom they complained to or would complain to, and whether they complained or would complain in person, by phone, in writing, by e-mail, or in some other fashion. They were asked if they had heard of bodies such as arbitrators, counselors, ombudsmen, etc., that deal with consumer disputes and if they would be willing to bring their problem before one of these agents or if they had fears about them. Further questions queried respondents about whether in the last five years they had had a problem that they could not get resolved, what type of product or service was involved, and what they did when they could not resolve the problem. They were questioned as to the minimum amount it would take to bring the problem to court, why they would not bring it to court for less, whether they had insurance that would cover the legal costs, if they would be more likely to go to court if they joined other consumers with the same problem, what would most encourage them to defend their rights in court, in whom they had the most confidence to defend consumers in court, how much confidence they had in the courts to settle disputes, and who could best protect consumer interests. Similar questions were asked concerning products bought abroad -- the amount it would take to bring the dispute to court, if they had ever had a problem with a product or service bought abroad, if they did anything about the problem, how satisfied they were with the results, and if it would be useful to have one form that could be used throughout the European Union to complain about a product or service problem. Information was also collected on whether anyone in the household owned a color TV, a video recorder, a video camera, a clock radio, a home computer, a still camera, an electric drill, an electric deep-fat fryer, two or more cars, or a second or holiday home. Standard demographic information collected included age, sex, nationality, left-right political self-placement, marital status, age at completion of education, number of people in household, number of children in household, current occupation, previous occupation, religiosity, household income, type of residence, size of locality,region of residence, and nationality.
Curated
Eurobarometer 55.2: Science and Technology, Agriculture, the Euro, and Internet Access, May-June 2001 (ICPSR 3341)
Released/updated on: 2010-06-30
Geographic coverage: Europe, United Kingdom, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 2001-05-10--2001-06-15
This round of Eurobarometer surveys, which diverged from the standard topics, focused on respondents' views of science and technology, the Internet, agriculture, and the single European currency, the euro. Respondents were asked to identify the scientific and technological developments in which they were most interested and to rank a number of information sources in their importance as sources of information about science and technology. They were asked if they had visited a museum of science and technology or another type of public museum in the past 12 months and how they would rate a variety of subjects, including such fields as biology, history, and astrology, in terms of whether or not they were scientific. A number of factual questions drawn from various scientific areas were posed, and respondents also gave their opinions on several other topics, including mad cow disease, genetically engineered food, how a drug should be tested for effectiveness, and the role of science and technology in safeguarding the environment and improving life in general. Other items measured respondents' level of trust in science, respondents' views on the role science and technology should have in improving the economy, and the potential benefits or harmful effects of science. Respondents also expressed their views on the role of ethics and responsibility in scientific research, who should be blamed for the mad cow disease problem and how such problems should be prevented. Other items elicited respondents' views on media coverage of scientific and technological topics, their levels of trust in and regard for various professions, the possible reasons for a declining interest in scientific careers among European young people, and the potential effects of that decline. The European Union (EU) was a focus of several questions, including which policy areas respondents believed the EU was active in, which it should be active in, and whether respondents supported research at the European, as opposed to the national, level. They also answered a number of questions designed to elicit their opinions on the current state of European research and how it could be improved. Respondents were asked to give their views on the EU agriculture policy, such as what its purpose was, what its purpose should be, and whether it had been effective in achieving its purpose. Further questions focused on the euro, including respondents' level of interest in the euro, how well informed they believed they were about the euro, and other questions designed to gauge their general knowledge of the euro. Respondents were asked whether they had used the euro before, if not, the reasons why, and their likelihood of using the euro in the future. Other items queried respondents about dual pricing in shops where prices in both the euro and national currency were displayed and the impending changeover from national currencies to the euro. An additional set of questions focused on the Internet. Respondents stated whether they used the Internet, and if so, where. If they did not use the Internet, respondents were asked to state the reasons why, and how they could be encouraged to use it. Respondents also described any computer training they had received, and the sorts of information they would like to find on the Internet. Finally, respondents who used the Internet were asked to identify the ways the Internet had changed their daily lives and, if they did not use the Internet, the ways in which they expected the Internet to change their daily lives. Demographic data on respondents includes nationality, political affiliation, marital status, education, gender, age, occupation, and income.
Curated
Eurobarometer 58.0: Services of General Interest, New Technologies, ICT, Health, Environment, and Public Safety, September-October 2002 (ICPSR 3661)
Released/updated on: 2010-04-26
Geographic coverage: Europe, United Kingdom, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Norway, Luxembourg, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 2002-09-01--2002-10-16
This round of Eurobarometer surveys queried respondents on standard Eurobarometer measures, such as how satisfied they were with their present life, whether they attempted to persuade others close to them to share their views on subjects they held strong opinions about, whether they discussed political matters, and what the European Union's priorities should be. Additional questions focused on the respondents' knowledge of and opinions about the European Union (EU), including sources of information about the EU and whether their country had benefited from being an EU member. This round included six general topics: services of general interest, new technologies, ICT (information communication technologies), health, environment, and public safety. In addition, demographic information was obtained. (1)The services of general interest topic included questions assessing accessibility, fairness in pricing, quality of service, clarity of information received, fairness in terms/conditions of contracts, complaints made, and customer service quality for the following services: mobile phone, fixed telephone, electricity supply, gas supply, water supply, postal services, transport services within towns/cities, and rail services between towns/cities. (2) The new technologies topic included questions about developing technologies, and whether they would improve the quality of life in the next 20 years. New technologies listed included solar energy, computers and information technology, biotechnology, genetic engineering, telecommunications, space exploration, the Internet, nuclear energy, nanotechnology, and mobile phones. Respondents were asked to what degree they were interested in, felt informed about, or found difficult to follow or understand politics, science and technology, and health. Further questions focused on biotechnology (broadly including genetic engineering and genetically modified foods). Respondents were asked to assess as either true or false statements such as the following: bacteria exist that live on waste water, genetically modified animals are larger than ordinary ones, and criminal tendencies are genetically inherited. With regard to applications of biotechnology (for food production or therapeutic cloning), respondents were asked whether they had heard of them, to what extent they had found them useful, and to what extent they believed they were a risk, morally acceptable, or encouraged them. Respondents also rated the most important and second most important issue with regard to new technologies. Respondents were then asked whether they tended to agree or disagree with statements regarding the utility, safety, and accuracy of judgment on genetically modified foods or cloning cells. All respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the statements that they would eat, buy, discuss, or support genetically modified foods, and whether they supported cloning research. Other questions probed whether different groups, such as newspapers, university scientists, government, and the European Commission, were doing a good job with regard to biotechnology. Respondents' level of trust in various groups was also gauged, and respondents also indicated whether they had discussed or read anything regarding biotechnology. Respondents indicated whether they agreed with various statements having to do with the ethical and philosophical aspects of new technology. (3) The ICT (information communication technologies) topic included questions regarding the use of a computer and other media devices (mobile phone, personal organizers, cable/satellite/digital TV). Respondents assessed their use of computers and the Internet to find or keep a job, communicate with family or friends, and to buy products or services. Questions related to computer training, such as the extent of training/qualifications, self-assessment of skill, and use of the Internet in daily life, were also asked. (4) Questions about the topic of health sought to identify sources of health information, use of the Internet as a health information source, and trust in various sources such as consumer organizations, trade unions, government, and media. (5) Questions about the environment included the extent to which respondents worried about aspects of the environment such as the ozone layer, acid rain, pollution of rivers and lakes, and waste management, and the extent to which they felt informed about these issues. Questions regarding personal efficacy, sources of information, trust in various groups, level of government involvement, and solutions to environmental problems were also posed. (6) Questions about the topic of public safety probed respondents' perceived level of safety, belief in the risk of theft or burglary within the next year, and agreement or disagreement on statements relating to public safety (such as burglar alarms can reduce crime, poverty leads to crime, and organized crime has infiltrated the economy). Demographic and other background information provided includes respondent's age, gender, nationality, marital status, left-right political self-placement, occupation, age at completion of education, household income, region of residence, and subjective size of community.
Curated
Eurobarometer 64.3: Foreign Languages, Biotechnology, Organized Crime, and Health Items, November-December 2005 (ICPSR 4590)
Released/updated on: 2010-06-23
Geographic coverage: Cyprus, Portugal, Global, Malta, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Latvia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Europe, United Kingdom, Spain, Czech Republic, Turkey, Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Germany, Estonia
Time period: 2005-11-05--2005-12-07
This round of Eurobarometer surveys diverged from the standard Eurobarometer measures and queried respondents on (1) foreign languages, (2) biotechnology, (3) organized crime and corruption, (4) health consciousness, (5) smoking, (6) AIDS prevention, (7) medical errors, and (8) consumer rights. For the first topic, foreign languages, respondents were asked to identify their native language, and first, second, and third foreign languages spoken, including proficiency and frequency of use. In addition, respondents were asked to identify the main reasons to learn a new language, methods used in learning, and barriers preventing learning. Respondents' opinions were sought regarding the best age to start learning a first and second new language, language support, and whether there should be a common language used throughout the European Union (EU). For the second topic, respondents were asked about their understanding of biotechnology, including gene therapy, pharmacogenetics, genetically modified foods and plants, nanotechnology, stem cell research, and its application in industry. Respondents' opinions were sought regarding the use of these techniques, governing safety and regulatory processes, new technology development, and integration of biotechnology into society. Respondents were also queried about their knowledge of science and politics and discussion of these matters with others, their opinions regarding entity involvement, including the EU, in utilizing or advancing biotechnology, and their personal political involvement in this area. For the third topic, organized crime and corruption, respondents were asked to identify the degree of national corruption, sources where corruption exists, a regulatory force in reducing it, and any personal involvement with corruption, in addition to providing an opinion about whether information sharing or policy development may reduce corruption. For the fourth topic, health consciousness, respondents were asked about their current state of health, breastfeeding, dieting, views on eating, foods consumed, changes in eating or drinking patterns and associated reasons for these changes, ease of and barriers to eating healthily, and exercise. Respondents were asked about their knowledge of sports and physical activity, and their opinion about obesity among adults and children. For the fifth topic, smoking, respondents were asked about their smoking habits and use with other substances, sensitivity to smoke, knowledge about second-hand smoke, exposure to tobacco cessation campaigns, and the likelihood of quitting. In addition, respondents were asked to provide an opinion about smoking bans in public places and the consumption of alcohol and tobacco among pregnant women. For the sixth topic, AIDS prevention, respondents were asked about their knowledge of AIDS transmission, changes in personal behaviors influenced by AIDS, and their opinions regarding current national measures in managing the AIDS pandemic and the potential coordination with the EU. For the seventh topic, medical errors, respondents were asked about their awareness of incidents of medical errors in their country, the significance of those errors, personal experience of a medical error, the likelihood of avoiding an error, and their degree of concern about suffering a medical error. For the eighth and final topic covered by this survey, consumer rights, those respondents living in Poland were asked about where and how often they saw or heard information about consumer rights, how frequently the media talked about consumer rights, and who in the media was the source of this information. Respondents were also asked whether they had heard a particular message and to define the meaning of that message, to evaluate Poland's consumer rights in comparison to other EU countries, and to assess the effectiveness of the justice system in protecting consumer rights. In addition, respondents were queried about their knowledge of consumer rights in certain situations, which organizations they would trust to provide correct advice and information about consumer rights, and whether they would refer others to a specific organization that deals with consumer rights, Federacja Konsumentow. Demographic and other background information includes respondent's age, gender, height, and weight, nationality, origin of birth (personal and parental), religious affiliation and involvement, marital status, left-to-right political self-placement, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, use of a fixed or a mobile telephone, size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Eurobarometer 73.1: The European Parliament, Biotechnology, and Science and Technology, January-February 2010 (ICPSR 31483)
Released/updated on: 2013-02-14
Geographic coverage: Cyprus, Portugal, Iceland, Global, Malta, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Latvia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Europe, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Spain, Czech Republic, Turkey, Belgium, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Germany, Estonia
Time period: 2010-01-29--2010-02-25
The Eurobarometer series is a unique cross-national and cross-temporal survey program conducted on behalf of the European Commission. These surveys regularly monitor public opinion in the European Union (EU) member countries and consist of standard modules and special topic modules. The standard modules address attitudes towards European unification, institutions and policies, measurements for general socio-political orientations, as well as respondent and household demographics. The special topic modules address such topics as agriculture, education, natural environment and resources, public health, public safety and crime, and science and technology.
This round of Eurobarometer surveys covers: (1) knowledge, opinions of, policies, and values of the European Parliament (EP); (2) biotechnology; (3) science and technology. Technology questions pertain to knowledge, opinions, and effects of genetically modified food, nanotechnology, animal clothing, synthetic biology, and biobanks emerging in the next 20 years, as well as opinions on regenerative medicine, including stem cell research, resistance genes, bio-fuels, and global warming. Other questions address interest in, knowledge of, and engagement with science and technology, collaborative research across Europe funded by the EU, level of EU investment in research, young people's interest in science, and women's representation in scientific professions.
Demographic and other background information collected includes age, gender, nationality, marital status, age when stopped full-time education, occupation, left-right political self-placement, political party attachment, household composition, religious affiliation and participation, ownership of a fixed or a mobile telephone and other durable goods, difficulties paying bills, level in society, and Internet use. In addition, country-specific data includes type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (select countries).
Curated
Late Parenting and Biotechnology: Rethinking Age, Gender, Family, and the Life Course (ICPSR 35835)
Released/updated on: 2015-04-28
Geographic coverage: United States
This project collects qualitative data based on interviews of 100 parents, partnered and single, in two interview sessions over 24 months. Respondents are couples who have conceived with in vitro fertilization where the woman was at least 40 years of age at the time of conception. For couples, the first interview is a joint interview and the second is an individual interview. Single participants are also interviewed twice.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
National Survey of the Public's Moral Concerns about Biobank Research, [United States], 2014 (ICPSR 37179)
Released/updated on: 2018-12-13
Geographic coverage: United States
The National Survey of the Public's Moral Concerns about Biobank Research was designed to explore the effect of "Non-Welfare Interests" (NWIs) on the public's willingness to donate to a biobank. NWIs refer to the moral, religious, or cultural concerns that potential donors may have with how their donated bio-specimens could be used. Respondents were presented with 7 NWI research scenarios and were then asked whether they would be willing to provide blanket (or broad) consent knowing such research might be conducted. The survey also asked about respondents' preferences for 5 biobank consent policies, ranging from blanket (or broad) consent to real-time specific (or study-by-study) consent. A variety of additional sociodemographic and attitudinal data were collected, including responses to the Research Attitudes Questionnaire (RAQ)--a measure of trust in medical research. Additional demographic information collected includes religion, political affiliation, age, education, race, gender, household composition, income, marital status, region, and employment status.
Self-published
test (ICPSR 300500)
Released/updated on: 2026-05-18
Geographic coverage: Detroit, Michigan, United States, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
Time period: 1995-01-01--2021-01-01
test
Curated
United States Biotechnology Study, 1997-1998 (ICPSR 3030)
Released/updated on: 2000-12-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1997-11-01--1998-02-01
Fielded November 11, 1997, through February 14, 1998, this study collected data from United States citizens aged 18 and older regarding their interest in and attentiveness to selected current news issues, knowledge of and attitudes toward biotechnology, various forms of political participation, and knowledge of scientific concepts. Conducted not long after the 1996 Eurobarometer Survey (EUROBAROMETER 46.1: MODERN BIOTECHNOLOGY, PRIVACY ON COMPUTER NETWORKS, AND THE COMMON EUROPEAN CURRENCY, OCTOBER-NOVEMBER 1996 [ICPSR 6940]), this study posed some questions similar to those asked of European respondents. To begin the interview, respondents were asked how interested they were in selected news issues, including agriculture and farm events, economic and business conditions, new scientific and medical discoveries, new inventions and technologies, environmental pollution, and quality and cost of health care services, and how well informed they felt about these issues. They were asked how often they read a newspaper, what magazines and newsletters they read regularly, and whether new technologies such as solar energy, computers and information technology, biotechnology, genetic engineering, telecommunications, and space exploration would improve our way of life over the next 20 years. Respondents were also queried on the meaning of the term "modern biotechnology" and asked if they had heard or read anything about modern biotechnology in the last three months, where they heard or read about it, what they had heard or read, and how they would get more information on the subject if they wanted it. They were asked if they knew about the cloning of Dolly the sheep, whether they understood the terms "DNA" and "molecule", and whether they knew about specific applications of biotechnology used for food and drink production, plant and crop genetics for pest resistance, human genetics for medicine and for organ transplant, and detection of serious diseases in unborn children. Respondents were also asked whether these applications were useful, risky, or morally acceptable to society, whether the practices should be encouraged, and how much trust they would have in groups such as the American Medical Association, the Food and Drug Administration, university scientists, food manufacturers, the National Institutes of Health, news reporters, the United States Department of Agriculture, TIME or NEWSWEEK, and CONSUMER REPORTS if these groups were to make public statements about the safety of biotechnology. Agreement or disagreement was sought regarding statements about topics such as informed citizens' influence on government science and technology policies, federal funding of knowledge-advancing scientific research, pain and injury to laboratory animals for human benefit, current biotechnology regulations, personal or family benefits from biotechnology, religion and biotechnology, public involvement in biotechnology policies, and whether respondents supported or opposed biotechnology and why. Respondents were read a list of human attributes, including eye color, intelligence, happiness, athletic ability, work attitude, and musical ability, and asked if they thought each was inherited or learned. They were further queried as to whether, in the next 20 years, modern biotechnology would cause a reduction in environmental pollution, world hunger, or the range of fruits and vegetables available, create new diseases, cure most genetic diseases, improve Third World natural resource yield, produce designer babies, or replace most existing food products. Respondents were asked for their understanding of the term "scientific study" and to determine the truth of a set of statements having to do with bacteria, viruses, senility, cloning, the human immune system, and animal, human, and plant genetics. In addition, they were asked how important biotechnology issues were to them personally, how informed they felt about biotechnology, and if they had ever talked about this subject with someone prior to the interview. Demographic attributes collected include political participation (including whether the respondent had written or spoken to any public official during the past year, their party affiliation, and who they voted for in 1996), religious affiliation and participation, marital status, number of adults and children in the household, educational attainment and field of study (including specific science and math courses taken in high school and any current studies), current employment status and occupation, computer usage at work, pets, language spoken at home, computer ownership, World Wide Web access and usage, smoking, geographic location, race, age, and gender.