Public opinion on DNA paternity testing: The influence of the media

People and Place

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 4-13

  Gilding, Michael ^a   Turney, Lyn ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DNA; PATERNITY;

AUSTRALASIA; AUSTRALIA;

EID: 33748760904     PISSN: 10394788     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. American Association of Blood Banks (AABB) (1992-2004) Annual Report Summary for Testing 1991-2003 Bethesada MD: AABB (typescripts)
2. M. Gilding, 'DNA paternity testing without the knowledge or consent of the mother: new technology, new choices, new debates', Family Matters, Australian Institute of Family Studies, no. 68, Winter, 2004, p. 70
3. M. Gilding, 'DNA Paternity Tests: A comparative analysis of the US and Australia', Health Sociology Review, vol. 15, no. 1, 2006, p. 84
4. M. Gilding, 'Rampant misattributed paternity: the creation of an urban myth', People and Place, vol. 13, no. 2, 2005, pp. 7-8;
5. Gilding op cit., 2006, pp. 91-3
6. M. R. Anderlik and M.A. Rothstein, 'DNA-based identity testing and the future of the family: a research agenda', American Journal of Law & Medicine, vol. 28, 2002, p. 220;
7. D. Nelkin, 'Paternity palaver in the media: selling identity tests', in M.A. Rothstein, T.H. Murray, G.E. Kaebnick and M. Anderlik Majumder (Eds), Genetic Ties and the Family: The Impact of Paternity Testing on Parents and Children, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 2005, p. 9;
8. Gilding, op. cit., 2004, pp. 68-75
9. Nelkin, op. cit., p. 4
10. Gilding, op. cit., 2006, pp. 91-3
11. L. Turney, M. Gilding, C. Critchley, P. Shields, L. Bakacs and K. Butler, 'Genetic paternity testing: public perceptions and the influence of gender', Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, vol. 1, no. 1, 2003, pp. 21-37
12. The search was for 'paternity test*'.
13. Nelkin, 2005, op.cit., p. 4
14. Gilding, 2005, op. cit.
15. ibid., p. 1
16. ibid.
17. ALRC/AHEC Non-confidential submissions to the Inquiry into the Protection of Human Genetic Information, available on application, No. G245, 2003
18. L. Hayward and S. Rohwer, 'Sex difference in attitudes toward paternity testing', Evolution and Human Behavior, vol. 25, 2004, p. 242
19. ibid., p. 246
20. M. Gilding. and C. Critchley, 'Technology and trust: public perceptions of technological change in Australia', Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, vol 1, no. 1, 2003, p. 66
21. Turney et al., op cit., 2003, pp. 26-8
22. ibid.
23. A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test gender differences over time - that is, whether there was any change in comfort with motherless testing. The result was highly significant for time (F=63.28, p<.0005).
24. This result was significant at the 0.05 level (p=0.03) but, given the large sample size (1013), the magnitude of the differences in the means was very small (partial eta squared=.002) so reflects a trend rather than a significant difference.
25. The proportion of men relative to women in both year samples was unbalanced (particularly in 2003) with fewer male participants. To ensure the differences over time and by gender were not due to sampling, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted. The reported patterns persisted when controlled for gender; Levene's Test showed that the gender variance in both samples was not significant.