Eyeing CRISPR on Wikipedia: Using Eye Tracking to Assess What Lay Audiences Look for to Learn about CRISPR and Genetic Engineering

ABSTRACT CRISPR/Cas-based genome editing is a monumental leap in genetic engineering with considerable societal implications – but it is a complex procedure that is difficult to understand for non-scientists. Wikipedia has been shown to be an important source of information about scientific topics. But research on search, selection, and reception processes on Wikipedia is scarce. By means of eye tracking and survey data, this study investigates how users find information about genetic engineering and CRISPR on Wikipedia and what influences search behaviors and outcomes. An observational study was conducted in which 67 participants searched for general information about genetic engineering and specific information about CRISPR. Results indicate that participants looking for specific information about CRISPR searched shorter, visited fewer Wikipedia pages, and followed shorter and more straightforward search paths than participants looking for general information about genetic engineering. Moreover, prior knowledge and involvement affected users’ browsing behavior. Prior knowledge and search behavior influenced search outcomes.

[1]  Wendy Macias,et al.  Inside the Mind of the Online Health Information Searcher using Think-Aloud Protocol , 2018, Health communication.

[2]  Mike S. Schäfer,et al.  The different audiences of science communication: A segmentation analysis of the Swiss population’s perceptions of science and their information and media use patterns , 2018, Public understanding of science.

[3]  Benjamin K. Johnson,et al.  To Your Health: Self-Regulation of Health Behavior Through Selective Exposure to Online Health Messages , 2013 .

[4]  Neil Selwyn,et al.  Students' use of Wikipedia as an academic resource - Patterns of use and perceptions of usefulness , 2016, Internet High. Educ..

[5]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Characterizing the influence of domain expertise on web search behavior , 2009, WSDM '09.

[6]  Dominique Brossard,et al.  U.S. attitudes on human genome editing , 2017, Science.

[7]  C M Condit,et al.  Public understandings of genetics and health , 2010, Clinical genetics.

[8]  Serap Kurbanoglu,et al.  Developing the information literacy self-efficacy scale , 2006, J. Documentation.

[9]  D. Brossard,et al.  Promises and perils of gene drives: Navigating the communication of complex, post-normal science , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  John Travis,et al.  Making the cut. , 2015, Science.

[11]  Mounia Lalmas,et al.  Reader preferences and behavior on Wikipedia , 2014, HT.

[12]  Eric S Lander,et al.  Brave New Genome. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Jonathan Wareham,et al.  Junior physician's use of Web 2.0 for information seeking and medical education: A qualitative study , 2009, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[14]  Andrew G. West,et al.  Wikipedia and Medicine: Quantifying Readership, Editors, and the Significance of Natural Language , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[15]  Richard Shepherd,et al.  Public Concerns in the United Kingdom about General and Specific Applications of Genetic Engineering: Risk, Benefit, and Ethics , 1997, Science, technology & human values.

[16]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  How the structure of Wikipedia articles influences user navigation , 2016, New Rev. Hypermedia Multim..

[17]  Ling Xia,et al.  Eye tracking and online search: Lessons learned and challenges ahead , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[18]  James M Heilman,et al.  Wikipedia: A Key Tool for Global Public Health Promotion , 2011, Journal of medical Internet research.

[19]  L. Boles,et al.  Promoting Public Awareness and Engagement in Genome Sciences , 2013, Journal of Genetic Counseling.

[20]  Rebecca Eynon,et al.  Development and validation of the Internet Skills Scale (ISS) , 2016 .

[21]  Matthias R. Hastall,et al.  Enhancing Selective Exposure to Health Messages and Health Intentions: Effects of Susceptibility Cues and Gain–Loss Framing , 2018, J. Media Psychol. Theor. Methods Appl..

[22]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Mining Meaning from Wikipedia , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[23]  Mike S. Schäfer,et al.  4. Analyzing science communication through the lens of communication science: Reviewing the empirical evidence , 2019 .

[24]  Nathaniel J. S. Ashby,et al.  Applications and innovations of eye-movement research in judgment and decision making , 2016 .

[25]  Eszter Hargittai,et al.  YOUNG ADULTS' CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENT OF WIKIPEDIA , 2011 .

[26]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Characterizing relevance with eye-tracking measures , 2014, IIiX.

[27]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Differences in Eye-Tracking Measures Between Visits and Revisits to Relevant and Irrelevant Web Pages , 2015, SIGIR.

[28]  Yvonne Kammerer,et al.  Searching the Web for conflicting topics: Page and user factors , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[29]  R. Blendon,et al.  The Public and the Gene-Editing Revolution. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  Fabian Flöck,et al.  Query for Architecture, Click through Military: Comparing the Roles of Search and Navigation on Wikipedia , 2018, WebSci.

[31]  B. Quick,et al.  Authoritative Parenting and Issue Involvement as Indicators of Ad Recall: An Empirical Investigation of Anti-Drug Ads for Parents , 2007, Health communication.

[32]  Steven M. Weisberg,et al.  A CRISPR New World: Attitudes in the Public toward Innovations in Human Genetic Modification , 2017, Front. Public Health.

[33]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 1986 .

[34]  Sabrina Heike Kessler,et al.  Eyes on the frame: Explaining people's online searching behavior in response to TV consumption , 2017, Internet Res..

[35]  Alison J. Head,et al.  How Today's College Students use Wikipedia for Course-related Research , 2010, First Monday.

[36]  Werner Wirth,et al.  Heuristic and Systematic Use of Search Engines , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[37]  Lucy Holman Rector.  Comparison of Wikipedia and other encyclopedias for accuracy, breadth, and depth in historical articles , 2008 .

[38]  C. Critchley,et al.  Predicting Public Attitudes Toward Gene Editing of Germlines: The Impact of Moral and Hereditary Concern in Human and Animal Applications , 2019, Front. Genet..

[39]  S. Kessler,et al.  Searching Online for Information About Vaccination: Assessing the Influence of User-Specific Cognitive Factors Using Eye-Tracking , 2019, Health communication.

[40]  S. M. Jang.  Seeking Congruency or Incongruency Online? , 2014 .

[41]  G. Patrinos,et al.  Genetics and Society—Educating Scientifically Literate Citizens: Introduction to the Thematic Issue , 2014 .

[42]  Jonathan Evans.  Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

[43]  George E. Gooden,et al.  A Global Social Media Survey of Attitudes to Human Genome Editing. , 2016, Cell stem cell.

[44]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  An eye‐tracking study on information processing in risky decisions: Evidence for compensatory strategies based on automatic processes , 2011 .

[45]  Biotechnology, communication and the public: Keys to delve into the social perception of science , 2018, Mètode Revista de difusió de la investigació.