Understanding Public Opinion in Debates over Biomedical Research: Looking beyond Political Partisanship to Focus on Beliefs about Science and Society

Abstract

As social scientists have investigated the political and social factors influencing public opinion in science-related policy debates, there has been growing interest in the implications of this research for public communication and outreach. Given the level of political polarization in the United States, much of the focus has been on partisan differences in public opinion, the strategies employed by political leaders and advocates that promote those differences, and the counter-strategies for overcoming them. Yet this focus on partisan differences tends to overlook the processes by which core beliefs about science and society impact public opinion and how these schema are often activated by specific frames of reference embedded in media coverage and popular discourse. In this study, analyzing cross-sectional, nationally representative survey data collected between 2002 and 2010, we investigate the relative influence of political partisanship and science-related schema on Americans' support for embryonic stem cell research. In comparison to the influence of partisan identity, our findings suggest that generalized beliefs about science and society were more chronically accessible, less volatile in relation to media attention and focusing events, and an overall stronger influence on public opinion. Classifying respondents into four unique audience groups based on their beliefs about science and society, we additionally find that individuals within each of these groups split relatively evenly by partisanship but differ on other important dimensions. The implications for public engagement and future research on controversies related to biomedical science are discussed.

Human Cardiomyocytes Prior to Birth by Integration-Free Reprogramming of Amniotic Fluid Cells

“…Moreover, concerns regarding inadvertent tumor formation with ESCs and many iPSCs when injected in vivo have limited enthusiasm for their clinical translation potential [ 39 ]. Finally, ethical objections to the use of human ESC‐based therapies in the United States and elsewhere on the basis of religious/social norms should not be underestimated [ 40 ].…”

The Dutch public are positive about the colorectal cancer-screening programme, but is this a well-informed opinion?

“…We first asked participants if they thought it was good that the CRC screening programme existed in the Netherlands [37, 40] (5-point scale: 1 =  totally not good, 5 =  totally good ). In addition, we asked participants in a more indirect way about their support for the CRC screening programme using a ranking question and a forced-choice question.…”

“…Previous research into public opinion (mostly in the field of sociology or political science) generally assessed public opinion by determining the level of support [37, 39–41] and or attitude towards a certain issue or action [29, 30, 36, 37, 40, 41] among a large group of individuals representative for the public. Studies that assessed both level of support and attitude did this mostly based on the belief that people’s attitude towards a certain issue affects their level of support.…”

“…The most common key factors seem to be people’s awareness, knowledge and perceived social norm regarding a certain issue. People’s views towards a certain issue are likely to be affected by how aware and knowledgeable they are of the issue [26, 40–43], and by how they perceive others like them to think and act regarding that issue (i.e. perceived social norm) [32, 39, 42, 44–46].…”

Physicians’ Preference towards Stem Cells as Regenerative Medicine-Lacks Clarity

“…Astonishingly, there are diversity among the public views towards stem cell sources and policies [22]. Democratic campaign strategists have observed stem cell research as politically favorable to win votes from moderate and weak-identified Republicans [23].…”