我做一个有关大学生自主创新的项目，课题是有关转基因的，需要找国外的文献，我找到了，可是教授要求必须要翻译成中文，鄙人不才，英语实在难登大雅之堂，跪求各位英语大神帮忙翻译一下，本人感激不尽！

Factors Affecting College Students’ Knowledge and Opinions of Genetically Modified Foods
Chad M. Laux, Gretchen A. Mosher and Steven A. Freeman
Abstract
The use of biotechnology in food and agricultural applications has increased greatly during the past decade and is considered by many to be a controversial topic. Drawing upon a previous national study, a new survey was conducted of U.S. and international college students at a large, land-grant, Research University to determine factors that may affect opinions about genetically modified (GM) food products. Factors examined included nationality, discipline area of study, perceptions of safety, and awareness and levels of acceptance regarding GM food. Results indicated students born outside the United States had more negative opinions about genetically modified foods than did American-born students. Students who were studying a physical science-based curriculum had a more positive opinion of GM food than did students studying a curriculum that was not based in the physical science. In addition, students who reported a higher level of acceptance of genetically modified foods felt more positively about the safety of the technology.
Introduction
The use of biotechnology in food and agriculture has increased greatly during the past decade (Comstock, 2001; Knight, 2006). Global use of genetically modified (GM) plants has increased rapidly since their commercial introduction in 1996. Desirable traits (e.g., insect and herbicide resistance and improved nutritional content) have resulted in a large increase in the number of hectares planted globally. The prevalence of GM crops has increased every year since their introduction, and this will continue (James, 2008). Consumer opinions are important to the success of technological innovation in the marketplace. The purpose of this study was to examine college students’ opinions in the areas of awareness, acceptance, and safety of GM foods with regard to nationality and field of study. The survey model is based upon a national survey concerning biotechnology.
Genetic modification of foods is one of many examples of the gap between scientists and nonscientists (Chappell & Hartz, 1998). Accordingly, Hoban (2001) stated that consumer awareness and understanding of biotechnology innovation has grown slowly. Despite the increased use of GM food products, GM technology is not well understood in the United States. Several recent surveys demonstrate this lack of understanding by the American public (Falk et al., 2002; Hallman & Hebden, 2005; Hallman, Hebden, Cuite, Aquino, & Lang, 2004). Although 60 to 70% of food products sold at supermarkets include ingredients using genetic modification, many consumers remain unaware of their use (Byrne, 2006). A lack of understanding among the public may lead to uncertainty about the safety of GM food products (Byrne, 2006, Hoban, 2001; Shanahan, 2003).
Consumer opinion of GM food safety also differs by nationality (Knight, 2006). Research reveals that U.S. consumers are the least concerned about GM food safety issues whereas European and Asian consumers report more concern (Chern, Rickertsen, Tsubio, & Fu, 2003; Fritz & Fischer, 2007; Pew Initiative, 2005). Even after more than a decade of debate and the increased support of governments in South America and China, the European Union and environmental groups, such as Friends of the Earth, continue to reject the cultivation and use of genetically modified crops (Weise, 2010).
College students form a su
bp
opulation of the general public and an area of interest concerning GM food opinions. Within the United States, college students may mingle among nationalities, a previously cited factor of perceptions concerning GM food safety. College students are likely to be younger and more highly educated than the general population and may have a greater awareness of agriculture biotechnology (Finke & Kim, 2003). Science-based coursework, laboratory work, and the beliefs of professors and instructors may contribute to awareness, and these beliefs may be reinforced within the student’s major area of study. As young adults, students may not have formed a strong opinion about this subject, and they may be more open to the different perspectives of agriculture biotechnology (Wingenbach, Rutherford, & Dunsford 2003). College graduates are more likely to be more open-minded, and they have been shown to have lower prejudice levels and increased knowledge of global issues (Rowley & Hurtado, 2002). Concerning GM food products, college students in the United States show a lack of understanding about the concepts and processes behind GM technology. Wingenbach, et al. (2003) found that even though college students surveyed felt confident in their knowledge of biotechnology

practices, only 30% answered the questions correctly. A weak relationship was found between the students’ perceived and actual knowledge of biotechnology and between students’ assessed knowledge and level of acceptance for biotechnology practices (Wingenbach, et al., 2003).
Nationality has been found to be a significant factor in college student opinion concerning GM foods, just as it has been with the general population (Gaskell, 2000; Hallman & Hebden, 2005; O’Fallon, Gursoy, & Swanger, 2007). In a study of Korean and American students, approximately 42% of U.S. students expressed concern about health risks from GM food and over 86% of Korean students felt the same level of concern (Finke & Kim, 2003). Only 14% of Korean students surveyed felt no concern compared with 42% of U.S. students who perceived no concern about the health risks of consuming GM foods.
When compared with previous research, this study is based on a wider demographic of students and included all students enrolled at a Midwestern land-grant research-intensive institution. Additionally, the international students participating in this study were students at an American university. In previous studies, the students were enrolled at universities in their home countries (Finke & Kim, 2003; Li., Curtiss, McCluskey, & Wahl, 2002). Unlike previous research, students from all disciplines were included versus students in specific disciplines (Finke & Kim, 2003; Wingenbach et al., 2003). All of these differences have the potential to affect students’ knowledge and opinions.
Methodology
To measure awareness, acceptance, and safety perceptions, a previously validated instrument was utilized (Hoban, 2001). Four-scaled response items were used to determine respondent awareness, usage acceptance levels, and safety perception regarding GM foods. When measuring awareness, four-point scales were used ranging from “none” to “a lot.” To determine the awareness of the students, two questionnaire items were used. The first asked the students how much they had heard about genetically modified food products, and the second item asked if they had consumed a product containing GM foods. This methodology was employed because past research has indicated that very few Americans surveyed know the extent of GM ingredients contained within foods sold in the United States. Several studies have found very low numbers of Americans surveyed have been able to correctly answer survey questions about consumption of GM foods. In this case, the assumption was that students who knew a lot about GM foods would also recognize that they had most likely consumed GM products (Falk et al., 2002; Hallman & Hebden, 2005; Hallman et al., 2004; Pew Initiative, 2003).
The relationship between awareness and acceptance was also explored. One theory of awareness and acceptance is that the more people know about a biotechnology, the more intense their support or opposition will be for this topic (Fischoff, 1995). An additional outcome of increased awareness is an emotional response that the GM foods were “hidden” from them without their consent (Hoban, 2001). The third item on the survey was used to explore the relationship between the variables of awareness (both perceived and actual) and safety perception.

The final item on the survey queried students on their support of the use of genetic modification in food and agriculture areas. This item measured the students’ acceptance of GM technology as applied to food and agriculture, and it was tested against field of study, nationality, and awareness levels to determine if a significant relationship existed. The relationship between acceptance levels and safety perceptions of students was also tested.
Three additional questions asked students about their nationality and field of study. Students indicated their field of study on the questionnaire and were also asked to identify the academic unit where their major was administered. Researchers classified the majors as either physical science based or non-physical science based. The instrument is shown in Figure 1.
1. How much have you heard about genetically modified food products?
a. A lot b. Some c. Little d. Nothing
2. Have you consumed genetically modified food products?
a. Yes b. No c. Not sure
3. How safe are genetically modified food products?
a. Safe b. Unsafe c. Not sure
4. Do you support the use of genetic modification in agriculture and food?
a. Yes b. No c. Not sure
5. To what College does your academic discipline belong?
a. Agriculture b. Business c. Design
6. d. Engineering e. Human Sciences f. Liberal Arts & Sciences
7. What is your major?
8. What is your nationality?
a. American-born b. Born internationally
Figure 1. Questions from the data collection instrument.
Physical science is defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2009) as fields in which the properties of energy and nonliving materials are studied. Although physical science is strictly defined by fields such as physics, chemistry, astronomy, and geology, some overlap with fields in the biological sciences is often apparent. These fields might include biochemistry, biophysics, virology, and paleontology. In the case of this study, physical science fields included disciplines such as agricultural biochemistry, food science, and meteorology, in addition to the subject areas listed in the definition.
The instrument was pilot tested on a small subgroup of the target population (n = 26). The seven-item survey was administered electronically to the student body attending an upper Midwestern land-grant research-intensive university. A cover letter preceded the survey to brief subjects about the project and its purpose. Consent of respondents was assumed if the student voluntarily clicked on the link to begin the survey. Because participation was voluntary, a delimitation of the study was the self-selection of the student sample. Data collection was guided by three research questions: