Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

2 Approach
Pages 43-62

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 43...
... conducted a survey of a segment of the U.S. life sciences community to assess awareness of the dual use dilemma -- including perceptions of the risk of bioterrorism, attitudes about responsibilities to help reduce the risks that their research could be misused, and actions being taken by some life scientists in response to the dual use dilemma.
From page 44...
... STUDY DESIGN To meet the research objectives, a questionnaire was developed and a cross-sectional Web survey was conducted. This section describes the development of the questionnaire, survey pretest, the target population and sample frame, the survey mode and design, sampling issues, and implementation of the survey.
From page 45...
... Participants from the first focus group included scientists from the Navy Medical Research Center, George Mason University, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) , the Center for Biosecurity of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Georgetown University, and the University of Maryland.
From page 46...
... (An example of relevant scientific fields is the list from which recent doctorates select in the annual Survey of Earned Doctorates.) The life sciences are quite interdisciplinary -- a trend that is growing.
From page 47...
... and primarily composed of postgraduate scientists, there was ample opportunity to survey the attitudes of a considerable body of American life scientists in several different but related scientific fields. Having said this, it is important to note that one cannot infer from the views of AAAS life science members to the broader life   Although issues regarding scientists' views about biosecurity affect scientists in many countries, this project in part reacts to efforts in the United States to educate scientists and to potentially set government regulations or guidelines for scientists working in the United States.
From page 48...
... Survey Mode and Sample Frame Recognizing that a census of life scientists was unrealistic, given the size of the target population, the project turned to a one-time, cross-sectional survey. This methodology was chosen for procedural reasons as well as the project's desire to obtain a baseline of quantitative data on scientists' attitudes toward biosecurity and dual use research issues.
From page 49...
... Thus, a potential bias was introduced into the study because there was a discrepancy between the sample frame of AAAS life science members with e-mail addresses and the survey population of all AAAS life sciences members. This discrepancy adds to the uncertainties about whether the results of the survey can be generalized and significantly limits any inferences that can be made about the data collected.
From page 50...
... the sample frame based upon scientific field. Even though the percentages in each field among the survey population of 64,787 closely match those in the sample frame of 24,194, extrapolation beyond the sampling frame for other measures would still be tenuous.
From page 51...
... This delinking reduced the committee's ability to investigate potential nonresponse bias, again constraining the ability to generalize from the respondents to even the sample frame. As a result of the issues relating to whether the surveyed sample was biased, which is compounded by the low response rate that will be discussed later, the committee adopted a conservative approach of reporting the results based upon the raw data provided by the respondents rather than inferring to the sample frame or survey population.
From page 52...
... In general, survey response rates have been dropping over time, and in response, a number of studies have examined different strategies to maximize response rates, including design issues, timing issues, and the use 12  Surveys include four types of persons: those who returned the questionnaire (respondents) ; those who were contacted, but did not respond for some reason (e.g., refusals or people who were unavailable when the survey was fielded)
From page 53...
... The differences could lead to over- or underestimates in results based only on respondents, and those differences can vary by question. Low response rates, however, in and of themselves do not necessarily mean that bias in survey estimates exists (Curtin et al.
From page 54...
... There are several ways nonresponse bias could have been assessed, but, as described above, because of confidentiality and anonymity concerns, the necessary frame data were not available from AAAS. Another approach to assess nonresponse bias would have been to compare the results of the committee's survey with results from similar surveys of life scientists.
From page 55...
... Response rates for individual questions are presented in Appendix D (Table D-1)
From page 56...
... A majority of scientists were academics and most were mid-career. Since one goal for the survey was to discern and describe attitudes and opinions of scientists who had some experience with research, the first survey question was: "Have you ever conducted research or managed others' research in the life sciences?
From page 57...
... the majority of life scientists who responded to the survey have conducted research since 2001, which is the period during which the greatest concerns have been expressed about the potential for misuse of the life sciences to aid bioterrorism. Among those life scientists who answered the question on their employment status, most (92 percent)
From page 58...
... For the 1,586 respondents who answered the question about highest educational degree awarded, the mean years since highest degree awarded was 23 and the median years since highest degree awarded was 24, indicating that the life scientists included in this study were generally mid-career or higher. Finally, as noted in Table 2-8, just under 97 percent of the respondents who answered the question on citizenship indicated that they were U.S.
From page 59...
... TABLE 2-7 Highest Awarded Degree of Respondents Highest Awarded Degree Frequency Percentage Doctorate or equivalent (e.g., Ph.D., D.Sc., Ed.D.) 1,252 79 Other professional degree (e.g., J.D., L.L.B., M.D., D.D.S., 143 9 D.V.M.)
From page 60...
... Fig 2-1.eps SOURCE: NRC/AAAS Survey; data tabulations by staff. bitmap image with type masked & replaced TABLE 2-8  Citizenship of Respondents Citizenship Status Frequency Percentagea U.S.
From page 61...
... Only 16 percent of scientists completed the survey and another 4 percent responded in part. Nevertheless, the committee believes that the survey responses (including respondents' comments)


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.