| Sumario: | It is a common concern that broader audiences interpret scientific information about the genetic correlates and causes of complex human traits in an overly deterministic manner. A frequently proposed way to address this issue is to carefully select the linking expressions used to describe gene–trait relationships when communicating genetic information – for example, by replacing explicitly causal expressions with statistical ones, or by avoiding strong causal expressions in favor of weaker ones. Although such recommendations are widespread, the efficacy of linking‐expression substitutions in mitigating deterministic interpretations is rarely examined. This article argues that the context sensitivity of linguistic interpretation, together with the hypothesis of genetic essentialism, predicts that such substitutions have little effect on how deterministically broader audiences interpret genetic information.
|
|---|