The Politics of the Gene: Social Status and Beliefs about Genetics for Individual Outcomes

Abstract

Social scientists have predicted that individuals who occupy socially privileged positions or who have conservative political orientations are most likely to endorse the idea that genes are the root cause of differences among individuals. Drawing on a nationally representative sample of the US population, this study examines belief in the importance of genes for understanding individual differences in a series of broad domains: physical illness, serious mental illness, intelligence, personality, and success in life. We also assess whether the belief that genetics are important for these outcomes is more common among those in relatively advantaged positions or among those who are more politically conservative. Finally, we consider whether such beliefs predict attitudes toward genetics-related social policies. Our analyses suggest that belief in the importance of genetics for individual differences may well have a substantial effect on attitudes toward genetics-related policies, independent of political orientation or other measures. Our study identifies high levels of endorsement for genes as causes of health and social outcomes. We describe a cultural schema in which outcomes that are “closer to the body” are more commonly attributed to genetics. Contrary to expectations, however, we find little evidence that it is more common for whites, the socioeconomically advantaged, or political conservatives to believe that genetics are important for health and social outcomes.

Exploring Relationships Among Belief in Genetic Determinism, Genetics Knowledge, and Social Factors

“…Belief in genetic determinism has been identified as problematic for society because it has the potential to foster intolerant attitudes (such as racism and homophobia; Dambrun et al 2009;Shostak et al 2009). Consequently, efforts to teach the multifactorial model of genetics could be considered worthwhile if it could be established that increased knowledge of modern genetics and genomics is associated with low levels of belief in genetic determinism Smith and Gericke 2015).…”

“…Nevertheless, local ethical guidelines made it more difficult to gather information on our participants' political beliefs, religious affiliations, and socioeconomic statuses. Such variables have been suggested as being related to belief in genetic determinism (e.g., Geller et al 2004, Nelkin andLindee 2004;Shostak et al 2009). We could include questions about participants' age, gender, field of study at university, personal experience with genetics, and religiosity, as specified in the first section of the PUGGS questionnaire.…”

“…We included gender because previous studies have suggested that males and females may use genetic explanations to classify themselves differently (Shostak et al 2009). We asked students to specify their field of study in case those studying science and technology-related fields would have more interest in genetics, which in turn might affect their knowledge and beliefs.…”

“…Beliefs in genetic determinism have been suggested to be a democratic problem because the power of genes could serve different social agendas (Geller et al 2004;Shostak et al 2009). Genetic explanations appear at first to provide rational and scientifically justifiable explanations, for instance, to social categories such as gender and race.…”

“…Moreover, in contrast to knowledge, social factors such as socioeconomic status and religiosity have also been suggested in the literature as potentially related to the formation of genetic deterministic beliefs (Nelkin and Lindee 2004;Parrott et al 2004;Shostak et al 2009).…”