This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Levitt, M. Articles by Goodacre, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Gene Week: a novel way of consulting the public

Centre for Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics (CESAGen), Furness College, Lancaster University, LA1 4YG, UKm.levitt{at}lancaster.ac.uk

Kate Weiner

Institute for the Study of Genetics, Biorisks & Society, Law and Social Sciences Building, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK

John Goodacre

Lancashire School of Health and Postgraduate Medicine, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK

Within academic circles, the "deficit" model of public understanding of science has been subject to increasing critical scrutiny by those who favor more constructivist approaches. These suggest that "the public" can articulate sophisticated ideas about the social and ethical implications of science regardless of their level of technical knowledge. The seminal studies following constructivist approaches have generally involved small-scale qualitative investigations, which have minimized the pre-framing of issues to a greater or lesser extent. This article describes the Gene Week Project, sponsored by the Wellcome Trust, which attempted to extend this work to a large-scale consultation on genetics and health through the medium of a local daily newspaper. Readers were invited to respond to a set of open-ended questions that accompanied stimulus material published each day for five consecutive weekdays. The articles were written with the intention of extending the limited range of discourses around genetics and biotechnology that are usually presented by the popular media (hope, fear, tragedy and bravery). Responses raised overarching issues about the place of emerging health technologies in society reminiscent of previous open-ended consultations in this field. The paper ends with a critical discussion about the potential of this method to contribute to the further development of open-ended public consultations.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 14, No. 1, 67-79 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0963662505047824


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. Weiner Lay Involvement and Legitimacy: The Construction of Expertise and Participation within HEART UK Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, April 1, 2009; 38(2): 254 - 273. [Abstract] [PDF]