Paul Stoneman

Europeans and Biotechnology in 2010: Winds of change?

George Gaskell and colleagues designed, analysed and interpreted the Eurobarometer 73.1 on the Life Sciences and Biotechnology as part of the research project Sensitive Technologies and European Public Ethics (STEPE), funded by the Science in Society Programme of the EC’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7).

Religious beliefs, knowledge about science and attitudes towards medical genetics

The use of genetics in medical research is one of the most important avenues currently being explored to enhance human health. For some, the idea that we can intervene in the mechanisms of human existence at such a fundamental level can be at minimum worrying and at most repugnant. In particular, religious doctrines are likely to collide with the rapidly advancing capability for science to make such interventions. The key ingredient for acceptance of genetics, on the other hand, is prototypically assumed to be scientific literacy – familiarity and understanding of the critical facts and methods of science. However, this binary opposition between science and religion runs counter to what is often found in practice. In this paper, we examine the association between religiosity, science knowledge and attitudes to medical genetics amongst the British public. In particular, we test the hypothesis that religion acts as a ‘perceptual filter’ through which citizens acquire and use scientific knowledge in the formation of attitudes towards medical genetics in various ways.

Exploring public discourses about emerging technologies through statistical clustering of open-ended survey questions

The primary method by which social scientists describe public opinion about science and technology is to present frequencies from fixed response survey questions and to use multivariate statistical models to predict where different groups stand with regard to perceptions of risk and benefit. Such an approach requires measures of individual preference which can be aligned numerically in an ordinal or, preferably, a continuous manner along an underlying evaluative dimension – generally the standard 5- or 7-point attitude question. The key concern motivating the present paper is that, due to the low salience and “difficult” nature of science for members of the general public, it may not be sensible to require respondents to choose from amongst a small and predefined set of evaluative response categories. Here, we pursue a different methodological approach: the analysis of textual responses to “open-ended” questions, in which respondents are asked to state, in their own words, what they understand by the term “DNA.” To this textual data we apply the statistical clustering procedures encoded in the Alceste software package to detect and classify underlying discourse and narrative structures. We then examine the extent to which the classifications, thus derived, can aid our understanding of how the public develop and use “everyday” images of, and talk about, biomedicine to structure their evaluations of emerging technologies.

Incommensurable worldviews? Is public use of complementary and alternative medicines incompatible with support for science and conventional medicine?

Proponents of controversial Complementary and Alternative Medicines, such as homeopathy, argue that these treatments can be used with great effect in addition to, and sometimes instead of, ‘conventional’ medicine. In doing so, they accept the idea that the scientific approach to the evaluation of treatment does not undermine use of and support for some of the more controversial CAM treatments. For those adhering to the scientific canon, however, such efficacy claims lack the requisite evidential basis from randomised controlled trials. It is not clear, however, whether such opposition characterises the views of the general public. In this paper we use data from the 2009 Wellcome Monitor survey to investigate public use of and beliefs about the efficacy of a prominent and controversial CAM within the United Kingdom, homeopathy. We proceed by using Latent Class Analysis to assess whether it is possible to identify a sub-group of the population who are at ease in combining support for science and conventional medicine with use of CAM treatments, and belief in the efficacy of homeopathy. Our results suggest that over 40% of the British public maintain positive evaluations of both homeopathy and conventional medicine simultaneously. Explanatory analyses reveal that simultaneous support for a controversial CAM treatment and conventional medicine is, in part, explained by a lack of scientific knowledge as well as concerns about the regulation of medical research.

Religion and the public ethics of stem-cell research: Attitudes in Europe, Canada and the United States

We examine international public opinion towards stem-cell research during the period when the issue was at its most contentious. We draw upon representative sample surveys in Europe and North America, fielded in 2005 and find that the majority of people in Europe, Canada and the United States supported stem-cell research, providing it was tightly regulated, but that there were key differences between the geographical regions in the relative importance of different types of ethical position. In the U.S., moral acceptability was more influential as a driver of support for stem-cell research; in Europe the perceived benefit to society carried more weight; and in Canada the two were almost equally important. We also find that public opinion on stem-cell research was more strongly associated with religious convictions in the U.S. than in Canada and Europe, although many strongly religious citizens in all regions approved of stem-cell research. We conclude that if anything public opinion or ‘public ethics’ are likely to play an increasingly important role in framing policy and regulatory regimes for sensitive technologies in the future.

Understanding support for complementary and alternative medicine in general populations: Use and perceived efficacy

Proponents of complementary and alternative medicine argue that these treatments can be used with great effect in addition to, and sometimes instead of, conventional medicine, a position which has drawn sustained opposition from those who advocate an evidence-based approach to the evaluation of treatment efficacy. Using recent survey data from the United Kingdom, this article seeks to establish a clearer understanding of the nature of the public’s relationship with complementary and alternative medicine within the general population by focusing on beliefs about the perceived effectiveness of homeopathy, in addition to its reported use. Using recent data from the United Kingdom, we initially demonstrate that reported use and perceived effectiveness are far from coterminous and argue that for a proper understanding of the motivations underpinning public support of complementary and alternative medicine, consideration of both reported use and perceived effectiveness is necessary. We go on to demonstrate that although the profile of homeopathy users differs from those who support this form of medicine, neither outcome is dependent upon peoples’ levels of knowledge about science. Instead, the results suggest a far greater explanatory role for need and concerns about conventional medicine.

Understanding SAFE Housing – putting older LGBT* people’s concerns, preferences and experiences of housing in England in a sociological context

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to put the findings of the Secure, Accessible, Friendly and Equal (SAFE) Housing study, which explored older LGBT* people’s housing concerns, preferences and experiences, in a sociological context. Design/methodology/approach The SAFE Housing study was based on a mixed methods research design that included focus groups and an online survey conducted in two areas of England. The paper draws heavily on the theoretical concept of social capital to help to understand and explain the findings. Findings Findings are grouped into three broad themes: safety, comfort and trust; connections and community; and imagining the future. Originality/value This is the first time that an older LGBT housing study has used social capital theory to interpret its findings. This shows how a focus on issues of trust, social networks and connections is expedient to avoid reductive approaches in research, policy and practice to older LGBT* people’s housing choices, preferences and expectations that concentrate on the individual.