Business engagement with scienceOpening the black box of perception of science in the business sector

Referencias bibliográficas

• Alam, A.; Uddin, M.; Yazdifar, H. (2019). Institutional DETERMINANTS of R&D INVESTMENT: Evidence from Emerging Markets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 138, 34-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.007
• Allum, N.; Sturgis, P; Tabourazi, D.; Brunton-Smith, I. (2008). Science Knowledge and Attitudes Across Cultures: A Meta-Analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 17 (1), 35-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506070159
• Arvanitis, S.; Woerter, M. (2014). Firm Characteristics and the Cyclicality of R&D Investments. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23 (5), 1141-1169. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtt013
• Bates, S. R.; Faulkner, W.; Parry, S.; and Cunningham-Burley, S. (2010). 'How do we Know it's not been done yet?!' Trust, Trust Building and Regulation in Stem Cell Research. Science and Public Policy, 37 (9), 703-718. https://doi.org/10.1093/spp/37.9.703
• Bauer, M. W; Durant, J. (1999). Trends in Public Understanding in Britain 1988-1996. London: LSE/Science Museum.
• Bauer, M. W.; Durant, J.; Evans, G. (1994). European Public Perceptions of Science. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 6 (2), 163-186. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/6.2.163
• Bauer, M. W. (2009). The Evolution of Public Understanding of Science. Discourse and Comparative Evidence. Science, Technology & Society, 14 (2), 221-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/097172180901400202
• Bauer, M. W. (2012). Science Culture and its Indicators. In: Schiele, B.; Claessens, M.; Shi, S. (eds.), Science Communication in the World. Dordrecht: Springer, 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4279-6_20
• Bauer, M. W. (2014). A Word from the Editor on the Special Issue on 'Public Engagement'. Public Understanding of Science, 23 (1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513518149 PMid:24434704
• Bauer, M. W.; Allum, N.; Miller, S. (2007). What can we Learn from 25 Years of PUS Survey Research? Liberating and Expanding the Agenda. Public Understanding of Science, 16 (1), 79-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506071287
• Bauer, M. W.; Petkova, K.; Boyadjieva, P. (2000). Public Knowledge of and Attitudes to Science: Alternative Measures that may End the "Science War". Science, Technology, & Human Values, 25 (1), 30-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390002500102
• Bauer, M. W.; Shukla, R.; Allum, N. (2012). The Culture of Science: How the Public Relates to Science Across the Globe. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203813621
• BBVA Foundation (2012). Estudio internacional de cultura científica de la Fundación BBVA [International study about scientific culture by BBVA Foundation]. Available at: https://www.fbbva.es/TLFU/dat/comprension.pdf [accessed 14 December 2020].
• Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
• Besley, J. C. (2018). The National Science Foundation's Science and Technology Survey and Support for Science Funding, 2006-2014. Public Understanding of Science, 27 (1), 94-109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516649803 PMid:27233295
• Block, E. S.; Erskine, L. (2012) Interviewing by Telephone: Specific Considerations, Opportunities, and Challenges. The International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11 (4), 428-445. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100409
• Bodmer, W. (1985). The Public Understanding of Science. London: The Royal Society. https://doi.org/10.2307/2981942
• Bogardus, E. S. (1933). A social distance scale. Sociology & Social Research, 17, 265-271.
• Bolsen, T.; Palm, R.; Kingsland, J. T. (2019). The Impact of Message Source on the Effectiveness of Communications About Climate Change. Science Communication, 41 (4), 464-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019863154
• Brossard, D.; Lewenstein, B. V. (2009). A Critical Appraisal of Models Of Public Understanding of Science: Using Practice to Inform Theory. In: Kahlor, L. A.; and Stout, P. (eds.) Communicating Science: New Agendas in Communication, 25-53. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203867631-9
• Cámara, M.; Muñoz van den Eynde, A.; López Cerezo, J. A. (2017). Attitudes Towards Science Among Spanish Citizens: The Case of Critical Engagers. Public Understanding of Science, 27 (6), 690-707. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517719172 PMid:28816092
• Cea D'Ancona, M.A. (1996). Metodología cuantitativa. Estrategias y técnicas de investigación. Madrid: Síntesis Sociología.
• Collins, H. (1985). Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226113821.001.0001
• Couto, J. P. A.; Vieira, J. C. (2004). National Culture and Research and Development Activities. Multinational Business Review 12(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.1108/1525383X200400002
• Davies, S. (2011). Regional Resilience in the 2008-2010 Downturn: Comparative Evidence from European Countries. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 4(3), 369-382. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsr019
• Den Hertog, R. G. (1993). Determinants of Internal and External R&D: some Dutch Evidence. De Economist, 141 (2), 279-289. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01717384
• Díaz-Catalán, C.; López-Navarro, I.; Rey-Rocha, J.; Cabrera, P. (2019). Influence of Individual and Group Variables on the Attitude of Spanish Researchers towards the Transfer of Knowledge and Cooperation with Private and Public Actors. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 42 (2), e232. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2019.2.1576
• Dierkes, M.; Von Grote, C. (2005). Between Understanding and Trust: the Public, Science and Technology. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203988978
• Doloreux, D.; Shearmur, R.; Rodríguez, M. (2016). Determinants of R&D in Knowledge-Intensive Business Services Firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 25 (4), 391-405. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2015.1067001
• Dosi, G.; Llerena, P.; Labini, M. S. (2006). The Relationships Between Science, Technologies and their Industrial Exploitation: an Illustration Through ihe Myths and Realities of the So-Called 'European Paradox'. Research Policy, 35 (10), 1450-1464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.012
• Durant, J. R.; Evans, G. A.; Thomas, G. P. (1989). The Public Understanding of Science. Nature, 340, 11-14. https://doi.org/10.1038/340011a0 PMid:2739718
• Einsiedel, E. F. (2000). Understanding ́Publics ́ in the Public Understanding of Science. In: Dierkes, M.; and von Grote, C. (eds.) Between Understanding and Trust: The Public, Science and Technology, 205-216. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic.
• Einsiedel, E. F. (1994). Mental Maps Of Science: Knowledge and Attitudes Among Canadian Adults. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 6 (1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/6.1.35
• Elzinga, A.; Jamison, A. (1995). Changing Policy Agendas in Science and Technology. In: Jasanoff, S. et al. (eds.) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 572-597. London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412990127.n25
• European Commission (1995). Green Paper on Innovation. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• European Commission (1977). Science and European Public Opinion. Brussels: European Commission.
• European Commission (2013). Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), Science and Technology. Brussels: European Commission.
• Eurostat (2020). Science, Technology and Innovation Database. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/science-technology-innovation/data/database [accessed 14 December 2020].
• Evans, G.; Durant, J. (1995). The Relationship Between Knowledge and Attitudes in the Public Understanding of Science in Britain. Public Understanding of Science, 4 (1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/4/1/004
• Fernández-Esquinas, M.; Iturrate, D. (2015). La población española ante el papel de las administraciones públicas en la ciencia y la tecnología [Spanish Population into the Role of Public Administrations in Science and Technology]. In: FECYT (ed.) Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología 2014, 277-316. [Social Perception of Science and Technology 2014] Madrid: FECYT.
• Frenz, M.; Ietto-Gillies, G. (2009). The Impact on Innovation Performance of Different Sources of Knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey. Research Policy, 38 (7), 1125-1135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.05.002
• Godin, B.; Gingras, Y. (2000). What is Scientific and Technological Culture and How is it Measured? A Multidimensional Model. Public Understanding of Science, 9 (1), 43-58. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/9/1/303
• Gonçalves, M. E.; Patrício, M. T.; da Costa, A. F. (1996). Political Images of Science in Portugal. Public Understanding of Science, 5 (4), 395-410. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/5/4/006
• González-Bravo, M. I., López-Navarro, I.; Rey-Rocha, J. (2020). Is Corporate R&D Simply a Matter of Money? The Combined Effect of a Firm's Economic Characteristics and its Perception Of Science. Industry and Innovation, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1792273
• Groot, S. P. T.; Möhlmann, J. L.; Garretsen, J. H.; de Groot, H. L. F. (2011). The Crisis Sensitivity of European Countries and Regions: Stylized Facts and Spatial Heterogeneity. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 4 (3), 437-456. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsr024
• Guenther, L.; Weingart, P.; Meyer, C. (2018). "Science is Everywhere, but no One Knows it": Assessing the Cultural Cistance to Science of Rural South African Publics. Environmental Communication, 12 (8), 1046-1061. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1455724
• Ho, S. S.; Scheufele, D. A.; Corley, E. A. (2010). Making Sense of Policy Choices: Understanding the Roles of Value Predispositions, Mass Media, and Cognitive Processing in Public Attitudes Toward Nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 12 (8), 2703-2715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-010-0038-8 PMid:21170125 PMCid:PMC2988209
• Ho, S. S.; Scheufele, D. A.; Corley, E. A. (2011). Factors influencing public risk-benefit considerations of nanotechnology: Assessing the effects of mass media, interpersonal communication, and elaborative processing. Public Understanding of Science, 22 (5), 606-623. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662511417936 PMid:23833174
• Hurtado, M. C.; Cerezo, J. A. L. (2012). Political Dimensions of Scientific Culture: Highlights from the Ibero-American Survey on the Social Perception of Science and Scientific Culture. Public Understanding of Science, 21 (3), 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510373871
• Industry, Economy and Competitiveness Ministry (2017). I+D+i en las empresas españolas. [R&D and Innovation in Spanish Companies]. Madrid: Industry, Economy and Competitiveness Ministry. Available at: www.ipyme.org/Publicaciones/Informe-ID-2017.pdf [accessed 14 December 2020].
• INE, Instituto Nacional de Estadística (2009) National Classification of Economic Activities. CNAE-2009. Available at: https://www.ine.es/daco/daco42/clasificaciones/cnae09/estructura_en.pdf [accessed 14 December 2020].
• Lee, C. Y. (2003). A Simple Theory and Evidence on the Determinants of Firm R&D. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 12(5), 385-395. https://doi.org/10.1080/1043859022000003418
• López Cerezo, J. A.; Cámara Hurtado, M. (2007). Scientific Culture and Social Appropriation of the Science. Social Epistemology, 21 (1), 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691720601125522
• López-Navarro, I.; Garzón-García, B; Rey-Rocha, J. (2011). Percepción de la Ciencia y la Tecnología en el Sector Privado. La Visión de Empresarios y Trabajadores Autónomos [Perception of Science and Technology in the Private Sector. The Vision of Entrepreneurs and Self-Employed Workers]. In FECYT (ed.) Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología en España 2010, 67-92. [Social Perception of Science and Technology in Spain 2010], Madrid: FECYT.
• Lorca, P.; de Andrés, J. (2019). The Importance of Cultural Factors in R&D Intensity. Cross-Cultural Research, 53 (5), 483-507. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397118813546
• Máñez, J. A., Rochina-Barrachina, M. E.; Sanchis-Llopis, A.; Sanchez-Llopis, J. A. (2015). The Determinants of R&D Persistence in SMEs. Small Business Economics, 44 (3), 505-528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-014-9611-3
• Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific Literacy: A Conceptual and Empirical Review. Daedalus, 29-48.
• Miller, J. D. (1998). The Measurement of Civic Scientific Literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 7, 203-223. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/7/3/001
• Miller, J. D. (2004). Public Understanding of, and Attitudes Toward, Scientific Research: What we Know and What we Need to Know. Public Understanding of Science, 13 (3), 273-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662504044908
• Möllering, G. (2006). Trust: Reason, Routine, Reflexivity. Oxford: Elsevier.
• Noy, S.; O'Brien, T. L. (2019). Science for Good? The Effects of Education and National Context on Perceptions Of Science. Public Understanding of Science, 28 (8), 897-916. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519863575 PMid:31354045
• OST; Wellcome Trust (2001). Science and the Public: a Review of Science Communication and Public Attitudes Toward Science in Britain. Public Understanding of Science 10, 315-330. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/10/3/305
• Pardo, R.; Calvo, F. (2004). The Cognitive Dimension of Public Perceptions of Science: Methodological Issues. Public Understanding of Science, 13 (3), 203-227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662504045002
• Prpić, K. (2011). Science, the Public, And Social Elites: How the General Public, Scientists, Top Politicians and Managers Perceive Science. Public Understanding of Science, 20 (6), 733-750. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510366363 PMid:22397082
• Qin, W.; Brown, J. L. (2007). Public Reactions to Information about Genetically Engineered Foods: Effects of Information Formats and Male/Female Differences. Public Understanding of Science, 16 (4), 471-488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506065336
• Quintanilla, M. A. (2004). Cultura tecnológica e innovación [Technological Culture and Innovation]. In: Quintanilla, M.A. (ed.) Tecnología: un enfoque filosófico y otros ensayos de filosofía de la tecnología, 247-261. [Technology: A philosophical approach and other essays on the philosophy of technology]. Mexico: FCE.
• Raza, G.; Singh, S. (2012). Defining Cultural distance. In: Bauer, M. W.; Shukla, R.; Allum, N. (eds.) The Culture of Science: how the Public Relates to Science Across the Globe. London: Routledge, 282-300.
• Raza, G.; Dutt, B.; Singh, S. (1997). Kaleidoscoping Public Understanding of Science on Hygiene, Health and Plague: A Survey in the Aftermath of a Plague Epidemic in India. Public Understanding of Science, 6 (3), 247-268. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/6/3/004 PMid:11619415
• Raza, G.; Singh, S.; Dutt, B. (2002). Public, Science, and Cultural Distance. Science Communication, 23 (3), 293-309. https://doi.org/10.1177/107554700202300305
• Rey-Rocha, J.; López-Navarro, I. (2016). The SCe Questionnaire: Scientific Culture, Perception and Attitudes towards Science and Innovation in the Spanish Business Sector. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/171841. [Accessed: June 23, 2020].
• Rey-Rocha, J.; Muñoz-van den Eynde, A.; López-Navarro, I. (2019). Exploring the Image of Science in the Business Sector: Surveying and Modeling Scientific Culture, Perception and Attitudes Towards Science. Social Epistemology, 33 (2), 137-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2019.1587543
• Saisana, M.; Munda, G. (2008). Knowledge economy: Measures and Drivers. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• Sanz-Menéndez, L.; Van Ryzin, G. G.; Del Pino, E. (2014). Citizens' Support for Government Spending on Science and Technology. Science and Public Policy, 41 (5), 611-624. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct091
• Shefer, D.; Frenkel, F.; renkel, A. (2005). R&D, Firm Size and Innovation: An Empirical Analysis. Technovation 25(1), 25-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00152-4
• Shukla, R. (2005). India Science Report: Science Education, Human Resources and Public Attitude Towards Science and Technology. Australia: East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
• Simis, M. J.; Madden, H.; Cacciatore, M. A.; Yeo, S. K. (2016). The Lure of Rationality: Why does the Deficit Model Persist in Science Communication?. Public Understanding of Science 25(4), 400-414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516629749 PMid:27117768
• Sinn, J. S. (2019). Mapping Ideology: Combining the Schwartz Value Circumplex with Evolutionary Theory to Explain Ideological Differences. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 5 (1), 44-57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-018-0165-5
• Sorensen, G.; Emmons, K.; Hunt, M. K.; Barbeau, E.; Goldman, R.; Peterson, K.; Kuntz, K.; Stoddard, A.; Berkman, L. (2003). Model for Incorporating Social Context in Health Behaviour Interventions: Applications for Canprevention for Working Class, Multiethnic Populations. Preventive Medicine, 37, 188-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-7435(03)00111-7
• Sorensen, K. H.; Aune, M.; and Hatling, M. (2000). Against Linearity- On the Cultural Appropriation of Science and Technology. In: Dierkes, M.; von Grote, C. (eds.) Between Understanding and Trust: the Public, Science and Technology, 237-257. London: Harwood Academic Publishers.
• Stocking, S. H.; Holstein, L. W. (2009). Manufacturing Doubt: Journalists' Roles and the Construction of Ignorance in a Scientific Controversy. Public Understanding of Science 18(1), 23-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507079373 PMid:19579533
• Sturgis, P.; Allum, N. (2004). Science in Society: re-Evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitudes. Public Understanding of Science 13(1), 55-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662504042690
• Takahashi, B.; Tandoc, E. C. Jr. (2016). Media Sources, Credibility, and Perceptions of Science: Learning about how People Learn about Science. Public Understanding of Science 25(6), 674-690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515574986 PMid:25792288
• Thomas, G.; Durant, J. (1987). Why should we Promote the Public Understanding of Science. Scientific Literacy Papers 1, 1-14.
• Turney, J. (1996). Public Understanding of Science. The Lancet, 347 (9008), 1087-1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90283-4
• Van Dijk, B.; Den Hertog, R.; Menkveld, B.; Thurik, R. (1997). Some New Evidence on the Determinants of Large- and Small-Firm Innovation. Small Business Economics, 9 (4), 335-343. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007995919950
• Vraga, E. K.; Bode, L. (2017). Using expert Sources to Correct Health Misinformation in Social Media. Science Communication, 39 (5), 621-645. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017731776
• Wynne, B. (1992). Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science. Public Understanding of Science, 1 (3), 281-304. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/1/3/004
• Wynne, B. (1993). Public Uptake of Science: a Case for Institutional Reflexivity. Public Understanding of Science, 2 (4), 321-337. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/2/4/003
• Wynne, B. (2001). Creating public Alienation: Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs. Science as Culture, 10 (4), 445-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505430120093586 PMid:15971363
• Wynne, B.; Irwin, A. (1996). Misunderstanding Science?: the Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511563737
• Xu, J.; Sim, J. W. (2018). Characteristics of Corporate R&D Investment in Emerging Markets: Evidence from Manufacturing Industry in China and South Korea. Sustainability 10(9), 3002. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093002