Glowing gels and pipettes aplenty: how do commercial stock image banks portray genetic tests?

The study investigates how commercial stock image banks visually portray genetic testing and what messages these images convey to the public. Recognizing that images in news, social media, and patient-facing materials can shape understanding more powerfully than text, the authors examine whether popular visuals keep pace with contemporary clinical genetics. Prior media narratives often depict genetics through iconic symbols and laboratory aesthetics. With clinical practice shifting from targeted genetic tests to broader genomic profiling—and with outcomes that range from definitive to uncertain—the authors aim to evaluate how stock images represent processes, data, and people involved, and whether these representations emphasize precision and certainty over ambiguity and communication.

The paper situates its analysis within scholarship on genetics imagery and public discourse. Van Dijck (1998) documented the double helix as an icon of genetic determinism and portrayed geneticists in white lab coats amid high-tech equipment, drawing parallels between genetics and space exploration. Harkin and Lindee (1997) described DNA’s cultural ubiquity, noting its supersized helical depictions and essentialist connotations. O’Riordan (2010) examined the rise of ‘genomic truths’ and identified electrophoresis bands as a persistent ‘genomic icon.’ More recent visual analyses have focused on controversial biotechnologies (e.g., cloning, genome editing) and broader ‘scars’ of genetics/genomics. Collectively, this literature highlights how visual tropes fuel expectations of precision, determinism, and progress—frames the current study tests against contemporary stock image representations of genetic testing.

Research design: The authors used a multimodal critical discourse approach focusing on the content, composition, and communicative functions of stock images. Inspired by prior visual discourse analyses of health topics, images were treated as visual texts shaped by deliberate producer choices. Data generation: Two large, popular, and long-standing stock image banks—Getty Images and Adobe Stock—were searched on 08/11/2022 using the term ‘genetic test.’ Results were sorted by each platform’s relevance/best match filters. To capture what users are most likely to encounter, the 50 most relevant images from each bank (total n=100) were selected, avoiding popularity-based filters that favored generic lab scenes. Image analysis: Two researchers (RH, LB) independently reviewed each image and first described features in free text (depiction, setting, presence and actions of people, color usage). They then developed a coding framework for frequently occurring objects (e.g., pipettes, microscopes, double helix, gel bands) and systematically recorded presence/absence across images. Within object categories (e.g., pipette/dropper), they noted compositional features (e.g., droplet at tip, centrality of pipette tip) and calculated proportions. Findings were iteratively discussed within the authorship and wider research group to interpret what these visual features communicate about genetic testing.

- Sample: 100 stock images (50 Getty, 50 Adobe) related to ‘genetic test.’ Most images were clear and high-contrast, enhancing perceived neatness and clarity. - Process categories (Table 1): Taking a sample (9), Processing a sample (32), Data/analysing data (14), Processing + data (20), Delivery of results (2), Other (23). - Wet-lab emphasis: 19% showed scientists working with pipettes. Pipettes/Eppendorfs appeared in 43% of images; in 18% of all images (46% of pipette images) a droplet at the pipette/dropper tip was the focal point, evoking precision and immediacy. - Gel electrophoresis visuals: 24% of images included slab gel electrophoresis; gels were 42% of Getty versus 6% of Adobe (with an additional 6% of Adobe showing band-like motifs). Of gel images, 60% showed multi-coloured bands and 46% featured glowing bands, reinforcing clarity and illumination tropes. - Iconography: The double helix appeared frequently; 30% of images featuring a helix depicted light shining from it (per Fig. 1D), connoting illumination/insight. - People depicted: Only 7% of images showed individuals undergoing genetic testing (often young adults, depicted passively, e.g., cheek swabs). Only one image suggested communication of results (a couple with a clinician’s clipboard/stethoscope visible). - Providers emphasized: People delivering/performing tests appeared in 59% of images, typically in lab attire (white coats, gloves, goggles). In 41% of provider images only hands/fingertips were visible; faces appeared in 42%, indicating focus on technical action rather than personhood. - Technology recency: Visuals overwhelmingly referenced older techniques (e.g., slab gels). None of the analysis/data images depicted contemporary genomic outputs (e.g., A/C/G/T strings, read alignment viewers, VCF data). Overall, composition favored bright colors, central pipette tips, and glowing gel bands, presenting genetic testing as precise, unambiguous, and illuminating.

The findings indicate that stock images used to illustrate genetic testing predominantly foreground technical sample processing and visually striking but older data representations (e.g., glowing gel bands). This aesthetic—and compositional focus on precision cues such as central pipette tips and crisp, high-contrast visuals—frames genetic testing as clear and definitive. Simultaneously, patients are largely absent, and communication of results is almost entirely missing, obscuring the real-world complexities of uncertain or non-diagnostic outcomes typical in modern genomic practice. By privileging iconic, simplified, and decontextualized laboratory imagery, stock images likely reinforce public expectations of determinism, informativeness, and certainty. These portrayals contrast with the nuanced, context-dependent interpretations clinicians face and may influence how audiences approach or evaluate genetic testing decisions and results.

This study provides a systematic, multimodal analysis of stock images labeled as related to ‘genetic test,’ revealing a dominant focus on wet-lab procedures and legacy visual tropes (e.g., slab gel bands, glowing helices) that imply precision and clarity. Patients and result communication are rarely depicted, potentially shaping public perceptions toward overconfidence in test definitiveness. The authors call for alternative visual representations that better reflect contemporary genomic practices, including uncertainty, communication, and patient experience. Future work will explore co-developing visuals with individuals undergoing and providing genetic tests to foster more accurate and responsible portrayals.

- Scope limited to two major stock banks (Getty Images and Adobe Stock) and a single search term (‘genetic test’) on 08/11/2022; results may differ with other platforms, terms (e.g., ‘genomic test’), or dates. - Selection by platform relevance/best match may bias toward generic, reusable images; lower-ranked but contextually accurate images may be underrepresented. - Coding and interpretation, while conducted by two researchers with iterative discussion, remain qualitative and may reflect subjectivity; no formal inter-rater reliability statistics reported. - Visuals of contemporary genomic data may have been missed due to terminology differences; nonetheless, an informal ‘genomic test’ search suggested gel dominance persists. - The analysis uses representative illustrations in figures due to copyright restrictions, though this does not affect the underlying image set coded.