IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v85y2026ics0160791x25003975.html

Australian public opinions of responsible innovation: Understanding its champions, supporters, moderates, and sceptics

Author

Listed:
  • Bentley, Sarah V.
  • Schleiger, Emma
  • McCrea, Rod
  • Coates, Rebecca
  • Hobman, Elizabeth

Abstract

Scientific and technological innovation has become a contested area of societal progress, often compounded by rising levels of societal mistrust and populist thinking. Responding to this, scholars and practitioners are deeply contemplating public ethics, accountability, and risk. At the heart of this motivation lies the domain of Responsible Innovation, where academics alongside applied stakeholders are endeavouring to align the values of innovation with those of society. To further our understanding of value alignment across the diversity of public opinion, this research maps opinions of science and technology through the lens of responsible practice using segmentation analysis on a large Australian sample (N = 2127). We find opinion divided into four typologies: Champions (22 %); Supporters (40 %); Moderates (30 %); and Sceptics (8 %). To investigate the impact of mistrust on these typologies, we assessed their relationship to both mistrust of society and of science, as measured by conspiratorial thinking and anti-science populism. Data showed levels of mistrust to be moderate across all typologies, but societal mistrust to be significantly higher for Sceptics. This research provides a benchmark for public opinions of responsible scientific and technological innovation against which other studies can compare. Moreover, results suggest that societal mistrust may be influencing perceptions of science across all typologies, but particularly for those normally perceived as disinterested or disengaged. These results call for a more concerted application of informed Responsible Innovation principles with which to deliver Responsible Innovation practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Bentley, Sarah V. & Schleiger, Emma & McCrea, Rod & Coates, Rebecca & Hobman, Elizabeth, 2026. "Australian public opinions of responsible innovation: Understanding its champions, supporters, moderates, and sceptics," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:85:y:2026:i:c:s0160791x25003975
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.103207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X25003975
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.103207?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilberto Montibeller & L. Alberto Franco & Ashley Carreras, 2020. "A Risk Analysis Framework for Prioritizing and Managing Biosecurity Threats," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2462-2477, November.
    2. Setiawan, Andri D., 2020. "The influence of national culture on responsible innovation: A case of CO2 utilisation in Indonesia," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    3. McCrea, Rod & Coates, Rebecca & Hobman, Elizabeth V. & Bentley, Sarah & Lacey, Justine, 2024. "Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Oliver Todt & José Luis Luján, 2014. "Analyzing Precautionary Regulation: Do Precaution, Science, and Innovation Go Together?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(12), pages 2163-2173, December.
    5. Zhang, Lixuan & Yencha, Christopher, 2022. "Examining perceptions towards hiring algorithms," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    6. van Buuren, Stef & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Karin, 2011. "mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 45(i03).
    7. Dietram A. Scheufele & Nicole M. Krause, 2019. "Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(16), pages 7662-7669, April.
    8. Christian Voegtlin & Andreas Georg Scherer & Günter K Stahl & Olga Hawn, 2022. "Grand Societal Challenges and Responsible Innovation," Post-Print hal-03466563, HAL.
    9. Joseph Henrich & Steve J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan, 2010. "The Weirdest People in the World?," RatSWD Working Papers 139, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    10. Christian Voegtlin & Andreas Georg Scherer & Günter K. Stahl & Olga Hawn, 2022. "Grand Societal Challenges and Responsible Innovation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 1-28, January.
    11. Joshua M. Blank & Daron Shaw, 2015. "Does Partisanship Shape Attitudes toward Science and Public Policy? The Case for Ideology and Religion," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 18-35, March.
    12. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    13. Deng, Ruolan & Ahmed, Saifuddin, 2025. "Perceptions and paradigms: An analysis of AI framing in trending social media news," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    14. Nora Weinberger & Silvia Woll & Christopher Conrad Maximillian Kyba & Nona Schulte-Römer, 2021. "The Value of Citizen Participation in Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, and Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, October.
    15. Susanna Hornig Priest & Heinz Bonfadelli & Maria Rusanen, 2003. "The “Trust Gap” Hypothesis: Predicting Support for Biotechnology Across National Cultures as a Function of Trust in Actors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 751-766, August.
    16. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    17. Rimal, R.N. & Brown, J. & Mkandawire, G. & Folda, L. & Böse, K. & Creel, A.H., 2009. "Audience segmentation as a social-marketing tool in health promotion: Use of the risk perception attitude framework in HIV prevention in Malawi," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(12), pages 2224-2229.
    18. repec:plo:pone00:0088473 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Caroline Orset, 2014. "Innovation and the precautionary principle," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 780-801, November.
    20. Fox, Stephen & Griffy-Brown, Charla, 2023. "Technology perceptions, innovations and effects in society: Technology in Society Briefing," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    21. Sütterlin, Bernadette & Brunner, Thomas A. & Siegrist, Michael, 2011. "Who puts the most energy into energy conservation? A segmentation of energy consumers based on energy-related behavioral characteristics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 8137-8152.
    22. Patrick Sturgis & Ian Brunton-Smith & Jonathan Jackson, 2021. "Trust in science, social consensus and vaccine confidence," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(11), pages 1528-1534, November.
    23. André Martinuzzi & Vincent Blok & Alexander Brem & Bernd Stahl & Norma Schönherr, 2018. "Responsible Research and Innovation in Industry—Challenges, Insights and Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-9, March.
    24. Viktoria Cologna & Niels G. Mede & Sebastian Berger & John Besley & Cameron Brick & Marina Joubert & Edward W. Maibach & Sabina Mihelj & Naomi Oreskes & Mike S. Schäfer & Sander Linden & Nor Izzatina , 2025. "Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 9(4), pages 713-730, April.
    25. Donald W Hine & Joseph P Reser & Mark Morrison & Wendy J Phillips & Patrick Nunn & Ray Cooksey, 2014. "Audience segmentation and climate change communication: conceptual and methodological considerations," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 441-459, July.
    26. Edward W Maibach & Anthony Leiserowitz & Connie Roser-Renouf & C K Mertz, 2011. "Identifying Like-Minded Audiences for Global Warming Public Engagement Campaigns: An Audience Segmentation Analysis and Tool Development," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(3), pages 1-9, March.
    27. Ardabili, Babak Rahimi & Danesh Pazho, Armin & Alinezhad Noghre, Ghazal & Katariya, Vinit & Hull, Gordon & Reid, Shannon & Tabkhi, Hamed, 2024. "Exploring Public's perception of safety and video surveillance technology: A survey approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    28. Miron, Marina & Whetham, David & Auzanneau, Margaux & Hill, Andrew, 2023. "Public Drone Perception," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    29. Madison D. Horgan & Christopher L. Cummings & Jennifer Kuzma & Michael Dahlstrom & Ilaria Cimadori & Maude Cuchiara & Colin Larter & Nick Loschin & Khara D. Grieger, 2025. "Beyond the Hype: Stakeholder Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Genetic Engineering for Sustainable Food Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-26, July.
    30. Linzer, Drew A. & Lewis, Jeffrey B., 2011. "poLCA: An R Package for Polytomous Variable Latent Class Analysis," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 42(i10).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Panizzon, Mateus & Janissek-Muniz, Raquel, 2025. "Theoretical dimensions for integrating research on anticipatory governance, scientific foresight and sustainable S&T public policy design," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. van Gelderen, Marco, 2025. "Living healthily to 120: Implications for entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 40(4).
    3. He, Shutong & Qian, Queena K. & Porsius, Jarry T., 2025. "Trigger my motivations and remove my barriers: Latent class analyses of homeowners’ perception about home energy retrofit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    4. Jacobsen, Lina Fogt & Frank, Darius-Aurel & Søndergaard, Helle Alsted & Peschel, Anne Odile, 2025. "From diversity to distinction: Exploring the role of diversity and inclusion related to consumer perceptions of company innovativeness and attractiveness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    5. Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich & El Benni, Nadja & Douziech, Mélanie, 2025. "Implementing responsible research and innovation and sustainability assessment in research projects: A framework and application," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(2).
    6. Ye, Dandan & Yuan, Ruizhi & Luo, Jun & Liu, Martin J. & Yannopoulou, Natalia, 2025. "Responsible artificial intelligence (AI) for responsible innovation in Chinese manufacturing: From the affordance–actualization theory," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    7. Wolf, Ingo & Schröder, Tobias, 2019. "Connotative meanings of sustainable mobility: A segmentation approach using cultural sentiments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 259-280.
    8. Zhang, Stephen X. & Chen, Jiyao & He, Liangxing & Choudhury, Afreen, 2023. "Responsible Innovation: The development and validation of a scale," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    9. Devi Vijay & Héloïse Berkowitz & Benjamin Huybrechts & Luc Audebrand & Marcos Barros & Marianna Fotaki, 2025. "Another World is Possible, It's Already Here: A Review and Research Agenda on Alternative Organizing," Working paper serie RMT - Grenoble Ecole de Management hal-05132352, HAL.
    10. Lehoux, P. & Miller, F.A. & Williams-Jones, B., 2020. "Anticipatory governance and moral imagination: Methodological insights from a scenario-based public deliberation study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    11. Odeh Al-Jayyousi & Hira Amin & Hiba Ali Al-Saudi & Amjaad Aljassas & Evren Tok, 2023. "Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy for Sustainable Development: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-21, August.
    12. Jay A. Richards & Martin P. Johnson, 2014. "A Case for Theoretical Integration," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(2), pages 21582440145, May.
    13. Joan J. H. Kim & John D. Coley, 2025. "Mental Models Matter: Conceptualizations of the Human–Nature Relationship Predict Pro-Environmental Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-25, May.
    14. Joachim P. Hasebrook & Leonie Michalak & Anna Wessels & Sabine Koenig & Stefan Spierling & Stefan Kirmsse, 2022. "Green Behavior: Factors Influencing Behavioral Intention and Actual Environmental Behavior of Employees in the Financial Service Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-35, August.
    15. Nieves García-de-Frutos & José Manuel Ortega-Egea & Javier Martínez-del-Río, 2018. "Anti-consumption for Environmental Sustainability: Conceptualization, Review, and Multilevel Research Directions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 411-435, March.
    16. Kyoko Sasaki & Wendy Stubbs & Megan Farrelly, 2023. "The relationship between corporate purpose and the sustainable development goals in large Japanese companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 2475-2489, September.
    17. Mohamed Mousa & Ahmad Arslan, 2025. "Navigating between Grand Challenges and Unusual Work Setbacks: How Do Public Managers Use Strategic Human Resources Management?," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 867-883, September.
    18. Paolo Antonetti & Stan Maklan, 2014. "Feelings that Make a Difference: How Guilt and Pride Convince Consumers of the Effectiveness of Sustainable Consumption Choices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 117-134, September.
    19. Sukayna Younger-Khan & Nils B. Weidmann & Lisa Oswald, 2024. "Consistent effects of science and scientist characteristics on public trust across political regimes," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    20. Ting Yue & Ruyin Long & Junli Liu & Haiwen Liu & Hong Chen, 2019. "Empirical Study on Households’ Energy-Conservation Behavior of Jiangsu Province in China: The Role of Policies and Behavior Results," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-16, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:85:y:2026:i:c:s0160791x25003975. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.