Measuring migration motives with open-ended survey data: Methodological and conceptual issues.

Motives for migration are difficult to measure. Open-ended data collection can be an attractive option, but also comes with pitfalls. We use the "Motives for Migration" survey on internal migration in Sweden to identify some of these pitfalls. We identify five categories of methodological issues: how the respondents-and we-dealt with multiple motives for migration; who the motive pertained to (i.e., the respondents themselves or someone else in the household); whether the motive was related to a status or an event; which third-party person(s) the respondent meant to refer to; and which geographical unit the motive pertained to. We also identify two conceptual issues: (1) the distinction between reasons for moving and location choice and (2) the distinction between moving "from" and moving "to" somewhere. We present some suggestions that will be useful for future attempts to study the topic and possibly such other topics as motives for immigration, getting married, or leaving the parental home.

What Do Women Know About Breast Density? Results From a Population Survey of Virginia Women.

PURPOSE: Breast density reduces the sensitivity of mammography and is a moderate independent risk factor for breast cancer. Virginia is one of 24 states that currently require notification of patients when they have dense breasts. However, little is known about what women in the general population know about breast density. This survey study assessed knowledge about breast density and about its impact on mammography and breast cancer risk. METHODS: A random sample of 1024 Virginia women between ages 35 and 70 years without breast cancer, reached by landline and cell phone, who completed a 24-minute interview. Bivariate and multivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-six percent of respondents had been informed about their breast density. These women were more likely to be familiar with the term "breast density." Seventy-five percent of respondents reported being either somewhat or very familiar with risk factors for breast cancer, but <1% spontaneously listed breast density as a risk factor. About half of women who had a mammogram in the last year were aware of their breast density. Overall, only one in five women were aware that density reduces the sensitivity of mammography and only one in eight were aware that density increases breast cancer risk. Very few respondents (5.3%) were able to correctly answer three density knowledge questions. Lower-education, African-American, and Jewish women were less knowledgeable about breast density. CONCLUSIONS: Although women are becoming aware of the term "breast density," they may not understand its relationship to cancer detection on mammography and, especially, its relationship to breast cancer risk.

A hedonic story has a transmission advantage over a eudaimonic story.

We examined (a) whether a hedonic story (story full of hedonic activities) is better remembered and transmitted compared with a eudaimonic story (story full of eudaimonic activities), and (b) whether the hedonic story's memory and transmission advantage varies depending on contextual cues, as indexed by the day of the week. Study 1 showed that college students are surrounded with more party announcements on Wednesdays through Fridays than on Mondays and Tuesdays. Study 2 showed that the hedonic story and the eudaimonic story we created were equally interesting, rich in plot, surprising, and arousing, yet the hedonic story was rated as more disturbing, real, and newsworthy. In Studies 3 and 4, we used a serial reproduction method and found that the hedonic story was better recalled and transmitted to others than was the eudaimonic story, and that this effect was particularly strong when participants completed the study later in the week. Our findings suggest that a hedonic story is more communicable than a eudaimonic story, particularly when supported by environmental cues.