Funded by the Department of Commerce (University of Maryland)
Funding years: 2012-2014
PI: Mick Couper
PI: Mick Couper
Beth Tarini has been awarded the Benz Birth Defects Research Award for $20,000 to support her research project "Knowing Your Child's Genome: Exploring Parents' Decision-Making Process Regarding Genomic Sequencing of Children." Congratulations!
The goal of this proposal is the development of “bottom-up” measures of daily experience, combining elements of time sampling with detailed episodic reinstantiation of events. Future use of the measures includes research into well-being and age-related changes in activities and experiences. I will (1) design methodological studies for the development and validation of these measures (Event Reconstruction Method, Day Reconstruction Method, and future variants); (2) develop the question program for pilot studies using the measures; (3) supervise the implementation of the pilot studies in form of web-based self-administered questionnaires; (4) participate in meetings in Princeton; and (5) present and publish relevant results.
More information: http://micda.psc.isr.umich.edu/project/detail/34823
PI: Norbert Schwarz
Dr. Scherer was a VA and CBSSM Postdoctoral Research Fellow, 2010-2012. She received her PhD in social psychology in 2010 from Washington University in St. Louis.
Dr. Scherer is currently an Assistant Professor of Psychological Sciences at the University of Missouri.
Jeff Kullgren's editorial "Injecting Facts Into the Heated Debates Over Medicaid Expansion" was recently published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. In this editorial, Dr. Kullgren reviews Wherry and Miller's study on the effects of ACA on coverage, access, utilization, and health.
Link to IHPI article.
Tom Valley is a fellow in the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine in the Department of Internal Medicine at the University of Michigan. He received his undergraduate degrees in history and chemistry from Emory University, and his medical degree from the University of Miami. He completed his internal medicine residency at the University of Texas-Southwestern/Parkland Memorial Hospital, after which he served as Chief Medical Resident at UTSW/PMH. He joined the University of Michigan as a pulmonary and critical care fellow in 2013. He is currently a research mentee of Drs.
Tell us what you think about certain public policies designed to reduce the incidence of diabetes in the US.
Please read this hypothetical news article and then answer a few questions at the end.
Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what?
Researchers affiliated with CBDSM and the School of Public Health have found that "Americans' opinions about health policy are polarized on political partisan lines. Democrats and Republicans differ in the ways that they receive and react to messages about the social determinants of health."
In the study, lead author Sarah Gollust, PhD, randomly assigned participants to read one of four hypothetical news articles about type 2 diabetes. Diabetes was used as an example of a common health issue that is widely debated and that is known to have multiple contributing factors, including genetic predisposition, behavioral choices, and social determinants (such as income or neighborhood environments).
The articles were identical except for the causal frame embedded in the text. The article that you read in this Decision of the Month presented social determinants as a cause for type 2 diabetes. Other versions of the article presented genetic predisposition or behavioral choices as a cause for type 2 diabetes, and one version had no causal language.
Dr. Gollust then asked the study participants their views of seven nonmedical governmental policies related to the environmental, neighborhood, or economic determinants of diabetes:
Dr. Gollust also asked participants their political party identification and a number of other self-reported characteristics.
The most dramatic finding of this study was that the news story with the social determinants as a cause for type 2 diabetes had significantly different effects on the policy views of participants, depending on whether they identified themselves as Democrats or Republicans. After reading the social determinants article, Democrats expressed a higher level of support for the proposed public health policies. Republicans expressed a lower level of support for the proposed public health policies. This effect occurred only in the group of participants who were randomly assigned to read the version of the news article with social determinants given as a cause for type 2 diabetes. Dr. Gollust summarizes: "Exposure to the social determinants message produced a divergence of opinion by political party, with Democrats and Republicans differing in their opinions by nearly 0.5 units of the 5-point scale."
The study suggests several possible explanations for these results:
"First, the social determinants media frame may have presumed a liberal worldview to which the Republican study participants disagreed or found factually erroneous (ie, not credible), but with which Democrats felt more comfortable or found more familiar. . . Second, media consumption is becoming increasingly polarized by party identification, and . . . the social determinants message may have appeared particularly biased to Republicans. . .Third, the social determinants frame may have primed, or activated, study participants' underlying attitudes about the social group highlighted in the news article. . . Fourth, participants' party identification likely serves as proxy for . . . values held regarding personal versus social responsibility for health."
Dr. Gollust and her colleagues conclude that if public health advocates want to mobilize the American public to support certain health policies, a segmented communication approach may be needed. Some subgroups of Americans will not find a message about social determinants credible. These subgroups value personal responsibility and find social determinants antagonistic to their worldview. To avoid triggering immediate resistance by these citizens to information about social determinants of health, public health advocates may consider the use of information about individual behavioral factors in educational materials, while working to build public familiarity with and acceptance of research data on social determinants.