Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 7, No. 4, 2004
Issue release date: January 2004
Community Genet 2004;7:185–195

Lay Understandings of Race: Cultural and Genetic Definitions

Dubriwny T.N. · Bates B.R. · Bevan J.L.
aUniversity of Georgia, Athens, Ga., bOhio University, Athens, Ohio, and cUniversity of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nev., USA

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in


Objective: To examine lay understandings of race. Method: Fifteen focus groups were held in the southeastern United States from July to October of 2001. Results: The lay understanding of race is multifactorial, conceptualizing race as defined in part by genetics and in part by culture. Conclusions: The multifactorial understanding of race used by lay people is important to geneticists for two reasons. First, within the multifactorial definition of race, genetic variation is interpreted as phenotypic differences among individuals. Second, racial differences are apparent in understandings of race. African-American participants held a more fluid understanding of race that included ideas of self-definition and culture, while European-Americans were more likely to rely on physical characteristics to understand race.

Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.


  1. Satel S: Medicine’s race problem. Policy Rev 2001/2002;110:49–58.
  2. Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR: Unequal treatment: Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Washington, National Academy Press, 2002.
  3. Foster MW, Sharp RR: Race, ethnicity, and genomics: Social classifications as proxies of biological heterogeneity. Genome Res 2002;12:844–850.
  4. Census, race, and science. Nat Genet 2000;24:97–98.
  5. Lawlor DA, Frankel S, Shaw M, Ebrahim S, Smith GD: Smoking and ill health: Does lay epidemiology explain the failure of smoking cessation programs among deprived populations? Am J Public Health 2003;93:266–270.
  6. Popay J, Bennett S, Thomas C, Williams G, Gatrell A, Bostock L: Beyond ‘beer, fags, egg and chips’? Exploring lay understandings of social inequalities in health. Sociol Health Illn 2003;25:1–23.
  7. Prior L: Belief, knowledge, and expertise: The emergence of the lay expert in medical sociology. Sociol Health Illn 2003;25:41–57.
  8. Morgan DL: Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, Sage, 1997.
  9. Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN: Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, Sage, 1990.
  10. Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement of categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–174.
  11. Braun L: Race, ethnicity, and health. Perspect Biol Med 2002;45:159–174.
  12. Rothstein MA, Epps PG: Pharmacogenomics and the (ir)relevance of race. Pharmacogenomics J 2001;1:104–108.
  13. Fleissner E: Race and the human genome. Hastings Cent Rep 1999;29:40–42.
  14. Lee SS, Mountain J, Koenig BA: The meanings of ‘race’ in the new genomics: Implications for health disparities research. Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics 2001;1:33–75.
  15. Boston Globe, Oct 10, 2002, A3.
  16. Boston Globe, Aug 17, 2002, A11.
  17. NY Times, Jan 1, 2002, F5.
  18. Haney-Lopez I: White by law: The Legal Construction of Race. New York, New York University Press, 1996.
  19. Sankar P, Cho MK: Toward a new vocabulary of human genetic variation. Science 2002;298:1337–1338.

Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50