Rethinking the knowledge-attitudes model and introducing belief in human evolution: examining antecedents of public acceptability of human gene editing

In the science communication literature, we can easily notice the persistence of the knowledge-attitudes model (or the deficit model) that attributes the lack of public support to a lack of scientific knowledge. However, there has also been a continuing debate over the roles of scientific knowledge in explaining public attitudes towards specific controversial science and technologies. Using the data from an American nationwide survey, this study examined the variety of antecedents of the public acceptance of human gene editing (HGE), including scientific knowledge, attitudes towards science, risk-benefit perceptions of HGE, and belief in human evolution. Our findings illuminate how scientific knowledge indirectly influenced the public acceptance of HGE through a variety of mediating variables (such as attitudes towards science, risk perceptions of HGE, and benefit perceptions of HGE), though it did not directly influence this acceptance. The findings also reveal some moderating effects of belief in human evolution on the relationships among the above variables, serving as a ‘perceptual filter’ in the case of HGE. These findings revisit and extend the persistent but simplified knowledge-attitudes model and provide new insights into the complicated process of public attitude formation about such controversial technologies as HGE.