Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35086388›Full record

ArticlePublic understanding of science (Bristol, England)2022

Does China have a public debate on genetically modified organisms? A discourse network analysis of public debate on Weibo.

Yan Jin, Simon Schaub, Jale Tosun, Justus Wesseler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public understanding of science (Bristol, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yan JinWageningen University, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7749-7367
Jale TosunHeidelberg University, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9367-5039
Justus WesselerWageningen University, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6009-8543

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We examine stakeholder participation in the online debate on genetically modified organisms in China and assess how the debate has changed over time. Therefore, we compare messages posted between 2013 and 2020 on the Chinese microblog website Weibo by using discourse network analysis. Our findings reveal strong opposition to genetically modified crops, along with the existence of two competing coalitions of supporters and opponents. We further observe an increasing number of posts supporting genetically modified organisms by the public in recent years. Consequently, there is an indication that the positions of stakeholders have changed over time. We discuss the policy implications for China and draw conclusions for other countries.

Indexed as

Crops, AgriculturalDissent and DisputesChinaOrganisms, Genetically ModifiedPlants, Genetically ModifiedChinadiscourse network analysisgenetically modified organisms (GMOs)public debateWeibo

Identifiers

PMID35086388
PMCPMC9344491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.