Does knowledge make a di%erence? The association between knowledge about genes and attitudes toward gene tests

Journal of Health Communication

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 29-39

  Jallinoja, Piia ^a   Aro, Arja R ^a  

^a NATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; EMPIRICAL APPROACH; FINLAND; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PUBLIC OPINION;

EMPIRICAL APPROACH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

DATA COLLECTION; FINLAND; GENETIC SCREENING; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; PUBLIC OPINION;

EID: 0033629555     PISSN: 10810730     EISSN: 10870415     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10810730050019546     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Aro, A. R., Hakonen, A., Hietala, M., LoÈ nnqvist, J., Niemelä, P., Peltonen, L., & Aula, P. (1997). Acceptance of genetic testing in a general population : Age, education and gender differences. Patient Education and Counseling, 32, 41-49.
2. Beauchamp, T. L. (1994). The “Four Principles” Approach. In R. Gillon (Ed.), Principles of Health Care Ethics (pp. 3-12). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
3. Carnaghan, E. (1994). Alienation, Apathy or Ambivalence ?: “Don’t Knows” and Democracy in Russia. Glasgow: Centre for the Study of Public Policy, University of Strathclyde.
4. Davison, A., Barns, I., & Schibeci, R. (1997). Problematic publics : A critica l review of surveys of public attitudes towards biotechnology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 22, 317-348.
5. Decruyenaere, M., Evers- Kiebooms, G., Denayer, L., & Van den Berghe, H. (1992). Cystic .brosis : Community knowledge and attitudes towards carrier screening and prenatal diagnosis. Clinical Genetics, 41, 189-196.
6. Evans, G., & Durant, J. (1995). The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain. Public Understanding of Science, 4, 57-74.
7. Fryns, J. (1995). Screening for the Fragile X syndrome: The necessity for international guide- lines for molecular genetics predictive testing in general. Genetic Counseling, 6, 293-296.
8. Hietala, M., Aula, P., SyvaÈ nen, A.- C., Isoniemi, A., Peltonen, L., & Palotie, A. (1996). DNA- based carrier screening in primary healthcare: Screening for aspartylglucosaminuaria mutations in maternity health offices. Clinical Chemistry, 42, 1398-1404.
9. Hietala, M., Hakonen, A., Aro, A. R., Niemelä, P., Peltonen, L., & Aula, P. (1995). Attitudes toward genetic testing among the general population and relatives of patients with severe genetic disease: A survey from Finland. American Journal of Human Genetics, 56, 1493-1500.
10. Jallinoja, P., & Aro, A. R. (1999). Knowledge about genes and heredity among Finns. New Genetics and Society, 18, 101-110.
11. Jallinoja, P., Hakonen, A., Aro, A. R. Niemelä, P., Hietala, M., Lönnqvist, J., Peltonen, L., & Aula, P. (1998). Attitudes towards genetic testing : Analysis of contradictions. Soc Sci Med, 46, 1367-1374.
12. Kerr, A., Cunningham- Burley, S., & Amos, A. (1998). The new genetics and health : Mobi- lizing lay expertise. Public Understanding of Science, 7, 41-60.
13. Kinmonth, A. L., Reinhard, J., Bobrow, M., & Pauker, S. (1998). Implications for clinical services in Britain and the United States. British Medical J ournal, 316, 767-770.
14. Lambert, H., & Rose, H. (1996). Disembodied knowledge? Making sense of medical science. In A. Irwin & B. Wynne (Eds.), Misunderstanding Science? (pp. 65-83). Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press.
15. Lock, R., Miles, C., & Hughes, S. (1995). The influence of teaching on knowledge and atti- tudes in biotechnology and genetic engineering contexts : Implications for teaching con- troversia l issues and the public understanding of science. School Science Review, 76, 47-59.
16. Macnicol, A. M., Wright, A. F., & Watson, M. L. (1991). Education and attitudes in families with adult polycystic kidney disease. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 6, 27-30.
17. Michie, S., Drake, H., Bobrow, M., & Marteau, T. (1995). A comparison of public and pro- fessionals’ attitudes towards genetic developments. Public Understanding of Science, 4, 243-253.
18. Ministry of Social AOEairs and Health. (1998). muistio [Memo of the GeeniseulontatyoÈ ryhmän working party of genetic screening ]. Helsinki : Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.
19. Netherlands Health Council. (1994). Genetic screening. Report of a Committee of the Health Council of the Netherlands. Gezondheidsraad 1994/22E.
20. Ramsay, G. (1998). DNA chips : State- of- the- art. Nature Biotechnology, 16, 40-44.
21. Schroeder- Kurth, T. M. (1993). Ethical standards of genetic counselling. In H. Haker, R. Hearn, & K. Steigleder (Eds.), Ethics of Human Genome Analysis. European Perspectives (pp. 125-135). TuÈ bingen : Attempto Verlag.
22. Singer, E. (1991). Public attitudes towards genetic testing. Population Research and Policy Review, 10, 235-255.
23. Statistics Finland. (1996). Statistical Yearbook of Finland 1996. Helsinki : Statistic s Finland
24. Turner, J., & Michael, M. (1996). What do we know about “don’t knows”? Or, contexts of “ignorance.” Social Science Information, 35, 15-37.
25. Wood- Harper, J., & Harris, J. (1996). Ethics of human genome analysis : Some virtues and vices. In T. Marteau & M. Richards (Eds.), The Troubled Helix. Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics (pp. 274-294). Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press.
26. Wynne, B. (1995). Public understanding of science. In S. Jasanoff, G. E. Markle, J. C. Peter- sen, & T. Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 361-388). London: Sage.