Perceptions of science and boundary crossing in human gene editing acceptance

Abstract

Background

This research explores how public confidence in science and perceptions of ethical boundaries impact acceptance of a novel health technology. Non-technical audiences often distrust health innovations they view as ethically questionable, so understanding these perceptions is crucial for effective health communication.

Methods

Using secondary analysis of a public opinion survey (N = 5,107), this study examines how beliefs about human gene editing (HGE) affect the link between science confidence and HGE acceptance.

Results

Findings indicate that while confidence in science supports HGE acceptance, perceptions of ‘boundary crossing’ diminish this effect. On an individual level, acceptance is stronger when HGE is seen as beneficial. Similarly, societal acceptance aligns with positive attitudes toward science but concerns about ethical boundary-crossing weaken this connection.

Conclusion

The discussion emphasizes that efforts to promote gene editing are most effective when rooted in a collective impact approach, where multiple organizations collaborate intentionally to improve public health outcomes. These insights suggest that public health initiatives can foster greater acceptance of technology by addressing ethical concerns through transparent science communication.