Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objectives Effective communication about genetics concepts is essential for collaborative anthropological genetics research. However, communication can be challenging because many ideas are abstract and are especially unfamiliar to communities with limited access to formal education. Indeed, there are no widely adopted models for communicating such information, nor a clear understanding of the social factors that may shape engagement. Here, we conducted a qualitative and quantitative, community‐driven study to understand how illustrations can be useful to support concept sharing with two Indigenous groups—the Orang Asli of Peninsular Malaysia and the Turkana of Kenya. Methods We used a two‐phase approach to create and evaluate how illustrations can bolster communication about genetics concepts. First, we created images illustrating answers to frequently asked questions about genetics, iteratively updating the illustrations based on participant feedback. Second, we conducted 92 interviews to evaluate the finalized illustrations' effectiveness. Finally, we analyzed the interview data using thematic analysis and multivariable modeling to identify patterns in participant understanding and feedback, including age, sex, market integration, and schooling. Results Participants reported high interest in genetics research (92%) and broadly positive perceptions of the illustrations. Familiar, locally grounded imagery was preferred and associated with greater perceived clarity, while more technical illustrations were more frequently reported as confusing. Quantitative analyses showed strong internal consistency across measures of engagement and understanding, with modest variation by degree of market integration, schooling, and sex. Discussion Our findings demonstrate that community‐specific visualizations, co‐developed through iterative feedback, can effectively support engagement with genetics research in participant communities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arner et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: