Dataset Information

Under threat by popular vote: German-speaking immigrants' affect and cognitions following the Swiss vote against mass immigration.

ABSTRACT: A popular initiative in support of regulating future immigration to Switzerland was accepted by the electorate in 2014. Assuming that the initiative acted as an exclusionary threat for current immigrants of Switzerland, we conducted an online survey among a sample of highly-skilled German-speaking immigrants ("expats"). Participants reported having experienced negative affect following the vote. Moreover, having a more left-wing orientation, living in a political constituency that had voted pro-regulation and having proportionally few Swiss friends positively predicted negative affect following the vote. Negative affect was associated with a reported negative change in one's attitudes towards Switzerland, increased considerations to leave the country, and impaired satisfaction with life. In sum, the results suggest that a powerful exclusionary threat such as a national vote may be experienced as distressful by highly-skilled immigrants currently living in the country.

SUBMITTER: Rudert SC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5391132 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Under threat by popular vote: German-speaking immigrants' affect and cognitions following the Swiss vote against mass immigration.

Rudert Selma Carolin SC Janke Stefan S Greifeneder Rainer R

PloS one 20170413 4

A popular initiative in support of regulating future immigration to Switzerland was accepted by the electorate in 2014. Assuming that the initiative acted as an exclusionary threat for current immigrants of Switzerland, we conducted an online survey among a sample of highly-skilled German-speaking immigrants ("expats"). Participants reported having experienced negative affect following the vote. Moreover, having a more left-wing orientation, living in a political constituency that had voted pro- ...[more]

PMID: 28406990

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInternational medical electives are a well-established part of the curriculum of many western medical schools. It is widely accepted that these electives contribute to improved clinical examination and communication skills. Overseas electives also exert a strong influence over future career decisions and often pave the way for later international work. Whilst the positive outcomes are known, little information exists regarding elective preferences and destinations overall, information that could help optimise a safe learning experience and maximise the potential for one of the highlights of medical education. In order to obtain analytical data that could assist medical elective framework development, we systematically reviewed the two largest German online databases cataloguing abroad elective testimonies.ResultsWe identified 856 overseas elective reports uploaded within the last five years. European destinations were the most sought-after choice among German-speaking medical students. Interest in abroad electives in the United States (U.S.), a traditionally popular destination, was much lower than expected. U.S. elective reports accounted for only 3 % of long-term electives. Electives in low- and middle-income countries were generally less popular than electives in high-income countries. General surgery was the most popular elective discipline, followed by Emergency Medicine and Gynaecology and Obstetrics.ConclusionsWe observed a large inhomogeneity in German-speaking medical students' elective choices, potentially influenced by financial and organizational aspects as well as geopolitical developments. This highlights a crucial challenge for medical schools and other organizations involved in elective planning. In light of regional differences, our data suggest that a "one size fits all" preparation is not pertinent to optimize students' elective experience. Country- or region-specific pre-departure trainings and more individualized elective frameworks might be necessary to address these differences and to ensure a safe learning experience for students.

Project description:IntroductionInfection prevention and speaking up on errors are core qualities of health care providers. Heuristic effects (e.g. overconfidence) may impair behavior in daily routine, while speaking up can be inhibited by hierarchical barriers and medical team factors. Aim of this investigation was to determine, how medical students experience these difficulties for hand hygiene in daily routine.MethodsOn the base of prior investigations we developed a questionnaire with 5-point Likert ordinal scaled items and free text entries. This was tested for validity and reliability (Cronbach's Alpha 0.89). Accredited German, Swiss and Austrian universities were contacted and medical students asked to participated in the anonymous online survey. Quantitative statistics used parametric and non-parametric tests and effect size calculations according to Lakens. Qualitative data was coded according to Janesick.Results1042 undergraduates of 12 universities participated. All rated their capabilities in hand hygiene and feedback reception higher than those of fellow students, nurses and physicians (p<0.001). Half of the participants rating themselves to be best educated, realized that faulty hand hygiene can be of lethal effect. Findings were independent from age, sex, academic course and university. Speaking-up in case of omitted hand hygiene was rated to be done seldomly and most rare on persons of higher hierarchic levels. Qualitative results of 164 entries showed four main themes: 1) Education methods in hand hygiene are insufficient, 2) Hierarchy barriers impair constructive work place culture 3) Hygiene and feedback are linked to medical ethics and 4) There is no consequence for breaking hygiene rules.DiscussionAlthough partially limited by the selection bias, this study confirms the overconfidence-effects demonstrated in post-graduates in other settings and different professions. The independence from study progress suggests, that the effect occurs before start of the academic course with need for educational intervention at the very beginning. Qualitative data showed that used methods are insufficient and contradictory work place behavior in hospitals are frustrating. Even 20 years after "To err is human", work place culture still is far away from the desirable.

Project description:Background: Portuguese-speaking immigrants are a growing underserved population in the Unites States who experience high levels of psychological distress and increased vulnerability to mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety. Current evidence shows that mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) are effective to promote physical and mental health among educated English speakers; nonetheless, the lack of diversity in the mindfulness literature is a considerable limitation. To our knowledge, the feasibility and acceptability of MBIs among Portuguese-speaking immigrants have not yet been investigated. Methods: This single-arm pilot study (N = 30) explored the feasibility, acceptability, and cultural aspects of Mindfulness Training for Primary Care (MTPC)-Portuguese among Portuguese-speaking immigrants in the Boston area. MTPC is an 8-week, primary care-adapted, referral-based, insurance-reimbursable, trauma-informed MBI that is fully integrated into a healthcare system. The study also examined intervention preliminary effectiveness on mental health outcomes (depression and anxiety symptoms) and self-regulation (emotional regulation, mindfulness, self-compassion, interoceptive awareness), and initiation of health behavior was explored. Results: Primary care providers referred 129 patients from 2018 to 2020. Main DSM-5 primary diagnoses were depression (76.3%) and anxiety disorders (6.7%). Participants (N = 30) attended a mean of 6.1 (SD 1.92) sessions and reported a mean of 213.7 (SD = 124.3) min of practice per week. All survey finishers would recommend the program to a friend, found the program helpful, and rated the overall program as "very good" or "excellent," and 93% would participate again, with satisfaction mean scores between 4.6 and 5 (Likert scale 0-5). Participants and group leaders provided feedback to refine MTPC-Portuguese culturally responsiveness regarding materials language, settings, time, food, and community building. Patients exhibited reductions in depression (d = 0.67; p < 0.001) and anxiety (d = 0.48; p = 0.011) symptoms, as well as enhanced emotional regulation (d = 0.45; p = 0.009), and among survey finishers, 50% initiated health behavior change through action plan initiation. Conclusion: This pilot study suggests that MTPC-Portuguese is feasible, acceptable, and culturally appropriate among Portuguese-speaking patients in the Boston area. Furthermore, the intervention might potentially decrease depression and anxiety symptoms, facilitate health behavior change, and improve emotional regulation. MTPC-Portuguese investigation with larger samples in controlled studies is warranted to support its dissemination and implementation in the healthcare system. Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier: NCT04268355.

Dataset Information

Under threat by popular vote: German-speaking immigrants' affect and cognitions following the Swiss vote against mass immigration.

Publications

Under threat by popular vote: German-speaking immigrants' affect and cognitions following the Swiss vote against mass immigration.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets