This survey allowed us to discuss about the relation between the scientific community (biological engineering students) and the general public and to improve their knowledge about Synthetic Biology. We considered the engineer's responsibilities, the impact of our project and the understanding by people.
So we decided to make a survey targeting high school first year students studying sciences, as they are the future of the scientific community.
The results underwent a process of clustering, a computed algorithm aiming at roughly distributing them in different groups according to their answers. By the end of the process all the people who had answered similarly were put together in the same group. From that process we sorted out five « clusters » (the groups), each one with a different profile of answers.
Then we treated the data to make it more exploitable and easier to understand, but this sort of study is still hard to simplify. The answers were converted to numerical values: answers expressing acceptance toward synthetic biology were given positive values while negative answers towards synthetic biology had negative scores.
Here each bar is linked to the mean of the answer
We note that the groups containing the most people have the opposite profiles :
- 24% ('Informed-Favorable') of the people knew about synthetic biology and the issues it raises but were still supportive of it, or at least not against it
- 25% ('Little informed-Unfavorable') knew a little less about it but were completely opposed to using its products.
- 17% of people ('Informed-Unfavorable-User with restrictions') have, like in the 'Little informed-Unfavorable' group, a little understanding of what synthetic biology is and are against purifying drinking water through its processes but are fine with using it for purifying water that will be used for domestic purposes.
The two remaining groups have both little knowledge about synthetic biology.
However, as we can see there’s a paradox in the answer of the 'Little informed-Favorable-User with restrictions group', which represents 20% of the panel, as they seem rather acceptant of synthetic biology, and yet would choose water purified with physical or chemical methods over methods involving synthetic biology.
Our interpretation is that despite not being against these techniques, these people may still consider the conventional ones more efficient and safe. They are therefore less oriented towards synthetic biology than the people of the 'Not informed-Favorable group' (14% of the answers) who, despite not knowing anything about synthetic biology, would still be willing to use it without reluctance. We can see it as a proof that many people still don’t have prejudices against this science.
"
International survey
