Search

Objective: National public opinion polls and surveys use different questions from one another to assess people's abortion attitudes. We included commonly asked abortion attitude items on a single survey to examine people's attitudes toward abortion legality and abortion restriction to create profiles of people which we then compared across state groups. Concurrently assessing attitudes toward both abortion legality and restrictions is important given the changing abortion legislative climate in the United States. Method: We administered an online survey to U.S. adults (n = 919) via Ipsos probability panel and used latent class analysis to identify classes of participants. Then, we used multinominal logistic regression to make state‐level comparisons. Results: We identified three classes: (1) 35.0 percent—abortion should be illegal/more restricted, (2) 35.1 percent—abortion should be legal/laws should reflect the status quo, and (3) 29.9 percent—abortion should be legal/more available. Trigger‐law states comprise the largest proportion of people who think abortion should be illegal/more restricted, whereas states without trigger laws comprise similar proportions of people from all three classes. Conclusion: Concurrently measuring whether people believe abortion should be legal and the extent it should be restricted can provide a more comprehensive understanding of people's attitudes and demonstrates important state‐level nuances in attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the relationship between perceptions of pregnancy and fetal milestone timing and support for abortion bans. Using survey data collected from a representative sample of 739 US adults, we use logistic regression to predict support for six- and 15-week abortion bans. Perceptions of timing for the milestones of pregnancy awareness and fetal pain are significantly related to support for six-week abortion bans. Furthermore, this relationship is moderated by abortion identity labels (e.g. pro-life, pro-choice). Our findings suggest that, although perceptions of milestone timing may be related to abortion attitudes, the relationship is nuanced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Abortion is common in the United States (US), although access is becoming more difficult for some. In addition to restrictive policies that ban most abortion, limit the number of providers and increase costs, barriers to access also include less supportive cultural climates and stigma related to abortion. Prior to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health decision of the United States Supreme Court, research suggested that people generally believed it was easy to access abortion, but this research did not examine the underlying factors that drive these perceptions. Methods: In 2019, using data from closed and open‐ended survey questions, we examined differences in people's assessment of abortion access within the state they reside and factors that influence those perceptions. We recruited English‐ and Spanish‐speaking US adults (N = 2599) from Qualtrics' national panel using quota‐based sampling to participate in a web‐based survey. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine predictors of access perceptions across demographic characteristics and thematic analysis to analyze open‐ended responses. Results: Fifty‐three percent of participants believed abortion was easy to access in their state. Spanish speakers and participants from legislatively "hostile" states were more likely to perceive access as difficult. Legality‐related knowledge and pro‐life identity were associated with perceiving abortion access as easy. Conclusions: Prior to Dobbs, participants' interpretation of the ease or difficulty of accessing abortion were subjective. Misconceptions about state abortion laws and the prevalence of providers were common, suggesting a need for more education about abortion laws, policies, and access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study is to examine how situational abortion attitudes differ when including additional context related to the gestational age of the pregnancy. Method: Ordinary Least Squares Regression models predicting abortion attitudes across four different sets of abortion attitude questions, using data collected from an online panel weighted to match U.S. benchmarks. Results: Later gestational ages are associated with less support for abortion. Although there is some variation in the amount that support decreases across different socio‐demographic groups, the predictors of abortion attitudes remain relatively stable across gestational ages. Abortion attitudes questions with no reference to weeks' gestation appear to be the most similar to questions referencing early weeks' gestation. Conclusion: When answering abortion attitude questions that do not include any reference to weeks' gestation, respondents may be more likely to think about abortion early in pregnancy. Including references to weeks' gestation may provide a more nuanced and complete understanding of abortion attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2016, there were approximately 45,000 juveniles in placement in the United States. Most youth indicate that they plan to live with a family member upon release. Yet, many boys report housing needs before, during or after their time in placement which may be related to family experiences with child maltreatment, substance abuse and criminal justice contact. Using the young males' data from the Serious and Violent Offenders Re-entry Initiative (SVORI), we investigate the influence of boys' housing needs prior to their release on their continued housing needs and offending in the first-year post-release. We found that needing a place to live prior to release significantly increased boys' violent offending at nine-months post-release and we also find that boys who did not live with a parent prior to placement reported more crime at nine-months post-release. We also found that boys' baseline housing needs and prior physical abuse significantly predicted boys' reports that they needed help finding a place to live at nine-months and that baseline housing needs significantly predicted housing needs at fifteen months post-release. We contextualize our findings given the adverse family environments boys often face post-release. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Pro‐life" and "pro‐choice" are closely associated with discussions about abortion; we refer to the extent that people identify with these terms as "abortion identity." Most polling measures present pro‐life and pro‐choice as mutually exclusive options, but there is a dearth of information about people who might simultaneously endorse both (or neither) labels. Method: We administered a survey to adults in the United States (n = 580) that included two different formats for participants to select their abortion identity: a categorical item with response options ranging from strongly pro‐choice to strongly pro‐life (and "both" and "neither") and two separate items (sliders) that asked people the extent to which they identify with each term. We asked participants endorsing both pro‐life and pro‐choice to some extent on the slider items to explain their responses in an open‐ended item. We used logistic regression to examine the relationship between participants' socio‐demographic characteristics and the likelihood of dual identification slider scores; we analyzed open‐ended data for content and themes. Results: On the sliders, more than 64% of participants identified as both pro‐life and pro‐choice to some extent. Variability existed between people's abortion identity on the close‐ended items and their response to the open‐ended questions. Among those with mixed abortion identities, participants described abortion as a serious and undesirable option but reflected positively on notions of personal choice and bodily autonomy. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate complexity in measuring people's endorsement of abortion identity labels. We recommend developing more nuanced and consistent measures to assess abortion attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay offers a fresh look at Jonathan Edwards's doctrine of atonement. Following the doctrine in its logical order (i.e. from eternity past, through redemptive history, and then into eternity future) with a representative sampling of Edwards's writings in each section, this essay aims to prove that the great body of documents touching on the doctrine of atonement in the Edwards corpus, for all of their variety, do reveal a consistent organizing principle--namely, divine love. Particular attention is given to Edwards's views on the mechanics of the atonement and the distinctive role that love plays in his thinking on that subject. For Edwards, love was not only a divine motive for the atonement, but part of the actual mechanism which made it effectual for the elect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Prior research suggests there is a link between child maltreatment and out of home care and both adult crime and juvenile delinquency. Using a bevy of administrative data, this article investigates potential risk and protective factors of youth (n = 1420) who aged out of foster care without legal permanency in a southwestern state. Findings show that common correlates of crime such as gender, previous delinquency, mental illness and placement instability while in care significantly increase the odds of having a felony adjudication and criminal involvement. Results also suggest that the odds of a felony adjudication are lower among youth who access education training vouchers. This article contributes to previous research through its use of administrative data to support previous findings and by highlighting the negative influence of excessive placements while in care. Highlights • The odds of a felony adjudication differ across gender for youth who have aged out of foster care. • Juvenile delinquency significantly increases the odds of a felony adjudication. • A felony adjudication is more likely among individuals receiving mental health or substance abuse services. • Placement instability increases the likelihood of a felony adjudication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PRACTICE IMPACT STATEMENTThe goal of this study was to assess if attendance at alcohol-intensive environments (AIE; bars, parties), was associated with men’s engagement in two types of sexually aggressive tactics (enticement/coercion and assault) independent of individual alcohol consumption. Young men (n = 790) were recruited through Qualtrics’ survey panel to complete a web-administered questionnaire. We ran a multinominal logistic regression predicting whether men used each tactic. AIE attendance, but not alcohol consumption, was related to men’s use of assaultive tactics only whereas alcohol consumption, but not AIE attendance, was related to enticement/coercion. Men’s attendance at AIE may be associated with their engagement in certain aggressive tactics, rather than their individual alcohol consumption. Prevention programme implementers may want to focus on cultural risk factors associated with AIE for specific sexual aggression tactics.Men’s attendance at alcohol intensive settings (AIE; e.g. bars/parties) may be a stronger predictor of their sexual aggression than individual alcohol consumption. AIE attendance may relate to sexual aggression because of cultural norms surrounding AIE that could normalise men’s sexual aggression. Prevention programmes could focus on underlying cultural norms associated with AIE and teach people to identify concerning sexual situations within these contexts, given that they can be a risk factors for sexual aggression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined public opinion regarding unique aspects of abortion legality to better understand potential contexts in which stigma may occur and the extent that people (a) believe actors involved in abortion (i.e., pregnant woman, healthcare provider, man involved in the pregnancy, someone providing information about where to get an abortion, parents of a minor) should be held responsible for illegal abortion, (b) believe abortion should be illegal across different circumstances, and (c) endorse different punishments for pregnant women and healthcare providers, including variation by responsibility. An online survey was administered to 2,489 English and Spanish-speaking U.S. adults, using quota-based sampling, with post-stratification weights applied to match U.S. benchmarks. People scored healthcare providers and women more responsible than other actors. Although the majority did not support abortion being illegal for most circumstances, a substantial proportion were unsure. Additionally, "no punishment" was most frequently selected for the woman and healthcare provider. However, those who endorsed any punishment, compared with no punishment, typically indicated the pregnant woman and healthcare provider were more responsible. Our findings suggest that current laws criminalizing abortion are misaligned with public opinion and that pregnant women and healthcare providers are likely most susceptible to abortion-related stigma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined people's (1) attitudes about abortion using an item from Pew Research Center (i.e., whether abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases, or illegal in all cases) and (2) support for different punishments if abortion were illegal in all cases for different people involved in the abortion–the pregnant person, their partner, an informant and the healthcare provider. We administered a web-based survey to 2,204 U.S. adults using quota-based sampling. Post-stratification weights were applied to the data so that the sample was comparable to U.S. benchmarks for gender, race, Hispanic ethnicity, age, education, and political affiliation. We compared endorsement of various punishments for a pregnant person, their partner, informant, and healthcare provider. Additionally, we compared the endorsement of these punishments across response options of Pew's abortion legality item. Overall, most of our sample indicated that abortion should be legal in most (34%) or legal in all scenarios (21%). However, if abortion were illegal in all circumstances, most of our sample supported some form of punishment for the pregnant person (72%−75%), their partner (65%−68%), and healthcare providers (70%−71%), but not informants (47%−49%). Among the endorsed punishments, therapy/education typically received the most support. Because of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision and the subsequent overturning of Roe v. Wade , abortion is illegal in a significant number of states and a punishable offense. Our findings suggest that current punishments associated with many of these laws are counter to public sentiment. Despite majority support for some punishment, the categories of "no punishment" or therapy/education had the most support. Given the lack of plurality or majority support for fines or incarceration, abortion laws including these punishments, including bounty-style laws passed in Texas and Oklahoma, may be out of step with public opinion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Criminal justice research frequently investigates relationships between punishment decisions and demographic characteristics of the accused, such as gender, race, and age. While there are many similarities between criminal justice and child welfare cases, research on child maltreatment has yet to examine potential demographic influences on case outcomes. The current study examines relationships between parent gender, type of maltreatment, and child removal among agency responses to child maltreatment cases. Using data collected by the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS), we identify differences in the likelihood of child removal from the parental home across type of maltreatment and perpetrator gender. Our results indicate that mother perpetrators of physical abuse not only face significantly higher likelihood of removal than mother perpetrators of neglect, but are more at risk for losing their children than father perpetrators of both physical abuse and neglect. Findings suggest that gendered attributions and stereotypes regarding parenting can shape assessments of parents' blameworthiness, dangerousness, and rehabilitative potential. We propose that future research on child maltreatment cases adapt and apply justice concepts and frameworks to uncover potential unwarranted demographic disparities in agency decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An essay on American theologian Jonathan Edwards is presented and explains why he should be remembered as the theologian of God's glory in Christ. Topics include an overview of Edwards' conversion to Christianity and his ministry, his recognition of the limitations of unaided reason in determining the purposes of God, and a discussion of his work, "Dissertation," where he offers the reasons for adopting the glory of God as the center and foundation of his theology.

Research suggests that youth aging out of foster care may be at higher risk of experiencing homelessness than other youth. Among this already at-risk population there may be certain characteristics that further exacerbate the risk. This paper uses data collected from various local and state agencies to further examine significant predictors of homelessness among youth who have aged out of foster care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior to and since the 2022 Dobbs decision, U.S. state laws have endorsed individuals surveilling and punishing those associated with abortion care. This practice presents an urgent need to understand the characteristics of abortion stigma, particularly the perspectives of individuals with stigmatizing beliefs. To examine the concept and characteristics of abortion stigma, we interviewed 55 individuals about whether they thought there should be consequences for getting an abortion and, if so, what the consequences should be. Adults from three states (Michigan, Kansas, and Arizona) were purposively sampled to include a range of abortion identities and levels of religious engagement. We used reflexive thematic analysis to code and interpret the data. Participants imagined consequences including financial penalties, incarceration, and forced sterilization. Three themes highlighted how abortion was described as violating the law, women's gender roles, and religious doctrine; accordingly, abortion was imagined as deserving of negative consequences, although abortion was legal in all states during data collection. We argue that these imagined consequences relied on carceral logics and interconnected sexist, racist, and classist stereotypes that reflect and reproduce abortion stigma. This study deepens the understanding of abortion stigma from the perspective of the stigmatizer, underscoring the danger of legislation grounded in stigmatizing beliefs. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843221131544. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines knowledge of and attitudes toward Roe v. Wade among a sample of 779 US Latinx adults. Survey response patterns were examined in relation to generational status and choice of survey language as well as to several demographic variables previously shown to influence abortion attitudes (e.g., age, religiosity, political affiliation). Differences were found in knowledge of Roe v. Wade by generational status and survey language, with those with higher generational statuses and those taking the survey in English exhibiting greater knowledge. Finally, greater knowledge of Roe v. Wade and choosing to take the survey in English predicted more positive attitudes toward Roe v. Wade controlling for other demographic variables; no effect on attitudes of generational status was observed. These findings contribute to our understanding of abortion attitudes among US Latinxs as well as the relationship between political socialization, knowledge, and attitudes toward social issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We explored public opinion about using telemedicine to provide medication abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. We also investigated the associations between socio-demographic characteristics and support for using telemedicine in this context and explored factors that influenced respondents' attitudes on the topic.Study Design: In a nationally representative, web-based survey of US adults (n = 711), we asked open- and closed-ended questions about using telemedicine to prescribe medication abortion during COVID-19. We used multinomial logistic regression to assess the relationship between socio-demographic characteristics, endorsement of abortion labels, and political affiliation and support for telemedicine in this circumstance. Then, we conducted content and thematic analyses with the open-ended data to explore what influenced respondents' opinions.Results: Overall, 332 (44%) of respondents supported using telemedicine for medication abortion during the pandemic; 237 (35%) opposed and 138 (21%) were unsure. Respondents who identified as prochoice were more likely to support using telemedicine for abortion during the pandemic than those who identified as prolife were to oppose it in this context (RRR 2.95; 95% CI 1.31-6.64). Via our content and thematic analysis, we identified that concerns about safety, the legitimacy of telemedicine, and the belief that abortion should occur as early in the pregnancy as possible influenced respondents' beliefs about using telemedicine for medication abortion.Conclusions: More respondents supported using telemedicine for medication abortion during COVID-19 than opposed it. Among respondents who expressed support, most thought that medication abortion was safe and that telemedicine was equivalent to the in-person provision of care.Implications: There appears to be support among US adults for the provision of medication abortion via telemedicine during COVID-19. Policymakers may consider public sentiment as well as clinical evidence when considering legislation about abortion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Guided by the Reasoned Action Approach, we used a salient belief elicitation (SBE) to elicit participant‐generated beliefs regarding abortion. SBE is a formative research technique used to elicit people's control (i.e., perceived facilitators and barriers associated with a behavior), behavioral (i.e., perceived positive and negative consequences of doing a behavior), and normative (i.e., influence of important people/peers regarding a behavior) beliefs regarding a particular behavior (i.e., abortion). Methods: We administered our SBE to English‐ and Spanish‐speaking U.S. adults (N = 608) from NORC's AmeriSpeak® panel. We used inductive content and thematic analyses to assess open‐ended questions. Results: We found that participants' control and behavioral beliefs referenced circumstances used to assess abortion attitudes in polling item (e.g., rape) and reasons people seek abortion (e.g., financial reasons) as well as potential negative emotions (e.g., shame) and positive consequences (e.g., autonomy) associated with abortion. Participants indicated pregnant people's partners and people seeking abortion as salient referents. Conclusion: Participants mentioned several contexts reflected in common measures used to assess abortion attitudes by national polls and surveys. However, we also found other relevant circumstances not reflected in common measures and a range of salient referents. We recommend abortion attitudes measures account for these participant‐driven salient beliefs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated the content of survey items to assess whether and how racist and sexist stereotypes are woven into the fabric of research on attitudes about abortion in the United States. We collected and analyzed a comprehensive set of survey items (456 items from 80 studies) used in peer‐reviewed research published from 2008 to 2018 in representative and nonrepresentative studies of U.S. respondents. Our analysis was guided by historical narratives that have been influential in shaping representations of women and reproduction in the United States (e.g., the Moynihan Report). With this background, we developed three themes pertaining to how individuals' attitudes about abortion are measured: we found that items rely on (1) moral, (2) sexual, and (3) financial evaluations of women seeking abortion care. These themes highlighted implicit and explicit judgments of women, including representations of them as unwilling to partner with men and as fiscally and sexually irresponsible. We argue that survey items meant to objectively assess abortion attitudes draw on negative racial and gender stereotypes and that these stereotypes then travel widely under the veneer of scientific objectivity. Critical methods, such as the item bank analysis described in this study, are crucial to discern how inequality, prejudice, and discrimination can be reproduced in the fabric of research methods. In our discussion, we offer suggestions for researchers to reduce these and related forms of bias in survey‐based abortion research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines how Latinx migrant generation and the circumstances of abortion may be linked to attitudes toward abortion legality among a sample of U.S.‐Latinx adults. Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Multiple‐Indicators Multiple‐Causes modeling, we found that abortion attitudes across different migrant generations are sensitive to circumstances motivating the abortion. We did not find significant differences across migrant generations for generally more endorsed circumstances, such as when the woman's health is at risk or when the pregnancy occurs as a result of rape. However, second and third generations were more inclined to endorse legal abortion than first‐generation for generally less endorsed circumstances, such as low income, being unpartnered, not wanting (more) children, or contraception failure. The social context in which one is raised (i.e., the United States for migrants' descendants or the country of birth for the first‐generation migrants) plays a role in shaping abortion attitudes regarding the less endorsed social‐related circumstances but not for more endorsed circumstances. Further research should consider the inner heterogeneity of the Latinx population as well as the multiple contexts of abortion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study a standardized effect size was created for use with the SIBTEST procedure. Using this standardized effect size, a single set of heuristics was developed that are appropriate for data fitting different item response models (e.g., 2-parameter logistic, 3-parameter logistic). The standardized effect size rescales the raw beta-uni value using a pooled variation that incorporates the beta-uni inclusion factor. Although the heuristics for the standardized and unstandardized effect sizes provide similar true-positive and false-positive rates in most conditions, the standardized effect size provides higher true-positive rates for conditions where item response variability is smaller in proportion to raw score differences. Inflated false-positive rates were solely impacted by smaller sample sizes, whereas larger sample sizes improved true-positive rates. An empirical application is provided to demonstrate how the standardized effect size provides for a more consistent comparison across items with varying response distributions. This study lays the foundation for the utilization of a standardized effect size for both dichotomous and polytomous item response models using the suite of SIBTEST procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colleges are rape-prone cultures with high rates of sexual victimization. Fraternities’ and sororities’ relationships with sexual assault are consistent themes in literature focusing on sexual violence among college students. Previous research suggests that fraternity men are more likely to endorse rape-supportive attitudes compared with non-Greek men or sorority women. The present study examines rape-supportive attitudes as well as rape and sexual assault victimization in college students with a focus on gender and Greek-life (i.e., involvement in fraternities or sororities) status variables. College students (N = 1,002) completed a survey including the Token Resistance to Sex Scale (TRSS), Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale–Short Form (IRMA-S), and items related to past experiences of nonconsensual sex. Two regression models tested predictors of token resistance and rape myth acceptance. Chi-square analyses tested between-group differences of experiencing rape and sexual assault. Gender (p < .001), Greek status (p < .001), and race/ethnicity (p < .001) were predictors for TRSS scores. For IRMA scores, gender (p < .001), Greek status (p < .001), and race/ethnicity variables (p < .001) were also significant. Interaction terms revealed that Greek men had higher token resistance and rape myth acceptance than any other group. Chi-square analyses indicate women more frequently report experiences of rape (χ2 = 25.57, df = 1, p < .001) and sexual assault (χ2 = 31.75, df = 1, p < .001). Men report high rates (40.8%) of experiencing sexual assault “because refusing was useless.” No differences of victimization rates were found between Greeks and non-Greeks. Gender and sexual scripting theory can help explain gender differences in attitudes and experiences. Greater endorsement of rape myth acceptance and token resistance by Greeks, who influence college party culture, could be contributing to a culture conducive to rape. Findings demonstrate a continued need for interventions focused on shifting sociocultural dynamics (e.g., traditional roles and sexual scripting) on college campuses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationship between people's attitudes about abortion acceptability and the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade—two distinct but related issues—has not been rigorously explored. The authors used a mixed-methods approach for analyzing in-depth interviews to better understand how participants' feelings toward abortion acceptability are related to perceptions of whether abortion should be legal. The authors then assessed (1) correlations between abortion acceptability and different measures of support for Roe v. Wade, and (2) how the phrasing of survey items related to Roe v. Wade may evoke different responses via an online survey fielded in 2018. The study's qualitative results highlight that there is a disjuncture between people's moral feelings toward abortion and their attitudes toward abortion legality. The study's quantitative results further demonstrate that correlations between abortion acceptability and support for Roe v. Wade are moderate, and the differences in responses to the phrasing of survey items related to Roe v. Wade are moderated by knowledge. The authors recommend that when researchers develop survey items, they avoid ambiguities of abortion as a general construct, especially when public opinion measures on abortion are employed for research and the design of social and health policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A study was conducted to implement the use of a standardized effect size and corresponding classification guidelines for polytomous data with the POLYSIBTEST procedure and compare those guidelines with prior recommendations. Two simulation studies were included. The first identifies new unstandardized test heuristics for classifying moderate and large differential item functioning (DIF) for polytomous response data with three to seven response options. These are provided for researchers studying polytomous data using POLYSIBTEST software that has been published previously. The second simulation study provides one pair of standardized effect size heuristics that can be employed with items having any number of response options and compares true-positive and false-positive rates for the standardized effect size proposed by Weese with one proposed by Zwick et al. and two unstandardized classification procedures (Gierl; Golia). All four procedures retained false-positive rates generally below the level of significance at both moderate and large DIF levels. However, Weese's standardized effect size was not affected by sample size and provided slightly higher true-positive rates than the Zwick et al. and Golia's recommendations, while flagging substantially fewer items that might be characterized as having negligible DIF when compared with Gierl's suggested criterion. The proposed effect size allows for easier use and interpretation by practitioners as it can be applied to items with any number of response options and is interpreted as a difference in standard deviation units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although debate remains about the saliency and relevance of pro‐choice and pro‐life labels (as abortion belief indicators), they have been consistently used for decades to broadly designate abortion identity. However, clear labels are less apparent in other languages (e.g., Spanish). Social media, as an exploratory data science tool, can be leveraged to identify the presence and popularity of online abortion identity labels and how they are contextualized online. Purpose: This study aims to determine how popularly used Spanish‐language pro‐choice and pro‐life identity labels are contextualized online. Method: We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic models, an unsupervised natural language processing (NLP) application, to generate themes about Spanish language tweets categorized by Spanish abortion identity labels: (1) proelección (pro‐choice); (2) derecho a decidir (right to choose); (3) proaborto (pro‐abortion); (4) provida (pro‐life); (5) antiaborto (anti‐abortion); and (6) derecho a vivir (right to life). We manually reviewed themes for each identity label to assess scope. Results: All six identity labels included in our analysis contained some references to abortion. However, several labels were not exclusive to abortion. Proelección (pro‐choice), for example, contained several themes related to ongoing presidential elections. Discussion and Conclusion: No singular Spanish abortion identity label encapsulates abortion beliefs; however, there are several viable options. Just as the debate remains ongoing about pro‐choice and pro‐life as accurate indicators of abortion beliefs in English, we must also consider that identity is more complex than binary labels in Spanish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We examine how a sample of English‐ and Spanish‐speaking U.S. adults define the terms pro‐life/pro‐vida and pro‐choice/pro‐elección and explore whether definitions differ by language and/or ethnicity. Methods: We asked a sample of 1504 English‐ and Spanish‐speaking U.S. adults to define the terms pro‐choice/pro‐elección and pro‐life/pro‐vida in an open‐ended format. We used content and thematic analysis to examine congruence and discordance between how English and Spanish speakers, as well as Latinx and non‐Latinx participants, understand these terms. Results: The terms largely appeared to hold common and canonical understandings, but we identified important differences across language and cultural/ethnic groups. For example, Latinx participants opted out of defining the terms more often than non‐Latinx participants, and respondents to the Spanish survey had higher rates of uncertainty about and misunderstanding of the terms than respondents to the English version. Conclusions: Our findings suggest language‐related variability in understandings of the terms pro‐choice/pro‐elección and pro‐life/pro‐vida that could have implications for multilingual and cross‐cultural polling on abortion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public reaction to Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States initially centered around abortion. However, approximately two months after the nomination, sexual assault accusations against Kavanaugh were made public. We examined the extent that people's perceptions of Kavanaugh's stance on abortion and people's attitudes toward whether Kavanaugh committed sexual assault were associated with perceptions of Kavanaugh as a good Supreme Court justice. Data were collected from English- and Spanish-speaking participants (N = 2,883) in the United States via Qualtrics' panel. Using an exploratory hierarchical regression approach, we found that people's perceptions of whether Kavanaugh committed sexual assault was a stronger predictor of their attitudes toward Kavanaugh's quality as a Supreme Court justice [F(1,2855) = 1736.54, p <.001] than people's perceptions of him regarding abortion, after controlling for demographic characteristics and participants' abortion identity (e.g., identifying as pro-life, pro-choice). That sexual assault was a stronger predictor could suggest the importance of sexual assault regarding opinions of Supreme Court justices or potential over inflation of abortion as a salient issue. Researchers should investigate the saliency of sexual and reproductive health issues in relation to Supreme Court nominees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of web-based surveys for collecting self-report data is convenient for businesses and researchers, however their use can reduce the likelihood of population representativeness and increase the risk for poor data quality. Evaluation of data quality has resulted in different proportions of participant subgroups being flagged, however these differences are not consistent across studies and survey topics. Setting aside participants identified as having low quality data (LQD) can impact sample characteristics when some subgroups are reduced at higher rates than others. In this study, the incidence of LQD is compared across demographic subgroups for four data collections measuring attitudes about social issues and consumer satisfaction. Younger participants are more frequently identified as having LQD using multiple indicators and survey topics. Conversely, participants identifying as having Black or African American race/ethnicity are consistently flagged for LQD at a higher rate for one survey topic, but not the other, indicating some LQD indicators may be oversensitive to subgroups with construct complexity. To reduce underrepresentation in samples and associated analyses when subgroups have been found to exhibit higher LQD, we recommend oversampling. When LQD for a subgroup shows evidence of being construct-dependent, we recommend LQD indicators unrelated to content response patterns. • Younger online survey participants exhibit low quality data at higher rates. • Younger online survey participants are more likely to fail attention checks. • High rates of low quality data for minorities may relate to construct ambivalence. • Education level and income are not consistent indicators of low data quality levels. • Oversampling of some subgroups may be needed for sufficient analytical samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Jemez Mountains salamander (Plethodon neomexicanus; hereafter JMS) is an endangered salamander restricted to the Jemez Mountains in north‐central New Mexico, United States. This strictly terrestrial and lungless species requires moist surface conditions for activities such as mating and foraging. Threats to its current habitat include fire suppression and ensuing severe fires, changes in forest composition, habitat fragmentation, and climate change. Forest composition changes resulting from reduced fire frequency and increased tree density suggest that its current aboveground habitat does not mirror its historically successful habitat regime. However, because of its limited habitat area and underground behavior, we hypothesized that geology and topography might play a significant role in the current distribution of the salamander. We modeled the distribution of the JMS using a machine learning algorithm to assess how geology, topography, and climate variables influence its distribution. The best habitat suitability model indicates that geology type and maximum winter temperature (November to March) were most important in predicting the distribution of the salamander (23.5% and 50.3% permutation importance, respectively). Minimum winter temperature was also an important variable (21.4%), suggesting this also plays a role in salamander habitat. Our habitat suitability map reveals low uncertainty in model predictions, and we found slight discrepancies between the designated critical habitat and the most suitable areas for the JMS. Because geological features are important to its distribution, we recommend that geological and topographical data are considered, both during survey design and in the description of localities of JMS records once detected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although much work has been done on US abortion ideology, less is known relative to the psychological processes that distinguish personal abortion beliefs or how those beliefs are communicated to others. As part of a forthcoming probability-based sampling designed study on US abortion climate, we piloted a study with a controlled sample to determine whether psychological indicators guiding abortion beliefs can be meaningfully extracted from qualitative interviews using natural language processing (NLP) substring matching. Of particular interest to this study is the presence of cognitive distortions—markers of rigid thinking—spoken during interviews and how cognitive distortion frequency may be tied to rigid, or firm, abortion beliefs. Methods: We ran qualitative interview transcripts against two lexicons. The first lexicon, the cognitive distortion schemata (CDS), was applied to identify cognitive distortion n-grams (a series of words) embedded within the qualitative interviews. The second lexicon, the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC), was applied to extract other psychological indicators, including the degrees of (1) analytic thinking, (2) emotional reasoning, (3) authenticity, and (4) clout. Results: People with polarized abortion views (i.e., strongly supportive of or opposed to abortion) had the highest observed usage of CDS n-grams, scored highest on authenticity, and lowest on analytic thinking. By contrast, people with moderate or uncertain abortion views (i.e., people holding more complex or nuanced views of abortion) spoke with the least CDS n-grams and scored slightly higher on analytic thinking. Discussion and conclusion: Our findings suggest people communicate about abortion differently depending on their personal abortion ideology. Those with strong abortion views may be more likely to communicate with authoritative words and patterns of words indicative of cognitive distortions—or limited complexity in belief systems. Those with moderate views are more likely to speak in conflicting terms and patterns of words that are flexible and open to change—or high complexity in belief systems. These findings suggest it is possible to extract psychological indicators with NLP from qualitative interviews about abortion. Findings from this study will help refine our protocol ahead of full-study launch. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A simulation study was conducted to investigate the heuristics of the SIBTEST procedure and how it compares with ETS classification guidelines used with the Mantel–Haenszel procedure. Prior heuristics have been used for nearly 25 years, but they are based on a simulation study that was restricted due to computer limitations and that modeled item parameters from estimates of ACT and ASVAB tests from 1987 and 1984, respectively. Further, suggested heuristics for data fitting a two-parameter logistic model (2PL) have essentially went unused since their original presentation. This simulation study incorporates a wide range of data conditions to recommend heuristics for both 2PL and three-parameter logistic (3PL) data that correspond with ETS's Mantel–Haenszel heuristics. Levels of agreement between the new SIBTEST heuristics and Mantel–Haenszel heuristics were similar for 2PL data and higher than prior SIBTEST heuristics for 3PL data. The new recommendations provide higher true-positive rates for 2PL data. Conversely, they displayed decreased true-positive rates for 3PL data. False-positive rates, overall, remained below the level of significance for the new heuristics. Unequal group sizes resulted in slightly larger false-positive rates than balanced designs for both prior and new SIBTEST heuristics, with rates less than alpha levels for equal ability distributions and unbalanced designs versus false-positive rates slightly higher than alpha with unequal ability distributions and unbalanced designs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multilanguage surveys are a vital component of comparative public health science. And, with dozens of tools available to guide the translation and design process, an open dialogue about key translation frameworks and design approaches and their strengths and limitations is needed. Herein, we briefly summarize the application and use of several popular translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches. Our purpose is to draw attention to the complexities of multilanguage surveys by noting how the most appropriate framework or approach is entirely dependent on the context of a specific study. We conclude with a call encouraging the adoption of frameworks and approaches that value high degrees of cultural input, ideally among a large team of culture, language, and subject matter experts. And, as the implemented translation framework or questionnaire design approach may hold implications for the quality and validity of data, we also call on editors to create recommendations that encourage disclosure of the translation framework(s) and/or questionnaire design approaches guiding multilanguage surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Salient belief elicitations (SBEs) measure beliefs toward a health behavior through open-ended questions, with the purpose of developing close-ended survey questions. Auxiliary verbs used in SBE questions often differ (eg, What are the top 3 reasons you would/should decide to have an abortion?). We tested how 2 auxiliary verbs function in a SBE assessing abortion in English and Spanish: would/decidíra and should/debería. Methods: We administered a SBE survey online (N = 175) and in-person (N = 72); in-person participants also participated in cognitive interviews to assess question interpretation. Participants were assigned to survey versions that included identical SBE questions aside from auxiliary verbs--would/decidíra versus should/debería. Data analysis included: (1) content analysis of survey responses to assess differences in responses by version and (2) thematic analysis of interview data focused on interpretations of would/decidíra and should/debería. Results: Would/decidíra surveys generated more response categories. Similarly, cognitive interview findings suggest participants conceptualized would/decidíra as allowing for more options, while should/debería was thought to include only the most significant reasons/circumstances for abortion, potentially restricting participants' responses. Conclusion: These findings have important measurement implications for researchers administering SBEs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Salient belief elicitations (SBEs), informed by the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA), are used to identify 3 sets of beliefs - behavioral, control, and normative - that influence attitudes toward a health behavior. SBEs ask participants about their own beliefs through openended questions. We adapted a SBE by focusing on abortion, which is infrequently examined through SBEs; we also included a survey version that asked participants their views on what a hypothetical woman would do if contemplating an abortion. Given these deviations from traditional SBEs, the purpose of this study was to assess if the adapted SBE was understood by participants in English and Spanish through cognitive interviewing. Methods: We examined participants' interpretations of SBE items about abortion to determine if they aligned with the corresponding RAA construct. We administered SBE surveys and conducted cognitive interviews with US adults in both English and Spanish. Results: Participants comprehended the SBE questions as intended. Participants' interpretations of most questions were also in line with the respective RAA construct. Conclusions: SBE survey questions were comprehended well by participants. We discuss areas in which SBE questions can be modified to improve alignment with the underlying RAA construct to assess abortion beliefs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insulin autoimmune syndrome ( IAS) or Hirata's disease is a rare disorder characterized by hypoglycemia secondary to insulin autoantibodies ( IAb). Over 200 patients have been described from Japan with significantly less numbers being reported from outside the Orient. IAS is more common in patients older than 40 yr of age with reports in the pediatric age group being notably rarer. Exposure to sulfhydryl group containing medications is implicated in the pathogenesis of this syndrome. In this report, we describe a case of IAS in an African-American adolescent. A 16-yr-old healthy African-American male was diagnosed with Graves' disease and started on Methimazole. Four weeks later, he was found unconscious and hypoglycemic (blood sugar 1.5 mmol/L). Evaluation was negative for insulinoma. Insulin antibodies were positive. Oral glucose tolerance test revealed elevated free insulin concentrations with disproportionately elevated total insulin levels. The patient was started on prednisone, diazoxide, and propranolol for management of IAS and hyperthyroidism. Thyroid radio-ablation was subsequently undertaken. The doses of prednisone and diazoxide were tapered and these medications discontinued after 9 months. The insulin antibody levels decreased gradually and became undetectable in 6 months with resolution of the hypoglycemia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The understanding of subsurface events that cannot be directly observed is dependent on the ability to relate surface-based observations to subsurface processes. This is particularly important for nuclear explosion monitoring, as any future clandestine tests will likely be underground. We collected ground-based lidar and optical imagery using remote, very-low-altitude unmanned aerial system platforms, before and after several underground high explosive experiments. For the lidar collections, we used a terrestrial lidar scanner to obtain high-resolution point clouds and create digital elevation models (DEMs). For the imagery collections, we used structure-from-motion photogrammetry techniques and a dense grid of surveyed ground control points to create high-resolution DEMs. Comparisons between the pre- and post-experiment DEMs indicate changes in surface topography that vary between explosive experiments with varying yield and depth parameters. Our work shows that the relationship between explosive yield and the extent of observable surface change differs from the standard scaled-depth-of-burial model. This suggests that the surface morphological change from underground high explosive experiments can help constrain the experiments' yield and depth, and may impact how such activities are monitored and verified. • Photogrammetry and lidar can record surface change from deeply buried explosions. • The observed pattern of surface change differs from conventional scaling. • The stress field controls surface damage more than number of pre-existing fractures. • Yield and depth may be obtainable from high-resolution surface change measurements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]