Attitudes towards genetic testing: The role of genetic literacy, motivated cognition, and socio-demographic characteristics.

Understanding reasons for why people choose to have or not to have a genetic test is essential given the ever-increasing use of genetic technologies in everyday life. The present study explored the multiple drivers of people's attitudes towards genetic testing. Using the International Genetic Literacy and Attitudes Survey (iGLAS), we collected data on: (1) willingness to undergo testing; (2) genetic literacy; (3) motivated cognition; and (4) demographic and cultural characteristics. The 37 variables were explored in the largest to-date sample of 4311 participants from diverse demographic and cultural backgrounds. The results showed that 82% of participants were willing to undergo genetic testing for improved treatment; and over 73%-for research. The 35 predictor variables together explained only a small proportion of variance: 7%-in the willingness to test for Treatment; and 6%-for Research. The strongest predictors of willingness to undergo genetic testing were genetic knowledge and deterministic beliefs. Concerns about data misuse and about finding out unwanted health-related information were weakly negatively associated with willingness to undergo genetic testing. We also found some differences in factors linked to attitudes towards genetic testing across the countries included in this study. Our study demonstrates that decision-making regarding genetic testing is influenced by a large number of potentially interacting factors. Further research into these factors may help consumers to make decisions regarding genetic testing that are right for their specific circumstances.

Japanese Translation and Validation of Genomic Knowledge Measure in the International Genetics Literacy and Attitudes Survey (iGLAS-GK).

Knowledge of genetics is essential for understanding the results of genetic testing and its implications. Recent advances in genomic research have allowed us to predict the risk of onset of common diseases based on individual genomic information. It is anticipated that more people will receive such estimates of risks based on their genomic data. However, currently, there is no measure for genetic knowledge that includes post-genome sequencing advancements in Japan. In this study, we translated the genomic knowledge measure in the International Genetics Literacy and Attitudes Survey (iGLAS-GK) into Japanese and validated it in a general Japanese adult population (n = 463). The mean score was 8.41 (SD 2.56, range 3-17). The skewness and kurtosis were 0.534 and 0.088, respectively, and the distribution showed a slightly positive skewness. Exploratory factor analysis proposed a six-factor model. Results for 16 of the 20 items of the Japanese version of the iGLAS-GK were comparable to those from previous studies in other populations. These results indicate that the Japanese version is reliable and can be used to measure the genomic knowledge of adults in the general population, and this version of the knowledge measure maintains the multidimensional structure for assessing genomic knowledge.

What Do People Know About the Heritability of Sleep?

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Twin studies have provided data about the relative weight of genetic and environmental factors on sleep variables over the last few decades. However, heritability is a non-intuitive concept and it is often misunderstood even amongst the scientific community. This study aimed to analyze: (1) understanding of the meaning of heritability of insomnia; (2) the accuracy of estimations of heritability in the general population regarding three sleep traits (sleep duration, sleep quality and insomnia); (3) perceptions of the effectiveness of different treatments for insomnia depending on how the disorder is presented (i.e. having an environmental or genetic etiology) and whether the subject's estimate of genetic influence on sleep traits impacted beliefs about the effectiveness of different treatments. METHODS: Participants (N = 3658) completed a survey which included: questions about general genetic knowledge; a specific question about the meaning of heritability; estimates of heritability of three different sleep traits; and the effectiveness of different treatments for insomnia depending on how the etiology of this condition was presented. RESULTS: Fewer than 25% of the participants selected the correct description of the heritability of insomnia. Almost half of the sample incorrectly believed that heritability refers to the chance of passing a disorder onto their children. We also found that participants provided different estimates for the effectiveness of different treatments depending on the presumed etiology of the disorder. CONCLUSION: Most people do not have accurate knowledge about the concept of heritability. People's assumptions about the etiology of a disorder may influence which treatments they consider most effective.

Judging in the genomic era: judges' genetic knowledge, confidence and need for training.

Genetic information is increasingly used in many contexts, including health, insurance, policing and sentencing-with numerous potential benefits and risks. Protecting from the related risks requires updates to laws and procedures by justice systems. These updates depend to a large extent on what the key stakeholders-the judiciary-know and think about the use of genetic information. This study used a battery of 25 genetic knowledge items to collect data from 73 supreme court judges from the same country (Romania) on their knowledge of genetic information. Their responses were compared with those of two other groups: lawyers (but not judges; N = 94) and non-lawyers (N = 116) from the same country. The data were collected at approximately the same time from the three groups. The judges' results were also compared to the results obtained from a general population data collection (N = 5310). The results showed that: (1) judges had overall better knowledge of genetics than the other groups, but their knowledge was uneven across different genetic concepts; (2) judges were overall more confident in their knowledge than the other two groups, but their confidence was quite low; and (3) the correlation between knowledge and confidence was moderate for judges, weak for lawyers and not significant for non-lawyers. Finally, 100% of the judges agreed that information on gene-environment processes should be included in judges' training. Increasing genetic expertise of the justice stakeholders is an important step towards achieving adequate legal protection against genetic data misuse.

To Use or Not to Use: No Consensus on Whether and How to Apply Genetic Information in the Justice System.

Little is known about the public's attitudes towards applying genetic information in the justice system. This study aimed to extend previous research to explore this among the general public and those with training in law. Data were collected from over 10,000 participants, including 486 lawyers and law students. We analysed eight available relevant items from the International Genetic Literacy and Attitudes Survey (iGLAS). The majority of participants viewed genetic information as relevant to justice. For example, 65% believed that we should make provisions (legal and policy) to buffer the effects of genetic disadvantage on individuals, and almost 60% believed that genetic information should be taken into account in sentencing. At the same time, many participants (70%) disagreed that genetic influences on behaviour negate free will. The results of the correlational analyses suggest that people who consider genetic information relevant in one context tend to consider it relevant across all aspects of the justice system, including in sentencing, crime prevention and access to justice. Overall, the results suggest that views on the use of genetics by justice systems are complex and widely varied. Further research is needed to understand these complex views.

New literacy challenge for the twenty-first century: genetic knowledge is poor even among well educated.

We live in an age of rapidly advancing genetic research. This research is generating new knowledge that has implications for personal health and well-being. The present study assessed the level of genetic knowledge and personal engagement with genetics in a large sample (N = 5404) of participants. Participants received secondary education in 78 countries, with the largest samples from Russia, the UK and the USA. The results showed significant group differences in genetic knowledge between different countries, professions, education levels and religious affiliations. Overall, genetic knowledge was poor. The questions were designed to assess basic genetic literacy. However, only 1.2% of participants answered all 18 questions correctly, and the average score was 65.5%. Genetic knowledge was related to peoples' attitudes towards genetics. For example, those with greater genetic knowledge were on average more willing to use genetic knowledge for their personal health management. Based on the results, the paper proposes a number of immediate steps that societies can implement to empower the public to benefit from ever-advancing genetic knowledge.

GENES AND GINI: WHAT INEQUALITY MEANS FOR HERITABILITY.

Research has established that genetic differences among people explain a greater or smaller proportion of the variation in life outcomes in different environmental conditions. This review evaluates the results of recent educationally relevant behavioural genetic studies and meta-analyses in the context of recent trends in income and wealth distribution. The pattern of results suggests that inequality and social policies can have profound effects on the heritability of educational attainment and achievement in a population (Gene-Gini interplay). For example, heritability is generally higher at greater equality levels, suggesting that inequality stifles the expression of educationally relevant genetic propensities. The review concludes with a discussion of the mechanisms of Gene-Gini interplay and what the findings mean for efforts to optimize education for all people.