public-at-large believed to exert any significant 

 influence over decisions, while at the same time 

 the public was thought to be the group most 

 entitled to have such influence. Technical 

 experts rated quite highly; they were seen as 

 legitimately exercising a great deal of influence 

 in every area. There was considerably less 

 support for Executive Branch leaders in the 

 Government, and for business leaders. These 

 results can be compared with the consistently 

 high standings that scientists (and engineers) 

 hold in the public's esteem, in comparison with 

 other professionals, in the studies previously 

 discussed. 



Questions were also asked about the impact 

 that the respondents anticipated from a list of 

 future technologies. Mainly beneficial results 

 were expected from most of the technologies 

 listed: particularly, urban rail transit and solar 

 energy. The only predominantly negative 

 responses were to genetic engineering and 

 massive data banks of information about the 

 public, but there was also relatively little 

 support for the anti-ballistic missile, the SST, 

 and space travel. The public proved to have 

 quite different reactions to different 

 technologies. Previous studies have also in- 

 quired about public reaction to different 

 technologies, but it is difficult to make a 

 quantitative comparison because of the 

 different technologies considered and the 

 different questions asked. 



In general, hopes for benefits from future 

 technology were most often expressed in terms 

 of the directly intended consequence of that 

 technology — some improvement in instrumen- 

 tal technique. Fears about harms, on the other 

 hand, were most often expressed in terms of 

 unintended, indirect consequences for social or 

 political values such as the economy, the 

 environment, or political rights. General anxie- 

 ty toward all technologies appeared to decrease 

 from 1972 to 1974, as a more focused concern 

 about the negative aspects of particular 

 technologies emerged. This qualified con- 

 fidence was paralleled by an increase in 



confidence in scientific activities. The single 

 instance of significantly increased support for a 

 technology was the enhanced attractiveness to 

 the "potential public" of developments in the 

 space program. The authors find this develop- 

 ment to be due largely to an increase of interest 

 in the scientific information that this program 

 can produce. Demographic analyses showed 

 that a certain group might very well value one 

 technology and fear another. 



SUMMARY (Part II) 



The survey data that have been described in 

 Part II areclearly very incomplete. For example, 

 much more needs to be done to survey the 

 attitudes of different groups within the broad 

 public. Some studies have attempted to 

 separate attitudes toward science and toward 

 technology, to distinguish between different 

 technologies, and to distinguish attitudes 

 toward fields from attitudes toward those who 

 work in them. This work should be extended 

 and continued over time, so that changes in 

 attitude can be followed. Moreover, some 

 studies contain the explicit suggestion that they 

 may be reporting only superficial and unin- 

 formed opinions that may easily change, and 

 may not express any serious convictions or 

 intentions. This too is an area for further work, 

 especially with regard to the depth of under- 

 standing of science and the motivations that 

 underlie public attitudes. Finally, the results of 

 separate studies have been compared without 

 critically probing the question of the consisten- 

 cy between them or the validity of individual 

 surveys. 



Because of these limitations in the data only 

 tentative conclusions can be offered. Perhaps 

 the clearest conclusion is that there has been a 

 general drop in the public's esteem for public 

 institutions generally since the middle 1960's. 

 In absolute terms, scientists have shared in this 

 drop, but in comparison with other 

 professionals they have held their own or even 

 gained. The public also has a high degree of 



CONFIDENCE IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



91 



