Communicating Gene Editing Effectively: What Does the Research Tell Us?

Katie Sanders, PhD, Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist, NC State University | Profile

******Joseph Opoku Gakpo, PHD, Founder, RM Communications | Profile

Related links:

----

Zoom Summary Overview

This colloquium presentation featured Katie Sanders and Joseph Gakpo, who shared findings from two recently published research studies examining public perceptions and information-processing behaviors related to CRISPR gene-edited food products. The first study focused on North Carolina residents' information-seeking behaviors regarding CRISPR in food products generally, while the second examined a national sample's processing of information specifically about CRISPR-edited pork, following the high-profile approval of the PRRS-resistant pig. Both studies were grounded in the Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP) model and employed structural equation modeling and regression analysis to understand how consumers engage with emerging biotechnology information.

Key Concepts or Theories

  • Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP) Model: A theoretical framework examining how individuals seek, avoid, and process information about risks or innovations based on factors such as information sufficiency, channel beliefs, and self-efficacy.
  • Information Sufficiency vs. Sufficiency Threshold: The gap between how much information a person currently has and how much they feel they need before making a comfortable decision about a technology.
  • Systematic vs. Heuristic Processing: Systematic processing involves deep, critical engagement with information; heuristic processing relies on mental shortcuts to reach conclusions.
  • Relevant Channel Beliefs: An individual's perception of how biased or credible a given information channel is.
  • Perceived Information Gathering Capacity: A measure of self-efficacy — whether an individual believes they can effectively use a given channel to obtain information.
  • Modular Approach to Communication: A strategy for disseminating information in layered formats, allowing audiences to self-select the depth of information they consume.
  • Integrated Communication Strategy: Using multiple, complementary platforms and channels to deliver consistent and holistic messaging rather than relying on a single source.
  • Audience Segmentation: Tailoring communication strategies not only by demographics but also by the values and worldviews of target audiences.

Important Questions Raised

  • How do consumers process information about CRISPR-edited food products, and what channels do they trust most?
  • Why do people continue to use information sources they perceive as biased?
  • How does prior knowledge of Extension services affect consumers' self-efficacy in seeking CRISPR-related information?
  • What role do subjective norms play in shaping information-seeking behaviors around gene-edited products?
  • How do worldviews and values — such as trust in science or aversion to tampering with nature — influence acceptance or rejection of CRISPR-edited foods?
  • What are the implications of the RISP model's findings for science communicators and technology developers?

Key Takeaways and Summary of Learning Objectives

  • The RISP model was validated in both a North Carolina-specific and a national context, demonstrating its robustness across different populations and gene-editing topics.
  • Consumers are generally open to learning more about CRISPR-edited pork and are not highly avoidant of related information, contrary to assumptions that the public disengages from complex scientific topics.
  • People who perceive news media and social media as biased tend to seek more information, suggesting that perceived bias motivates rather than discourages information-seeking.
  • Extension services represent a significant but underutilized opportunity for credible science communication, particularly once audiences are made aware of what Extension is and does.
  • A modular, integrated, multi-platform communication approach is recommended to meet audiences where they are and allow them to self-select the depth of information they consume.
  • Audience segmentation should go beyond demographics to include values and worldviews, which are increasingly important predictors of technology acceptance.
  • Male respondents reported higher heuristic processing than female respondents; older respondents reported lower information avoidance than younger respondents (ages 25–35).
  • Respondents with some college education reported higher information seeking and lower information avoidance than those with only a high school diploma or GED.
  • Future research directions include examining institutional trust, worldview constructs, and producer-side attitudes toward gene-edited technologies.

Topic 1: Study Overview and Theoretical Framework

Both studies presented by Katie Sanders and Joseph Gakpo were grounded in the Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP) model, a well-established framework in science communication research. The model examines how individuals respond to information about risks or innovations by considering factors such as how much information they currently have (information sufficiency), how much they feel they need (sufficiency threshold), their perceptions of channel credibility (relevant channel beliefs), and their confidence in using those channels (perceived information gathering capacity). These factors collectively shape four key behaviors: information seeking, information avoidance, systematic processing, and heuristic processing.

The first study focused on North Carolina residents and their information-seeking behaviors related to CRISPR use in food products broadly. The second study expanded to a national sample and concentrated specifically on CRISPR-edited pork, a topic that gained public attention following the regulatory approval of the PRRS-resistant pig. Both studies used structural equation modeling and regression analysis to identify relationships among these variables.

A key contextual backdrop for the research was the growing landscape of gene-editing applications in agriculture. As of 2024, the literature documented 212 papers on gene editing in animals, with CRISPR-Cas9 as the leading technology. Commonly targeted traits in livestock included yield, reproduction, and disease resistance. Despite this scientific momentum, CRISPR-edited products are not yet widely available on the market, making public opinion research particularly timely.

Relevant Q\&A

  1. Question : Are you differentiating between the kind of information being sought — for example, misinformation versus credible information? Answer : The studies did not attempt to differentiate between misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation. The research measured respondents' perceptions of information credibility through separate measures (relevant channel beliefs), but the information-seeking behaviors themselves were assessed without categorizing the type of information sought.
  2. Question : Is there a paradox in that people continue to use sources they perceive as biased? Answer : Katie Sanders acknowledged this paradox, noting that people may be inflating their perceived capacity to identify bias, or they may be continuing to use biased sources regardless. Joseph Gakpo added that seeking from multiple sources — including those perceived as biased — may be a rational strategy to triangulate information and manage perceived bias across channels.

Topic 2: Study One — North Carolina CRISPR Information-Seeking Behaviors

The first study examined how North Carolina residents seek and process information about CRISPR-edited food products, with a particular focus on the role of different information channels: news media, social media, Extension services, and interpersonal sources.

Key findings revealed that individuals who perceived news media as more biased were actually more likely to seek information about CRISPR-edited products. Similarly, those with more negative perceptions of social media were more likely to both seek and deeply process CRISPR-related information. Interestingly, respondents with higher self-efficacy on social media — those who felt confident in their ability to use social media to find information — were more likely to avoid CRISPR-related information, at least within the North Carolina sample.

Extension services emerged as a particularly noteworthy finding. Lower beliefs in Extension as an information channel were associated with greater avoidance of CRISPR-related information. However, once respondents were informed about what Extension is and does, their self-efficacy in using Extension for CRISPR information increased significantly. This suggests that Extension's challenge is less about credibility and more about brand visibility and public awareness.

The study also found that interpersonal conversations about CRISPR were not significantly impacting the ways in which people seek and process information in the deep, critical manner that communicators would hope for. Social media, while important, cannot stand alone as an information delivery system and must be part of a broader integrated communication strategy.

Relevant Q\&A

  1. Question : Were the information-seeking and processing behaviors measured generally or specifically in the context of CRISPR? Answer : All measures were captured specifically within the context of CRISPR-related information. Respondents were asked how likely they were to seek, avoid, or process information specifically about CRISPR-related food products — not general information-seeking behaviors.
  2. Question : Can you comment more on what respondents knew about Extension before participating in the study? Answer : In the North Carolina study, an "I don't know what Extension is" response option was included, allowing the team to capture baseline knowledge. In the national study (Study Two), a description of Extension was provided to respondents. The explanation significantly increased respondents' self-efficacy around using Extension to find CRISPR-related information, highlighting both the opportunity and the brand awareness challenge that Extension faces broadly.

Topic 3: Study Two — National Survey on CRISPR-Edited Pork

The second study, presented by Joseph Gakpo, expanded the scope to a national sample and focused specifically on consumers' information-processing behaviors related to CRISPR-edited pork. The study used regression analysis and found results largely consistent with the RISP model's theoretical expectations.

Descriptive statistics indicated that respondents had a high sufficiency threshold — meaning they felt they needed considerably more information before feeling comfortable making decisions about CRISPR-edited pork. Information seeking was relatively high, and information avoidance was low, suggesting that the public is open to engagement on this topic. Extension was rated as a moderately trusted source, falling between news media (higher perceived bias) and interpersonal sources (lower perceived bias but also lower perceived capacity for information gathering).

Key regression findings included: higher information insufficiency (a larger gap between current and desired knowledge) predicted greater information seeking; perceiving news media and social media as biased also predicted greater information seeking; higher relevant channel beliefs for Extension predicted decreased information seeking; and higher perceived information gathering capacity for both social media and Extension positively predicted information seeking. Respondents with some college education reported higher information seeking and lower information avoidance than those with a high school diploma or GED. Older respondents reported lower information avoidance than younger respondents aged 25–35. Male respondents reported higher heuristic processing than female respondents.

On the basis of these findings, the research team recommended a modular approach to communication — providing layered information that allows audiences to self-select the depth of engagement — as well as an integrated, multi-platform strategy where information from different channels complements rather than duplicates one another. Strengthening Extension's communication capacity and credibility was also highlighted as a priority recommendation.

Relevant Q\&A

  1. Question : What kinds of subjective norms were measured in the survey, and did they significantly impact information seeking or processing? Answer : Subjective norms were measured using items such as "People around me expect me to have information about CRISPR" and "I feel that I should be knowledgeable about CRISPR." These captured the social expectation to be informed. The measure was found to be associated with information sufficiency threshold — the more respondents felt others expected them to be knowledgeable, the more information they felt they needed before making a decision about CRISPR. This finding is consistent with how the RISP model has performed across various contexts.
  2. Question : Is it most effective to have multiple strategies ready for each person starting at a similar baseline, or does that risk information overload? Answer : The recommendation is to use a modular approach — providing an accessible summary first, then supporting it with additional evidence, data visualizations, and citations for those who wish to engage more deeply. Audience segmentation data, including platform preference research such as the Pew Research Center's annual reports on media use, can help communicators determine what information to place on which platform and in what format, reducing the risk of overload while still meeting diverse audience needs.

1) Question

: How does this research compare to studies on non-genome-edited topics, particularly those with perceived risk?

Answer

: The RISP model has held up consistently across studies on other technologies, including nano-technologies and human gene editing. The research team noted that having validated the model in both the North Carolina and national contexts, their subsequent work has shifted toward examining what underlies trust in institutions — academics, industry, and government regulators — and what worldviews drive acceptance or rejection of gene-edited technologies, which they see as a more complex and pressing area of inquiry.

Topic 4: Communication Recommendations and Future Research Directions

Drawing from both studies, Katie Sanders and Joseph Gakpo offered a set of actionable communication recommendations for researchers, technology developers, and science communicators working in the gene-editing space.

First, technology developers should proactively engage the public on innovations such as CRISPR-edited pork, rather than assuming public disinterest or avoidance. The data clearly show that people want more information and are not highly avoidant. Second, Extension services should be strengthened in both communication capacity and public visibility, as they represent a credible but underutilized channel — particularly the family and consumer science side of Extension, which has direct connections to consumers concerned about food. Third, communicators should avoid exaggerated claims designed to attract attention, avoid relying on single sources of communication, and instead adopt integrated, multi-platform strategies. Fourth, the modular approach to information dissemination — layered content that allows audiences to self-select depth — is recommended over either oversimplifying or overwhelming audiences with information. Fifth, audience segmentation should go beyond demographics to incorporate values and worldviews, as these are increasingly important predictors of technology acceptance and institutional trust.

Looking ahead, the research team noted that their subsequent work has moved beyond the RISP model toward examining institutional trust and the worldview constructs that underpin it. A study currently under review applies the theory of planned behavior to intention to consume CRISPR-edited pork, incorporating worldview constructs such as scientism and aversion to tampering with nature. Additional work on PRLR slick cattle examines trust in academics, industry, and government regulators. The team expressed interest in producer-side attitudes, the role of import/export considerations in producer decision-making, and the potential overlap between consumer and producer values regarding gene-edited technologies.

Relevant Q\&A

  1. Question : Have you looked at the attitudinal behaviors of producer networks, rather than just consumers? Are producers thinking differently about gene-edited products? Answer : Katie Sanders acknowledged this as an important and underexplored area. She noted that the field has documented cases where producers are reluctant to adopt new technologies even when offered incentives, and suggested that examining producer sentiment — including values-based concerns such as "are we playing God?" — is a valuable direction. The team has explored some producer-level sentiment in subsequent research and expressed openness to further collaboration on this question.
  2. Question : How does the framing of CRISPR-edited products — for example, emphasizing animal welfare versus farmer profit — affect consumer attitudes? Answer : Data from the same survey indicated that consumers do not respond positively to yield or farmer profit as justifications for gene editing. However, when the edit is framed around animal welfare, disease resistance, or benefits to the animal itself, consumer ratings are significantly more favorable. This suggests that both framing strategies and product development priorities should be aligned with consumer values to improve acceptance.

Supplemental Resources

  • Huang and Zhang (2020) paper on the RISP model, referenced as the source for subjective norms measurement items used in the studies.
  • Pew Research Center annual reports on media use, recommended as a resource for understanding which demographics use which platforms and how to tailor platform-specific communication strategies.
  • The two published studies discussed in the presentation: one in Crisis and Risk Communication on North Carolina residents' CRISPR information-seeking behaviors, and one national study on consumers' processing of information related to CRISPR-edited pork.
  • A forthcoming study (currently under review) applying the theory of planned behavior to intention to consume CRISPR-edited pork, incorporating worldview constructs.
  • Subsequent research on PRLR slick cattle examining institutional trust and worldview constructs, with results emerging at the time of the presentation.

About the speakers

Dr. Catherine (Katie) Sanders is an Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist of Food Systems Communication in the Department of Agricultural and Human Sciences at NC State. Her research and extension efforts focus on increasing the practice of stakeholder engagement as a component of effective science communication for agri-food innovations and technologies. Specifically, her goal is to leverage research, praxis, and the university system to enhance the social sustainability of agri-food technologies and create an overall more sustainable food system.

Dr. Joseph Opoku Gakpo is an agricultural and science communications scholar and practitioner. His research explores communication surrounding food system challenges and innovations, as well as participatory approaches to science. He holds a Ph.D. in agricultural education and human sciences (specializing in agricultural extension) from North Carolina State University, USA, M. A. in communication studies from the University of Ghana, and BSc. in Agricultural Biotechnology from Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana. He is a 2016 Global Leadership Fellow of Cornell University’s Alliance for Science Program, 2018 International Federation of Agricultural Journalists’ Best Video Reporter, and 2020 AgBioFEWS (Agricultural Biotechnology in our Evolving Food, Energy, and Water Systems) Fellow of NC State University’s Genetic Engineering & Society Center.

The GES Colloquium brings together speakers and audiences from across disciplines to explore the societal, ethical, environmental, and governance dimensions of emerging biotechnologies.

Seminars are held Tuesdays from 12-1 p.m. ET in 3170 Plant Sciences Building Innovation Hub and via Zoom. GES 609 is taught by Dr. Zack Brown. Recordings are regularly posted as videos and on the GES Lectures podcast.

Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates.

__ Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice.

Genetic Engineering and Society Center

Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter

GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology.

Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State

Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Rss Apple Podcaster
Podden och tillhörande omslagsbild på den här sidan tillhör Patti Mulligan. Innehållet i podden är skapat av Patti Mulligan och inte av, eller tillsammans med, Poddtoppen.