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 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 Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Richards, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Lay and professional knowledge of genetics and inheritance

Development at the University of Cambridge, Centre for Family Research in the Social and Political Sciences Faculty, Free School Lane, Cambridge CB2 3RF, UK

Despite almost a century of educational effort, studies of both schoolchildren and adults show that the public understanding of Mendelian genetics is very limited. A similar conclusion is drawn from studies of those who have been offered explanations of inheritance in genetic counselling clinics. The aim of this paper is to provide an explanation of these observations. It is argued that Mendelian explanations of inheritance conflict in a number of ways with a lay knowledge of inheritance that is general in society. Furthermore, it is suggested that lay knowledge is grounded in concepts of kinship which are themselves sustained by everyday social practice and relationships, which may make the lay knowledge of inheritance particularly resistant to change. It is suggested that Mendelian explanations may not be easily assimilated because of the conflicts with pre-existing lay knowledge that an individual holds. Preliminary results are described from an empirical study which tests the hypothesis that ideas of genetic connectedness are derived from concepts of kin relationships. The evidence appears to confirm the hypothesis. Parallels are drawn between the history of the acceptance of Mendel's ideas in the scientific community and the assimilation (or the lack of it) of Mendelian explanations by the public. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of public education in Mendelian genetics in schools and genetic counselling clinics, and the ways in which it could be more effective.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 5, No. 3, 217-230 (1996)
DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/5/3/003


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Santos The diversity of everyday ideas about inherited disorders Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2006; 15(3): 259 - 275. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Lock, J. Freeman, R. Sharples, and S. Lloyd When it runs in the family: putting susceptibility genes in perspective Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2006; 15(3): 277 - 300. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Rodriguez Talking brains: a cognitive semantic analysis of an emerging folk neuropsychology Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2006; 15(3): 301 - 330. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. R. Bates Public culture and public understanding of genetics: a focus group study Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2005; 14(1): 47 - 65. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Emslie, K. Hunt, and G. Watt A chip off the old block? Lay understandings of inheritance among men and women in mid-life Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2003; 12(1): 47 - 65. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Macleod, D. Craufurd, and K. Booth Patients' Perceptions of What Makes Genetic Counselling Effective: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis J Health Psychol, March 1, 2002; 7(2): 145 - 156. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. S. Shaw III and K. L. Bassi Lay Attitudes toward Genetic Testing for Susceptibility to Inherited Diseases J Health Psychol, July 1, 2001; 6(4): 405 - 423. [Abstract] [PDF]