“I don’t believe it.” Acceptance and skepticism of genetic health information among African-American and White smokers
Section snippets
Study overview
Thirteen focus groups (N = 84) were conducted in the St. Louis metropolitan area from April to August 2012. Participants stratified by race (African American, White) and educational attainment (<Bachelor's degree, ≥Bachelor's degree). Four groups fell within the higher education/African American and lower education/African American strata, two groups within the higher education/White stratum, and three groups in the lower education/White stratum. Assuming six to eight participants per group, we
Preliminary analyses
Of 84 participants, 44 (52.4%) were men, 52 (61.9%) were African American, and 57 (67.9%) reported having less than a Bachelor's degree. Their mean age was 42.8 years (SD = 12.9 years). Participants were established smokers; 78 (95.9%) smoked daily and 25 (29.8%) smoked at least a pack of cigarettes daily.
Model summary
As described in detail below, participants' explanations for accepting, rejecting, or being skeptical of the news that nicotine addiction has a genetic component were based primarily on their
Discussion
Ineffective communication is a critical barrier to the successful translation of genomics research into public health and clinical practice. Overcoming this barrier would facilitate translation and might help prevent the exacerbation of health disparities due to unequal access to genomics technologies. The present research makes four key contributions. First, it fills a gap in scientific understanding of the way in which the general public—particularly those who may be medically underserved,
Conclusions
Smokers used their existing knowledge and beliefs as context through which to interpret a novel mass media report about the discovery of a genetic variant associated with increased severity of nicotine addiction. Many smokers responded with skepticism and mistrust, due in part to discrepancies between their understandings of the smoking-genetics relationship and expert understandings. Resolving these discrepancies in a way that respects smokers’ experiential knowledge and also helps them to
Conflict of interest
Erika Waters, Linda Ball, and Sarah Gehlert each declare that they have no financial or personal conflicts of interest. The study sponsors had no role in study design; collection, analysis and interpretation of data; writing of the report and in the decision to submit the report for publication.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a grant from the American Cancer Society (ACS) to Erika Waters (MRSG-11-214-01-CPPB) and by the Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences grant UL1TR000448 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of the NIH or ACS.
References (51)
Convergence of genetic findings for nicotine dependence and smoking related diseases with chromosome 15q24-25
Trends Pharmacol. Sci.
(2010)- et al.
The limits of lifestyle: re-assessing 'fatalism' in the popular culture of illness prevention
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1992) - et al.
Return of individual genetic results in a high-risk sample: enthusiasm and positive behavioral change
Genet. Med.
(2015) - et al.
Self-regulation and the behavioural response to DNA risk information: a theoretical analysis and framework for future research
Soc. Sci. Med.
(2006) Biofantasies: genetics and medicine in the print news media
Soc. Sci. Med.
(2001)- et al.
Multifactorial beliefs about the role of genetics and behavior in common health conditions: prevalence and associations with participant characteristics and engagement in health behaviors
Genet. Med.
(2014) Public culture and public understanding of genetics: a focus group study
Public Underst. Sci.
(2005)- et al.
What does “A gene for heart disease” mean? A focus group study of public understandings of genetic risk factors
Am. J. Med. Genet.
(2003) - et al.
Communication strategies for enhancing understanding of the behavioral implications of genetic and biomarker tests for disease risk: the role of coherence
J. Behav. Med.
(2012) Constructing Grounded Theory: a Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis
(2006)
The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context
How geneticists can help reporters to get their story right
Nat. Rev. Genet.
Public understandings of genetics and health
Clin. Genet.
When do people deploy genetic determinism? A review pointing to the need for multifactorial theories of public utilization of scientific discourses
Sociol. Compass
An exploratory study of the impact of news headlines on genetic determinism
Sci. Commun.
Believing in both genetic determinism and behavioral action: a materialist framework and implications
Public Underst. Sci.
Public understanding of risks from gene-environment interaction in common diseases: implications for public communications
Public Health Genomics
Motivated skepticism: use of differential decision criteria for preferred and nonpreferred conclusions
J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.
Portrayal of genetic risk for breast cancer in ethnic and non-ethnic newspapers
Women's Health
Why (cancer) communication can be hard
J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr.
Lifestyle advice combined with personalized estimates of genetic or phenotypic risk of type 2 diabetes, and objectively measured physical activity: a randomized controlled trial
PLoS Med.
Genomics in public health: perspective from the office of public health genomics at the centers for disease control and prevention (CDC)
Healthc. (Basel)
Competing paradigms in qualitative research
Lay and expert interpretations of cancer cluster evidence
Risk Anal.
Personal attributions for melanoma risk in melanoma-affected patients and family members
J. Behav. Med.
Cited by (16)
The effect of ending disclosure on the persuasiveness of narrative PSAs
2021, Journal of Business ResearchCitation Excerpt :The process whereby the audience focuses on the events in the story, establishing links and relationships between the story, its characters, and the narrative world, is termed narrative thinking. This thought process inhibits the formation of counter-arguments that challenge the story’s persuasive attempt (Escalas, 2004; van Laer et al., 2014), which frequently occurs in argument-based persuasion (Waters, Ball, & Gehlert, 2017). In other words, a transported audience is too cognitively busy engaging in narrative thinking to generate counterarguments against the story’s persuasive attempt (Green & Brock, 2002).
Contextualizing geneticization and medical pluralism: How variable institutionalization of traditional, complementary, and alternative medicine (TCAM) conditions effects of genetic beliefs on utilization
2020, Social Science and MedicineCitation Excerpt :Such individuals might endorse multiple causes of health simultaneously, such as genes, economic conditions, and behavioral choices. For example, alternative models about smoking and nicotine addiction (e.g. the choice model and the socio-economic model) affect how people accept the genetic model and, as a result, lead to a fourth model that accommodates both the genetic model and these alternative models (Waters et al., 2017). Health service users’ “implicit theories” regarding human development (Taber et al., 2017) and notions of “human rights” (Bouchard and Renaud, 1997; Raz, 2004) play similar roles in production of various multi-causal approaches to health.
Testing Explanations for Skepticism of Personalized Risk Information
2023, Medical Decision MakingThe Effects of Website Traits and Medical Skepticism on Patients’ Willingness to Follow Web-Based Medical Advice: Web-Based Experiment
2022, Journal of Medical Internet Research