Factoids, factettes and fallacies: the problem of crossover research in the analysis of consumer responses to biotechnology

Abstract

A sound appreciation of the factors governing community acceptance of innovation in biotechnology is crucially important to the ability of biotechnology to deliver solutions to problems of socio-economic and public health importance. However, much of the research on consumer acceptance has been carried out by individuals with formal expertise in fields other than the analysis of human behaviour. This crossover research results in a body of work that is based substantially on a relatively naïve, untutored approach to human behavioural science rather than on a thorough grounding in the subject. This paper describes, with examples, the potential for fundamental conceptual and methodological deficiencies to give rise to apparently plausible but misguided conclusions about consumer attitudes and behaviour and how they could be influenced. It is argued that, for biotechnological innovations to achieve their full potential for benefit, the appraisal of consumer and community reactions should be conducted using the same methodological standards and scientific rigour as those used to generate the innovations themselves.