In RRI, responsible innovation is understood as a joint endeavour of innovators and societal stakeholders, who become mutually responsive to each other in defining the 'right impacts' of the innovation in society, and in steering the innovation towards realising those impacts.
For instance, RRI's definition by von Schomberg (2013) calls societal actors and innovators to 'become mutually responsive to each other with a view to the … innovation process and its marketable products' (emphasis added), while van den Hoven (2012) discusses the potential of technologies to spawn new moral choice situations.
It is emphasised that R&D should be an inclusive process, involving interaction between innovators and societal stakeholders, who become mutually responsive 'to each other with a view to the (ethical) acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable products' (von Schomberg, 2013).
In contrast, couples experiencing cancer who are mutually responsive, attend to each other's needs, and talk openly about their difficulties, have been found to be more able to engage in effective emotion and problem focused coping [ 100], which allows them to find benefits in the cancer experience, such as personal growth and relationship closeness [ 101, 102].
Couples who are mutually responsive, attend to each other's needs, and talk openly about their stress, are more able to engage in effective coping [ 87], which allows them to find benefits in the cancer experience, such as personal growth and relationship closeness [ 88, 89].
To become mutually responsive requires learning, interdependence, trust to take place among actors with very different needs and interests.
Product-responsiveness also makes RRI more explicit about possible roles for adopter-stakeholders, if they are to become mutually responsive with innovators 'with a view to the societal aspects of the innovation' (von Schomberg, 2013).
To become mutually responsive, innovators and different stakeholders are first expected to recognise differing perspectives on the innovation, and then to become attentive to others' perspectives – and critical of their own.
Process-responsiveness also makes RRI more explicit about what is expected of company innovators, if they are to become mutually responsive with societal actors with a view to the societal aspects of the innovation (von Schomberg, 2013).
In particular, positive interactions that are mutually responsive have been demonstrated to result in better compliance and increase the likelihood that maternal rules are internalised by the child [ 52].
This kind of interaction is likely to yield strong adolescent parent connections that contribute to a mutually responsive orientation (Maccoby 2007).
