for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help

 A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

  Subjects -> SOCIAL SERVICES AND WELFARE (Total: 213 journals)
The end of the list has been reached or no journals were found for your choice.
Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Social Justice Research
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.633
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 18  
 
  Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 1573-6725 - ISSN (Online) 0885-7466
Published by Springer-Verlag Homepage  [2351 journals]
  • Mind the Income Gaps' Experimental Evidence of Information’s Lasting
           Effect on Redistributive Preferences
    • Abstract: Individuals reject economic inequality if they believe it to result from unequal opportunities. This paper argues income gaps between groups determined at birth, based on sex, race, or family background, can serve people as an indication of unequal opportunities. Findings from a survey experiment show Americans underestimate these gaps. When confronted with accurate information, participants correct their perceptions and adjust redistributive preferences. A follow-up survey finds these effects to last for over one year. In sum, this paper contributes to political economy scholarship that links individual preferences to objective characteristics of the income distribution. Focusing on income gaps offers new ways to explore the political consequences of structural economic change.
      PubDate: 2019-09-04
       
  • Self-Objectification, System Justifying Beliefs, and the Rise of
           Labiaplasty
    • Abstract: Labiaplasty, an invasive surgical procedure that reduces the size of the labia minora, has dramatically increased in popularity, particularly among adolescent and young adult women in Western cultures. To understand this increase, we examined two possible underlying factors: self-objectification and system justifying beliefs. In Study 1, we predicted that system justifying beliefs would moderate the relationship between self-objectification and the desire to undergo labiaplasty. In Study 2, we also examined the unique role of labia-specific surveillance. Moreover, we predicted that system justification would be related to differences in the labia lengths that were considered normal versus desirable. In both studies, system justifying beliefs moderated the effect of self-objectification on dissatisfaction with one’s labia and consideration for getting a labiaplasty, but the nature of this effect was different for general indicators of self-objectification and labia-specific surveillance.
      PubDate: 2019-09-01
       
  • Public Health as Social Justice' A Qualitative Study of Public Health
           Policy-Makers’ Perspectives
    • Abstract: Social justice is often described as the ‘foundation of public health.’ Yet, outside of the theoretical literature the polysemous nature of the concept is rarely acknowledged. To complement recent contributions to normative theory specifically motivated by questions of social justice in public health, this study explores public health policy-makers’ perspectives on the meaning and role of social justice in their practice. This study involved twenty qualitative, semi-structured interviews with public health policy-makers recruited from two programmatic areas of public health [chronic disease prevention (CDP) and public health emergency preparedness and response (PHEPR)] within public health organizations in Canada. Participants’ perspectives appeared to be influenced by the perceived goals belonging to the programmatic area of public health in which they practiced. Those involved in PHEPR indicated that justice-based considerations are viewed as a ‘constraint’ on the aims of this area of practice, which are to minimize overall morbidity and mortality, whereas those involved in CDP indicated that justice-based considerations are ‘part and parcel’ of their work, which seeks primarily to address the unique health needs of (and thus, disparities between) population groups. The aims and activities of different programmatic areas of public health may influence the way in which social justice is perceived in practice. More ought to be done (in theory and in practice) to interrogate how the unique contributions that individual programmatic areas of public health can and should cohere in order to realize the broader aim that public health has as an institution to promote social justice.
      PubDate: 2019-09-01
       
  • The Consequences of Social Inequality for the Health and Development of
           India’s Children: The Case of Caste, Sanitation, and Child Height
    • Abstract: The links among social inequality, economic inequality, and health have long been of interest to social scientists, but causal links are difficult to investigate empirically. In particular, studies examining the impact of social status on one’s own health may overlook important effects of inequality on the health of populations as a whole occurring due to negative externalities of social forces. A recent literature on caste, sanitation, and child net nutrition provides an example of one social context where social inequality makes an entire population less healthy. This paper presents new observational analysis of the India Human Development Survey that provides descriptive evidence of this mechanism. We show that, on average, children in rural India are shorter if they live in villages where more people report practicing untouchability—meaning that they enforce caste hierarchies in their interactions with people from the lowest castes. This association is explained by the association between casteism and the prevalence of rural open defecation.
      PubDate: 2019-09-01
       
  • A Latent Factor Approach to Belief in a Just World and its Association
           with Well-Being
    • Abstract: Drawing on justice motive theory (Lerner et al. in Berkowitz and Walster (eds) Advances in experimental social psychology. Academic Press, New York, 1976), in the present work we examine belief in a just world as an underlying (latent) factor, reflected in general and personal beliefs. We first conducted a meta-analysis encompassing 51 articles, 76 samples, 19 countries and 23,900 participants, which revealed a positive association between the two forms of belief in a just world across studies (meta-analytic r = .52 [95% CI = .48, .56], p < .001) and within each of the individual samples. These results suggest that general and personal belief in a just world could be treated as joint indicators of a latent belief in a just world factor. In a second study, an online sample of participants (n = 311 participants, 54% women, Mage = 37.78 years) completed measures of general and personal belief in a just world, which we treated as indicators of latent belief in a just world. Measures of subjective well-being and psychological well-being were treated as indicators of latent well-being. Indicators loaded strongly on their respective latent factors, and the latent factors were strongly positively correlated (r = .74, p < .001). These results suggest that the link between belief in a just world and well-being may be even more substantial than has been previously recognized. In accordance with the original conceptualization of belief in a just world in justice motive theory, our results suggest benefits to examining the shared and unique aspects of general and personal beliefs in a just world.
      PubDate: 2019-08-26
       
  • Testing the Influence of Social Capital on Support for the Death Penalty
    • Abstract: The division of opinions among Americans over the use of the death penalty is owed to a myriad of factors. While a number of works have examined public opinion on the death penalty, the extant literature does not examine the role of social capital as a determinant of support for or opposition to the death penalty. Here, it is argued that social capital explains in part why some Americans oppose the death penalty while other Americans do not. This investigation contends that social capital makes people less likely to support government action to kill convicted murderers. This hypothesis is confirmed. Utilizing data taken from the 2008 American National Election Study, the results of the logistic regression analyses show that social capital is inversely related to support for the death penalty.
      PubDate: 2019-08-24
       
  • Space Deprivation and Residence Justice—Review of Evicted: Poverty and
           Profit in the American City
    • PubDate: 2019-07-19
       
  • Risk Exposure, Humanitarianism and Willingness to Pay for Universal
           Healthcare: A Cross-National Analysis of 28 Countries
    • Abstract: In this article, we explore the associations of people’s valuations of universal healthcare with risk exposure and humanitarianism across diverse institutional contexts. We argue that both micro-level factors increase the valuations. Furthermore, interactions between material interests and humanitarians are expected. This work also hypothesizes that institutional contexts with employment-independent healthcare systems should modify the effect of risk exposure. Following a comparative framework, we test the expectations by using the International Social Survey Programme 2011 health module for 28 developed and developing countries. Results suggest opposite effects for the factors under analysis. While risk exposure decreases the willingness to pay taxes for the provision of universal healthcare, humanitarianism strongly fosters the valuation. Furthermore, we find statistical significant interactions between material interests and humanitarianism. Results also suggest substantive cross-level interactions between risk exposure and healthcare systems. Findings are robust to different modeling strategies that control for standard micro-level variables (income and egalitarianism), individual factors and observed and unobserved country characteristics. The article lays out implications of these findings.
      PubDate: 2019-07-05
       
  • Measuring Neoliberalism: Development and Initial Validation of a Scale of
           Anti-Neoliberal Attitudes
    • Abstract: Critics of neoliberalism argue that so-called meritocratic and identity-neutral social policies and political positions actually reinforce and exacerbate intersecting inequalities, namely racism, sexism, heterosexism, classism, and ethnocentrism/xenophobia. The purpose of these studies was to develop and initially validate a scale of neoliberal attitudes from a wide range of existing instruments that reflect anti-neoliberal theory. A series of three studies resulted in a 25-item instrument—the Anti-Neoliberal Attitudes Scale (ANAS)—that exhibits initial evidence of construct validity, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability. Exploratory factor analysis with students from two universities revealed a four-factor structure of Racism and Sexism Awareness, Communitarian Values, Multicultural Ideology, and Inequality Consciousness. However, a confirmatory factor analysis with an independent sample of undergraduate students suggests a bifactor model in which the general factor explains most of the variance and that the instrument should be treated as a single scale, rather than independent subscales. Significant correlations with measures of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation suggest convergent validity. Temporal stability was established via a test–retest analysis in an independent sample of undergraduate students. Finally, responses from a sample of MTurk workers provided evidence of the ANAS’s incremental validity when compared to an existing measure of neoliberal beliefs. Implications for future empirical work on the psychological dimensions of neoliberalism are discussed.
      PubDate: 2019-06-12
       
  • Is Perceived Equal Opportunity Corrosive for Support for Equal
           Outcomes' Individual-Based Evidence
    • Abstract: According to a long-standing school of thought, the improvement in equal opportunity is said to reduce the support for equality of outcomes. Yet, some scholars challenge this wisdom and maintain that equalizing opportunities introduces higher uncertainty about individuals’ future rank in their society, which, in turn, leads to more demand for equalizing incomes. Based on the 2013 survey of French residents (N = 4000), this paper argues that both claims are correct. Two pieces of evidence are provided. First, the relationship between perceived equality of opportunity and preference for equality of outcomes is asymmetrically U-shaped. Second, using split samples, this relationship proves to be decreasing among the poorest and increasing among the richest. The article provides some clues supporting the generalizability of such results, based on the analysis of the four waves of the International Social Survey Program in 27 countries.
      PubDate: 2019-06-11
       
  • The Effects of Severity and Number of Misfortunes on Reactions to Victims
    • Abstract: Previous research indicates that sympathy for victims is related to how much they are suffering. Yet, it is unclear whether greater suffering alone leads to more compassionate reactions to victims or whether reactions to victims are moderated by other factors such as the duration of the suffering or the perceived frequency of the occurrence that causes suffering. Using Kelley’s (Neb Symp Motiv 15:192–238, 1967) covariation model as our theoretical framework, our study tested whether severity and number of misfortunes affected reactions to a target claiming to be a victim. Participants evaluated a target after viewing one of the four video interviews. The videos manipulated the severity and number of misfortunes claimed by a victim. More misfortunes generated more helping intentions. Severe misfortunes generated stronger empathic reactions to victims, whereas minor misfortunes generated stronger negative appraisals of victims. However, number of misfortunes moderated this effect: The most negative reactions were elicited by claims of many minor misfortunes and the most positive reactions by claims of many severe misfortunes. Additionally, participants were more likely endorse helping intentions in response to claims of many severe misfortunes than claims of many minor misfortunes. These results provide insight into factors influencing whether people are taken seriously as victims.
      PubDate: 2019-06-10
       
  • Religious and Spiritual Beliefs Uniquely Predict Poverty Attributions
    • Abstract: In this study, we investigated how religion and spirituality were associated with internal and external attributions for the causes of poverty. Such attributions are important as they may shape the types of policies and interventions that individuals support to alleviate poverty. Across two studies with samples of Christian students from a Catholic university in the Midwest (Study 1: n = 189) and a large public Midwestern university (Study 2: n = 646), hierarchical regression analyses revealed that a religious variable, religious conservatism, was positively associated with internal poverty attributions. A spirituality variable, universality (i.e., a sense of shared connection and interdependence with others), was positively associated with external poverty attributions. These findings were present while controlling for demographic variables, political conservatism, and the Protestant work ethic and were consistent across Study 1 and Study 2. Overall, this shows the unique ability of religious and spiritual variables to predict these different types of poverty attributions, and that spirituality was a unique predictor for external poverty attributions over-and-above religious variables. These findings suggest the importance of considering both religion and spirituality when working with individuals and religious communities to alleviate poverty. Limitations and directions for future research and for working with religious and spiritual communities are discussed.
      PubDate: 2019-06-08
       
  • Introduction to the Special Issue on Justice and Health: Different
           Perspectives in Different Disciplines
    • Abstract: This introduction to the special issue on justice and health sketches four common approaches (philosophical reflection, empirical analysis of real-world situations, empirical investigation of lay persons’ perceptions of justice, and empirical inquiry on the role of justice arguments in real-world policy making) and four common specific topics addressed in this emerging field (distribution of health or well-being, access to health care, health insurance arrangements, and priority setting). We observe little fruitful collaboration or interaction between researchers working in different approaches and topics. More interdisciplinary contact would yield richer insights into the evolving inquiry on justice and health.
      PubDate: 2019-06-06
       
  • Explicit Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds in Health Care: A Kaleidoscope
    • Abstract: Although the principles of cost-effectiveness analysis have been adopted by health systems worldwide, a large majority of countries remain reluctant to specify explicit threshold values for cost-effectiveness. Nonetheless, by aiming to benchmark what counts as a reasonable ‘price’ for health gains, the threshold value is a linchpin in the framework of health technology assessment, albeit also a controversial one. The desirability of thresholds depends largely on three claims: their intention to make resource allocation more efficient, their aspiration to make decision-making more transparent and their objective to make healthcare systems more sustainable. In this paper, we draw from various disciplines such as health economics but also psychology, anthropology, sociology, political sciences and ethics to discuss the many facets of these three values, related to the threshold debate. We discuss issues of allocative efficiency, fair decision-making, realpolitik, taboos, institutional justice and the rule of rescue. Based upon these considerations, which together substantiate the precautionary principle, we conclude that the case against thresholds is stronger than the case in favor and that most countries are right to be reluctant to use explicit threshold values.
      PubDate: 2019-06-01
       
  • (In)-Equality in the Allocation of R&amp;D Resources for Rare Diseases
    • Abstract: This paper analyses the allocation of R&D investments within rare diseases and identifies the characteristics of rare diseases that appear to lead R&D resources. Rare diseases affect less than 1 in 2000 citizens. With over 7000 recognised rare diseases and 350 million people affected worldwide, rare diseases are not so rare when considered collectively. Rare diseases are generally underserved by drug development because pharmaceutical industries consider R&D investments in rare diseases too costly and risky in comparison with the low expected returns due to the small population involved. We use data on rare diseases research from Orphanet along with academic publications per rare disease from bibliographic databases. We test the existence of inequalities in R&D investments within rare diseases and identify the disease characteristics that appear to lead R&D investments using dominance tools and bilateral tests. We show that rare diseases in children and with a smaller prevalence, such as ultra-rare diseases, are underserved by R&D. R&D investments appear to be concentrated in more profitable research areas with potentially larger sample size and adult population.
      PubDate: 2019-05-08
       
  • Innovation as a value in healthcare priority-setting: the UK experience
    • Abstract: All healthcare systems operate with limited resources and therefore need to set priorities for allocating resources across a population. Trade-offs between maximising health and promoting health equity are inevitable in this process. In this paper, we use the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) as an example to examine how efforts to promote healthcare innovation in the priority-setting process can complicate these trade-offs. Drawing on NICE guidance, health technology assessment reports and relevant policy documents, we analyse under what conditions NICE recommends the National Health Service fund technologies of an “innovative nature”, even when these technologies do not satisfy NICE’s cost-effectiveness criteria. Our findings fail to assuage pre-existing concerns that NICE’s approach to appraising innovative technologies curtails its goals to promote health and health equity. They also reveal a lack of transparency and accountability regarding NICE’s treatment of innovative technologies, as well as raising additional concerns about equity. We conclude that further research needs to evaluate how NICE can promote health and health equity alongside healthcare innovation and draw some general lessons for healthcare priority-setting bodies like NICE.
      PubDate: 2019-04-15
       
  • Incorporating Inequality Aversion in Health-Care Priority Setting
    • Abstract: Although measures of sensitivity to inequality are important in judging the welfare effects of health-care programmes, it is far from straightforward how to elicit them and apply them in health-care decision-making. This paper provides an overview of the literature on the measurement of inequality aversion, examines some of the features specific of the health domain that depart from the income domain, and discusses its implementation in health-system priority-setting decisions. We find evidence that individuals exhibit a preference for more equitable health distribution, but inequality aversion estimates from the literature are unclear. Unlike the income-inequality literature, standard approaches in the health economics do not follow a ‘veil-of-ignorance’ approach and elicit mostly bivariate (income-related health) inequality aversion estimates. We suggest some ideas to reduce the disconnect between the income inequality and health economics literature.
      PubDate: 2019-03-07
       
  • Simultaneous Use of Public and Private Specialist Services as a Potential
           Strategic Behaviour in Access to the National Health Service: Is There a
           Pattern by Socio-economic Level'
    • Abstract: Under national health services (NHS), non-urgent access to specialist doctors is not straightforward and sometimes leads to long waiting times. Consequently, some citizens may decide to pay for private specialist care to complement the services provided publicly, trying to shorten their NHS waiting times. This strategic behaviour may lead to inequities in access to public specialist services. A way to approach this phenomenon is to analyse those patients that use private and public specialist care simultaneously. The aim of this paper is to determine the proportion of patients who combine both types of services, their profile and to analyse whether the recent economic crisis has accentuated this phenomenon or not. With survey data from the Spanish Health Barometer between 2005 and 2015, probit models of the probability of combining public and private specialist visits are estimated, controlling for socio-economic, demographic and other individual characteristics. Models are estimated using the Heckman correction technique to solve the potential selection bias problem. Almost one in ten patients who visited a public specialist in the previous year also visited a private specialist. Insofar as these patients have used private specialist care strategically, as complementary services to those of the Spanish NHS, this phenomenon might contribute to generate horizontal inequity in access favouring such individuals, whose profiles respond to a high socio-economic level, young and resident in the regions of Canarias, C. Valenciana, Cataluña, Navarra or Cantabria. With the economic crisis and public budget cuts, the proportion of patients who combine private and public specialist care has declined probably due to the predominance of a “household income effect”.
      PubDate: 2019-03-04
       
  • Priority-Setting and Personality: Effects of Dispositional Optimism on
           Preferences for Allocating Healthcare Resources
    • Abstract: In a publicly financed health system, it is important that priority-setting reflects social values. Many studies investigate public preferences through surveys taken from samples, but to be representative, these samples must reflect value judgments of all relevant population subgroups. In this study, we explore whether, next to better-understood sources of heterogeneity such as age, education or gender, also differences in personality play a role in how people want to set limits to health care. We investigate the influence of dispositional optimism: whether someone anticipates a good or bad future. This is an important personality dimension that has been shown to widely reverberate into people’s lives and that can also be expected to influence people’s views on health care. To test our hypothesis, we asked a representative sample of the Belgian population (N = 750) to complete both the revised life orientation test and a discrete choice experiment about allocating healthcare resources, and we investigated the relationships between both measurements. We found that more pessimistic individuals were less supportive of using patients’ age as a selection criterion and more hesitant to invest in prevention. Since individual dispositions are usually not part of the criteria for selecting representative samples, our findings point at a potential non-response bias in studies that elicit social values.
      PubDate: 2019-02-28
       
  • Some Remarks on Equality in Health and Health Care
    • Authors: Daniel M. Hausman
      Abstract: The univariate distribution of health in a population is of little interest to egalitarians, whether relational or distributional, and the relational egalitarian has a hard time saying anything about how the distribution of health bears on whether individuals can interact as equals. The correlations between health and other factors relevant to well-being are of interest to both kinds of egalitarians, even though the relational egalitarian, unlike the distributional egalitarian, has no ultimate interest in distribution. It is difficult to specify distributional or relational egalitarian ideal distributions of health care and to determine what policies would best implement these ideals. What is of particular interest about health to egalitarians are mainly the links between health and other relevant social factors and the distribution of health care, public health programs, and health research. It might be thought that health care resources should be redistributed in the most cost-effective way, measuring effectiveness not by the consequences for total welfare alone, but by the consequences for some measure of egalitarian value. But there are ethical objections to the use of cost-effectiveness information to allocate health-care resources, even with an egalitarian understanding of “effectiveness.” It is very difficult to adjudicate among the moral considerations that are relevant to the allocation of the health-care budget: efficiency with respect to egalitarian objectives, prioritizing the treatment of those whose health problems are worst, offering fair chances to all, and avoiding discrimination are difficult problems. Regulated markets offer one possible response to these difficulties.
      PubDate: 2018-12-18
      DOI: 10.1007/s11211-018-0320-y
       
 
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Customise
APIs
Your IP address: 3.227.254.12
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-