As the role of genetic science in everyday life has grown, policymakers have become concerned about Americans’ understandings of this science. Much effort has been devoted to formal schooling, but less attention has been paid to the role of public culture in shaping public understanding of genetics. Research into public cultural messages about genetics has claimed that the public is likely to adopt problematic accounts, but few studies have explored the public’s articulation of these messages. This study is based on 25 focus groups convened to explore the lay public’s understanding of genetics. The study found that the public processed a greater variety of messages than assumed by previous researchers, including documentaries, non-sciencefiction films, and popular television in addition to previous researchers’ focus on science fiction and news media. The study also found that the public does not process the messages through the linear, transmission model assumed by previous research. The public processes messages about genetics complexly and critically. On the basis of these findings, the study suggests that researchers should include a greater variety of texts about genetics in their research and attend more fully to audience processing in addition to content analyses of these texts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1994) Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press .
2.
Anderson, A. (2002) “In Search of the Holy Grail: Media Discourse and the New Human Genetics,”New Genetics and Society21: 327–337 .
3.
Bader, R.G. (1990) “How Science News Sections Influence Newspaper Science Coverage: A Case Study,”Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly67: 88–96 .
4.
Barns, I. , Schibechi, R. , Davison, A. and Shaw, R. (2000) “What Do You Think about Genetic Medicine? Facilitating Sociable Public Discourse on Developments in the New Genetics,”Science, Technology and Human Values25: 283–308 .
5.
Bates, B.R. , Poirot, K. , Harris, T.M. , Achter, P.J. and Condit, C.M. (in press). “Evaluating Direct-to-consumer Marketing of Race-based Pharmacogenomics: A Focus Group Study of Public Understandings of Applied Genomic Medication,”Journal of Health Communication (in press).
6.
Bates, B.R. , Templeton, A. , Achter, P.J. , Harris, T.M. and Condit, C.M. (2003) “What Does ‘A Gene for Heart Disease’ Mean? A Focus Group Study of Public Understandings of Genetic Risk Factors,”American Journal of Medical Genetics119A: 156–161 .
7.
Bauer, M.W. (2002) “Controversial Medical and Agri-food Biotechnology: A Cultivation Analysis,”Public Understanding of Science11: 93–111 .
8.
Bendle, M.F. (2002) “Teleportation, Cyborgs, and the Posthuman Ideology,”Social Semiotics12: 45–62 .
9.
Bevan, J.L. , Lynch, J.A. , Dubriwny, T.N. , Harris, T.M. , Achter, P.J. , Reeder, A.L. and Condit, C.M. (2003) “Informed Lay Preferences for Delivery of Racially Varied Pharmacogenomics,”Genetics in Medicine5: 393–399 .
10.
Brookey, R.A. (2001) “Bio-rhetoric, Background Beliefs and the Biology of Homosexuality,”Argumentation and Advocacy37: 171–183 .
11.
Bush, G.W. (2002a) “President’s Radio Address,” in Public Papers of the President, 2001, Vol. 1. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office .
12.
Bush, G.W. (2002b) President Highlights Education Reform at Back to School Event . Speech presented to Parkview Arts and Science Magnet High School, Little Rock, Arkansas, 29 August.
13.
Clinton, W.J. (1998) Remarks by the President at Presentation Ceremony for Presidential Awards for Excellence in Science, Math, and Engineering Mentoring . Speech delivered from the White House, Washington, DC, 10 September.
14.
Clinton, W.J. (1999) “Remarks at Springbrook High School in Silver Spring, Maryland,” in Public Papers of the President, 1998, Vol. 1. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office .
15.
Committee on Science Education K-12 (1998) Every Child a Scientist: Achieving Scientific Literacy for All. Washington, DC: National Academies Press .
16.
Condit, C.M. (1999a) “How the Public Understands Genetics: Non-deterministic and Non-discriminatory Interpretations of the ‘Blueprint’ Metaphor,”Public Understanding of Science8: 169–180 .
17.
Condit, C.M. (1999b) The Meanings of the Gene. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press .
18.
Condit, C.M. , Achter, P.J. , Lauer, I. and Sefcovic, E. (2002a) “The Changing Meanings of ‘Mutation’: A Contextualized Study of Public Discourse,”Human Mutation19: 69–75 .
19.
Condit, C.M. , Ofulue, N. and Sheedy, K.M. (1998) “Determinism and Mass-media Portrayals of Genetics,”American Journal of Human Genetics62: 979–984 .
20.
Condit, C.M. , Parrott, R.L. and Harris, T.M. (2002b) “Lay Understandings of the Relationship between Race and Genetics,”Public Understanding of Science11: 373–387 .
21.
Condit, C.M. , Templeton, A. , Bates, B.R. , Bevan, J.L. and Harris, T.M. (2003) “Attitudinal Barriers to Delivery of Race-targeted Pharmacogenomics among Informed Lay Persons,”Genetics in Medicine5: 385–392 .
22.
Conrad, P. (1999) “Uses of Expertise: Sources, Quotes, and Voice in the Reporting of Genetics in the News,”Public Understanding of Science8: 285–302 .
23.
Conrad, P. (2001) “Genetic Optimism: Framing Genes and Mental Illness in the News,”Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry25: 225–247 .
24.
Conrad, P. and Markens, S. (2001) “Constructing the ‘Gay Gene’ in the News: Optimism and Skepticism in the US and British Press,”Health5: 373–400 .
25.
Craig, D.A. (2000) “Ethical Language and Themes in News Coverage of Genetic Testing,”Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly77: 160–174 .
26.
Cunningham-Burley, S. and Kerr, A. (1999) “Defining the ‘Social’: Towards an Understanding of Scientific and Medical Discourses on the Social Aspects of the New Human Genetics,”Sociology of Health and Illness21: 647–668 .
27.
Daunton, Martin and Hilton, M. (2001) The Politics of Consumerism: Material Culture and Citizenship in Europe and America. Oxford: Berg .
28.
Davison, A. , Barns, I. and Schibechi, R. (1997) “Problematic Publics: A Critical Review of Surveys of Public Attitudes to Biotechnology,”Science, Technology and Human Values22: 317–348 .
29.
Dimopoulos, K. and Koulaidis, V. (2003) “Science and Technology Education for Citizenship: The Potential Role of the Press,”Science Education87: 241–256 .
30.
Doble, J. (1995) “Public Opinion about Issues Characterized by Technological Complexity and Scientific Uncertainty,”Public Understanding of Science4: 95–118 .
31.
Dorgan, K.A. , Williams, S. , Parrott, R.L. and Harris, T.M. (2003) “Hope and Despair in Pandora’s Box: Perceiving Reproductive Reward and Risk of Genetics Technologies and Information,”Women’s Studies in Communication26: 88–117 .
32.
Du Gay, P. , Hall, S. , Janes, L. , Mackay, H. and Negus, K. (1997) Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the Sony Walkman. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE .
33.
Fausto-Sterling, A. (2003) “Science Matters, Culture Matters,”Perspectives in Biology and Medicine46: 109–124 .
34.
Fink, R.D. (2002) “Cloning, Stem Cells, and the Current National Debate: Incorporating Ethics into a Large Introductory Biology Course,”Cell Biology Education1: 132–144 .
35.
Frewer, L.J. and Shepherd, R. (1994) “Attributing Information to Different Sources: Effects on the Perceived Qualities of Information, on the Perceived Relevance of Information, and on Attitude Formation,”Public Understanding of Science3: 385–401 .
36.
Frewer, L.J. , Howard, C. and Shepherd, R. (1997) “Public Concerns in the United Kingdom about General and Specific Applications of Genetic Engineering: Risk, Benefit, and Ethics,”Science, Technology and Human Values22: 98–124 .
37.
Frewer, L.J. , Howard, C. and Shepherd, R. (1998) “The Influence of Initial Attitudes on Responses to Communication about Genetic Engineering in Food Production,”Agriculture and Human Values15: 15–30 .
38.
Frewer, L.J. , Howard, C. , Hedderly, D. and Shepherd, R. (1999) “Reactions to Information about Genetic Engineering: Impact of Source Characteristics, Perceived Personal Relevance, and Persuasiveness,”Public Understanding of Science8: 35–50 .
39.
Garland, M.J. (1999) “Experts and the Public: A Needed Partnership for Genetic Policy,”Public Understanding of Science8: 241–254 .
40.
Geller, G. , Bernhardt, B.A. and Holtzman, N.A. (2002) “The Media and Public Reaction to Genetic Research,”MSJAMA287: 773-773 .
41.
Geller, G. , Tambor, E.S. , Bernhardt, B.A. , Rodgers, J. and Holtzman, N.A. (2003) “Houseofficers’ Reactions to Media Coverage about the Sequencing of the Human Genome,”Social Science and Medicine56: 2211–2220 .
42.
Gollust, S.E. , Hull, S.C. and Wilfond, B.S. (2002) “Limitations of Direct-to-consumer Advertising for Clinical Genetic Testing,”JAMA288: 1762–1767 .
43.
Gomel, E. (2000) “From Dr. Moreau to Dr. Mengele: The Biological Sublime,”Poetics Today21: 393–421 .
44.
Goodnight, G.T. (1989) “Toward a Social Theory of Argument,”Argumentation and Advocacy26: 60–70 .
45.
Hasian, M.A., Jr. (1996) The Rhetoric of Eugenics in Anglo-American Thought. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press .
46.
Henderson, L. and Kitzinger, J. (1999) “The Human Drama of Genetics: ‘Hard’ and ‘Soft’ Media Representations of Inherited Breast Cancer,”Sociology of Health and Illness21: 560–578 .
47.
Hubbard, R. and Wald, E. (1999) Exploding the Gene Myth, 3rd edition. Boston: Beacon Press .
48.
Kerr, A. , Cunningham-Burley, S. and Amos, A. (1998a) “The New Genetics and Health: Mobilizing Lay Expertise,”Public Understanding of Science7: 41–50 .
49.
Kerr, A. , Cunningham-Burley, S. and Amos, A. (1998b) “Drawing the Line: An Analysis of Lay People’s Discussions about the New Genetics,”Public Understanding of Science7: 113–133 .
50.
Lambert, H. and Rose, H. (1996) “Disembodied Knowledge? Making Sense of Medical Knowledge,” in A. Irwin and B. Wynne (eds) Misunderstanding Science?The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology Studies, pp. 65–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
51.
Lasswell, H. (1948) “The Structure and Function of Communication in Society,” in L. Byson (ed.) The Communication of Ideas, pp. 37–51. New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies .
52.
Leftwich, G.M. (2002) “Science and the Humanities: The Case for State Humanities Councils,”Technology in Society24: 523–530 .
53.
Lessl, T.M. (1996) “Naturalizing Science: Two Episodes in the Evolution of a Rhetoric of Scientism,”Western Journal of Communication60: 379–396 .
54.
Levitt, M. (2003) “Public Consultation in Bioethics: What’s the Point of Asking the Public When They Have neither Scientific nor Ethical Expertise?,”Heath Care Analysis11: 15–25 .
55.
Macintyre, S. (1995) “The Public Understanding of Science or the Scientific Understanding of the Public? A Review of the Social Context of the ‘New Genetics,’”Public Understanding of Science4: 223–232 .
56.
Makgoba, M.W. (2002) “Politics, the Media and Science in HIV/AIDS: The Peril of Pseudoscience,”Vaccine20: 1899–1904 .
57.
Michael, M. (1992) “Lay Discourses of Science: Science-in-general, Science-in-particular and Self,”Science, Technology and Human Values17: 313–333 .
58.
Michael, M. and Carter, S. (2001) “The Facts about Fictions and Vice Versa: Public Understanding of Human Genetics,”Science as Culture10: 5–32 .
59.
Miller, D. (1995) “Introducing the ‘Gay Gene’: Media and Scientific Representations,”Public Understanding of Science4: 269–284 .
60.
Molitor, F. (1993) “Accuracy in Science News Reporting by Newspapers: The Case of Aspirin for the Prevention of Heart Attacks,”Health Communication5: 209–224 .
61.
Morris, S.H. and Adley, C.C. (2001) “Irish Public Perceptions and Attitudes to Modern Biotechnology: An Overview with a Focus on GM Foods,”Trends in Biotechnology19: 43–48 .
62.
Nelkin, D. (1994) “Promotional Metaphors and their Popular Appeal,”Public Understanding of Science3: 25–31 .
63.
Nelkin, D. and Lindee, M.S. (1995) The DNA Mystique. New York: W.H. Freeman .
64.
Nordgren, A. (2003) “Metaphors in Behavioral Genetics,”Theoretical Medicine24: 59–77 .
65.
Ochoa, E.R. and Vacanti, J.P. (2002) “An Overview of the Pathology and Approaches to Tissue Engineering,”Annals of the New York Academy of Science979: 10–26 .
66.
Parrott, R.L. , Silk, K.J. and Condit, C.M. (2003) “Diversity in Lay Perceptions of the Sources of Human Traits: Genes, Environments, and Personal Behaviors,”Social Science in Medicine56: 1099–1109 .
67.
Parrott, R.L. , Silk, K.J. , Weiner, J. , Condit, C.M. , Harris, T.M. and Bernhardt, J. (2004) “Deriving Lay Models of Uncertainty about Genes’ Role in Illness Causation to Guide Communication about Human Genetics,”Journal of Communication54: 105–122 .
68.
Parsons, E. and Atkinson, P. (1992) “Lay Constructions of Genetic Risk,”Sociology of Health and Illness14: 437–455 .
69.
Petersen, A. (1999) “The Portrayal of Research in Genetic-based Differences of Sex and Sexual Orientation: A Study of ‘Popular’ Science Journals, 1980–1997,”Journal of Communication Inquiry23: 163–182 .
70.
Petersen, A. (2001) “Biofantasies: Genetics and Medicine in the Print News Media,”Social Science and Medicine52: 1255–1268 .
71.
Priest, S.H. (1995) “Information Equity, Public Understanding of Science, and the Biotechnology Debate,”Journal of Communication45: 39–54 .
72.
Ramon, D. , Dorcey, E. , Gil, J.V. and Serrano, A. (2002) “GM Foods in Spanish Newspapers,”Trends in Biotechnology20: 285–286 .
73.
Readership Institute (2003) Consumers, Media, and U.S. Newspapers: Results from the Impact Study. Chicago: Readership Institute, the Media Management Center at Northwestern University .
74.
Richards, M. (1996) “Lay and Professional Knowledge of Genetics and Inheritance,”Public Understanding of Science5: 217–230 .
75.
Rosner, M. and Johnson, T.R. (1995) “Telling Stories: Metaphors of the Human Genome Project,”Hypatia10: 104–129 .
76.
Rothman, B.K. (1998) Genetic Maps and Human Imaginations: The Limits of Science in Understanding Who We Are. New York: W.W. Norton .
77.
Sapp, W. and Smith, E. (1996) Plain Talk about the Human Genome Project: A Tuskegee University Conference on its Promises and Perils. Tuskegee, AL: Tuskegee University Press .
78.
Selden, S. and Montagu, A. (1999) Inheriting Shame: The Story of Eugenics and Racism in America. New York: Teachers College Press .
79.
Shannon, C.E. and Weaver, W. (1949) The Mathematical Model of Communication. Chicago: University of Illinois Press .
80.
Singer, E. , Corning, A.D. and Antonucci, T. (1999) “Attitudes toward Genetic Testing and Fetal Diagnosis, 1990–1996,”Journal of Health and Social Behavior40: 429–445 .
81.
Sitko, B.J. (2002) “Reconstructing the Stem Cell Debate,”Princeton Journal of Bioethics5: 92–104 .
82.
Stockdale, A. (1999) “Waiting for the Cure: Mapping the Social Relations of Human Gene Therapy Research,”Sociology of Health and Illness21: 579–596 .
83.
Thacker, E. (2001) “The Science Fictions of Technoscience: The Politics of Simulation and a Challenge for New Media Art,”Leonardo34: 155–158 .
84.
Thacker, E. (2003) “Data Made Flesh: Biotechnology and the Discourse of the Posthuman,”Cultural Critique53: 72–97 .
85.
Turner, S.S. (2002) “Jurassic Park Technology in the Bioinformatics Economy: How Cloning Narratives Negotiate the Telos of DNA,”American Literature74: 887–909 .
86.
Turney, J. (1998) Frankenstein’s Footsteps: Science, Genetics, and Popular Culture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press .
87.
United States Bureau of the Census (2002) 1997 Economic Census [on-line], 17 December. Available: http://factfinder.census.gov/
88.
Weiss, I.R. , Knapp, M.S. , Hollweg, K.S. and Burrill, G. (2001) Investigating the Influence of Standards: A Framework for Research in Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press .
89.
Wilkes, L. , Withnall, J. , Harris, R. , White, K. , Beale, B. , Hobson, J. , Durham, M. and Kristjanson, L. (2001) “Stories about Breast Cancer in Australian Women’s Magazines: Information Sources for Risk, Early Detection and Treatment,”European Journal of Oncology Nursing5: 80–88 .
90.
Wolpert, L. (1999) “Is Science Dangerous?,”Nature398: 281–282 .
91.
Wynne, B. (1995) “The Public Understanding of Science,” in S. Jasanoff , G.E. Markel , J.C. Petersen and T. Pinch (eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (revised edition), pp. 361–388. London: SAGE .
92.
Young, J.S. (2002) “Mass Media and Medicine: Challenges and Opportunities,”MSJAMA287: 772-772 .
93.
Zeta Phi Beta National Educational Foundation (2000) The Challenges and Impact of Human Genome Research for Minority Communities: Proceedings. Philadelphia, PA: Zeta Phi Beta .
94.
Zilinskas, R.A. and Balint, P.J. (2000) The Human Genome Project and Minority Communities: Ethical, Social, and Political Dilemmas. Westport, CT: Praeger .
95.
Zimmerman, B.K. (1999) “The Use of Genetic Information and Public Accountability,”Public Understanding of Science8: 223–240 .
