Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Health Promot ; 36(1): 84-93, 2022 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34269101

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To test for racial/ethnic differences in perceived argument strength in favor of structural interventions to curb childhood obesity among lower-income parents of young children. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, self-report. SETTING: Online research panel, national sample of 1485 US adults in Fall 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Parents of children (age 0-5 years) with an annual income <$40,000, stratified by White, Black and/or Latinx race/ethnicity. MEASURES: SSB consumption, policy support, and strength of arguments in favor of marketing restrictions and a penny-per-ounce tax. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics, multivariable OLS models. RESULTS: Race/ethnicity was not a significant predictor of the perceived strength of a composite of marketing arguments (pBlack = 0.07; pLatinx = 0.10), however it was a significant predictor of the perceived strength of tax arguments (pBlack = 0.01; pLatinx = 0.01). Perceptions of strength of 12 of 35 discrete SSB tax arguments differed by race/ethnicity (p < .05). Arguments regarding industry targeting of Black children (marketing: pBlack < .001; pLatinx = .001; tax: pBlack < .001; pLatinx = .001), were particularly demonstrative of this difference. In contrast, arguments that these policies would provide support for parents (marketing: pBlack = 0.20; pLatinx = 0.84) and communities (tax: pBlack = 0.24; pLatinx = 0.58) were seen as strong arguments across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Black and Hispanic/Latinx parents may be more prepared to move toward SSB policy support than white parents. Emphasizing community benefits of policy may be effective in moving constituents toward policy support across groups.


Asunto(s)
Obesidad Infantil , Bebidas Azucaradas , Adulto , Bebidas , Niño , Preescolar , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Padres , Políticas
2.
Milbank Q ; 99(4): 1088-1131, 2021 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34402554

RESUMEN

Policy Points  Investments in early childhood education can have long-lasting influence on health and well-being at later stages of the life course.  Widespread public support and strategies to counter opposition will be critical to the future political feasibility of enhancing early childhood policies and programs.  Simple advocacy messages emphasizing the need for affordable, accessible, high-quality childcare for all can increase public support for state investments in these policies.  Policy narratives (short stories with a setting, characters, and a plot that unfolds over time and offers a policy solution to a social problem) that describe structural barriers to childcare and policy solutions to address these barriers may be particularly effective to persuade individuals inclined to oppose such policies to become supportive.  Inoculation messages (messages designed to prepare audiences for encountering and building resistance to opposing messages) may protect favorable childcare policy attitudes in the face of oppositional messaging. CONTEXT: Early childhood education (ECE) programs enhance the health and social well-being of children and families. This preregistered, randomized, controlled study tested the effectiveness of communication strategies to increase public support for state investments in affordable, accessible, and high-quality childcare for all. METHODS: At time 1 (August-September 2019), we randomly assigned members of an online research panel (n  =  4,363) to read one of four messages promoting state investment in childcare policies and programs, or to a no-exposure control group. Messages included an argument-based message ("simple pro-policy"), a message preparing audiences for encountering and building resistance to opposing messages ("inoculation"), a story illustrating the structural nature of the problem and solution ("narrative"), and both inoculation and narrative messages ("combined"). At time 2 (two weeks later) a subset of respondents (n  =  1,436) read an oppositional anti-policy message and, in two conditions, another narrative or inoculation message. Ordinary least squares regression compared groups' levels of support for state investment in childcare policies and programs. FINDINGS: As hypothesized, respondents who read the narrative message had higher support for state investment in childcare policies than those who read the inoculation message or those in the no-exposure control group at time 1. Among respondents who were initially opposed to such investments, those who read the narrative had greater support than respondents who read the simple pro-policy message. Those who received the inoculation message at time 2 were more resistant to the anti-policy message than respondents who did not receive such a message, but effects from exposures to strategic messages at time 1 did not persist at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Results offer guidance for policy advocates seeking to increase public support for early childhood policies and programs and could inform broader efforts to promote high-value policies with potential to improve population health.


Asunto(s)
Opinión Pública , Relaciones Públicas/tendencias , Adulto , Práctica Clínica Basada en la Evidencia/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad
3.
J Health Commun ; 23(10-11): 855-864, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30457448

RESUMEN

The 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (HHFKA) represented a major and controversial overhaul of national nutrition standards for foods served in the United States' nearly 100,000 public schools. To unpack how debate over this far-reaching policy was presented to the public, we examined 152 national print; network, network affiliate, and cable television; and public radio news stories about the policy, all appearing during the window surrounding its scheduled reauthorization (9/1/14-1/31/16). We found that HHFKA opponents were more likely to argue from a smaller set of frames that comprised a concise, clear narrative they frequently repeated, while proponents drew from a broader range of frames, each used less frequently, to present their position. In addition, key voices expected to be prominent in a debate over child health-children and parents-were relatively deemphasized. Overall, the primary frames on either side of this debate argued past one another, leaving largely unanswered critical charges about the role of government in assuring the public's health. This debate reflects deeper arguments at the root of many public health policy decisions, and as such, is an illustrative case example for those planning how to enter and help shape national debate over public health policy.


Asunto(s)
Medios de Comunicación de Masas , Política Nutricional/legislación & jurisprudencia , Instituciones Académicas , Hambre , Estados Unidos
4.
Health Equity ; 2(1): 117-121, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30283857

RESUMEN

Purpose: In two related studies, we examined how equity-based arguments featured in news debate over federal school nutrition policy. Methods: We conducted content analyses of national and local print and broadcast news (September 1, 2014-December 31, 2015), examining arguments rooted in appeals about equity and/or disparities. Results: Equity and/or disparities appeals appeared in 24% television, 14% national print, and 5% local print stories. Socioeconomic inequities were mentioned most; racial/ethnic inequities appeared minimally. Conclusions: Neither equity nor disparity featured prominently in this news debate over policy created to address children's nutritional inequities. When included, arguments focused on overcoming inequities' effects rather than addressing root causes.

5.
Am J Public Health ; 106(8): 1369-73, 2016 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27310351

RESUMEN

Evolving research in epigenetics and the developmental origins of health and disease offers tremendous promise in explaining how the social environment, place, and resources available to us have enduring effects on our health. Troubling from a communications perspective, however, is the tendency in framing the science to hold mothers almost uniquely culpable for their offspring's later disease risk. The purpose of this article is to add to the conversation about avoiding this unintended outcome by (1) discussing the importance of cognitive processing and issue frames, (2) describing framing challenges associated with communicating about developmental origins of health and disease and offering principles to address them, and (3) providing examples of conceptual metaphors that may be helpful in telling this complex and contextual story for public health.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crónica/epidemiología , Comunicación , Madres/psicología , Salud Pública , Causalidad , Cognición , Epigenómica/organización & administración , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , Efectos Tardíos de la Exposición Prenatal/epidemiología , Determinantes Sociales de la Salud
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...