Applying a Theory-Based Framework to Understand Public Knowledge of Genetic Risk Factors: A Case for the Distinction between How-To Knowledge and Principles Knowledge

Abstract

Objective: Using E.M. Rogers’s knowledge framework as presented in his seminal innovation-decision process, this paper aims to present an overview of the general public’s knowledge of genetics. It also makes a first attempt to examine the statistical validity of this framework. Methods: A sample of 2,500 members of the Dutch general population was presented with a questionnaire containing measures of 3 increasingly complex forms of knowledge: awareness knowledge, (practical) how-to knowledge and (theoretical) principles knowledge. Results: The general public seems to be moderately aware of genetic risk factors for multifactorial diseases. In general, how-to knowledge seems fair, whereas principles knowledge is limited and superficial. Additional analyses provided empirical evidence for the distinction between awareness knowledge, how-to knowledge and principles knowledge. Conclusion: The innovation-decision process, and specifically Rogers’s knowledge framework, provides a useful tool for public education in genetics. Future research may build upon and extend our findings by examining the persuasion, decision, implementation, and possibly the confirmation stages of the innovation-decision process concerning genetic education.

How Well Do Customers of Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomic Testing Services Comprehend Genetic Test Results? Findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics Study

“…Several of our findings were consistent with those of other studies indicating that numeracy, genetic knowledge, and education level are likely to predict comprehension of genetic information [24, 27]. It is important to note that both genetic knowledge and numeracy were found to be significant correlates of comprehension.…”

Genetic Knowledge within a National Australian Sample: Comparisons with Other Diverse Populations

“…The addition of items to comprehensibly measure genetic knowledge in the areas of social group and behaviour is highly desirable in future research. Furthermore, items that assess individuals’ understanding of multi-factorial disease and penetrance should be considered [2, 25, 47] to ensure that a sufficient depth of knowledge is understood by those being assessed.…”

Utilization of Genetic Counseling after Direct‐to‐Consumer Genetic Testing: Findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics (PGen) Study

“…These questions were selected from several validated measures of assessing genetic knowledge in the lay public (Bowling et al, 2008; Furr & Kelly, 1999; Molster, Charles, Samanek, & O’Leary, 2009; Smerecnik, Mesters, De Vries, & De Vries, 2011). Participants were given a score of 0–9 based on the sum of their correct responses (Ostergren et al, 2015).…”