Publications
Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A., Kim, E., & Lewenstein, B. V. (forthcoming). Religiosity as a perceptual filter: Examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology. Public Understanding of Science.
Nisbet, M. C., Scheufele, D. A. (2007). The future of public engagement [Cover article]. The Scientist, 21(10), 38-44.
Scheufele, D. A., Corley, E. A., Dunwoody, S., Shih, T., Hillback, E., & Guston, D. (2007). Scientists worry about some risks more than the public. Nature Nanotechnology, 2(12), 732 - 734.
Scheufele, D. A. (2007). Nano does not have a marketing problem … yet. Nano Today, 2(5), 48.
Lee, C., & Scheufele, D. A. (2006). The influence of knowledge and deference toward scientific authority: A media effects model for public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(4), 819-834.
Scheufele, D. A. & Lewenstein, B. (2005). The public and nanotechnology: How citizens make sense of emerging technologies. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(6), 659-667.
Scheufele, D. A. (2007). Opinion climates, spirals of silence, and biotechnology: Public opinion as a heuristic for scientific decision making. In D. Brossard, J. Shanahan, and T. C. Nesbit (Eds.), The public, the media, and agricultural biotechnology: An international casebook (pp. 231-241). Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press/CABI.
Scheufele, D. A. (2006). Five lessons in nano outreach. Materials Today, 9(5), 64.
Scheufele, D. A. (2006). Messages and heuristics: How audiences form attitudes about emerging technologies. In J. Turney (Ed.), Engaging science: Thoughts, deeds, analysis and action (pp. 20-25). London: The Wellcome Trust.
Lee, C., Scheufele, D. A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2005). Public attitudes toward emerging technologies: Examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public support for nanotechnology. Science Communication, 27(2), 240-267.
Scheufele, D. A. (2005). The “scientific citizen” and nanotech: Chasing an unrealistic ideal? Small Times.
Powell, M.,& Kleinman, D. L.(in press). Building citizen capacities for participation in technoscientific decisionmaking: The democratic virtues of the consensus conference model. Public Understanding of Science.
Kleinman, D. L., Powell M., Grice, J., Adrian, J., & Lobes, C. ( 2007). A toolkit for democratizing science and technology policy: The practical mechanics of organizing a consensus conference. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 27(2), 154-169.