Project description:Standard cost-effectiveness models compare incremental cost increases to incremental average gains in health, commonly expressed in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Our research generalizes earlier models in several ways. We introduce risk aversion in Quality of Life (QoL), which leads to "willingness-to-pay" thresholds that rise with illness severity, potentially by an order of magnitude. Unlike traditional CEA analyses, which discriminate against persons with disabilities, our analysis implies that the marginal value of improving QoL rises for disabled individuals. Our model can also value the uncertain benefits of medical interventions by employing well-established analytic methods from finance. Finally, we show that traditional QALYs no longer serve as a single index of health, when consumers are risk-averse. To address this problem, we derive a generalized single-index of health outcomes-the Generalized Risk-Adjusted QALY (GRA-QALY). Earlier models of CEA that abstract from risk-aversion nest as special cases of our more general model.
Project description:A few weeks prior to the EU referendum (23rd June 2016) two broadly representative samples of the electorate were drawn in Kent (the south-east of England, N = 1,001) and Scotland (N = 1,088) for online surveys that measured their trust in politicians, concerns about acceptable levels of immigration, threat from immigration, European identification, and voting intention. We tested an aversion amplification hypothesis that the impact of immigration concerns on threat and identification would be amplified when political trust was low. We hypothesized that the effect of aversion amplification on voting intentions would be mediated first by perceived threat from immigration, and then by (dis) identification with Europe. Results in both samples were consistent with this hypothesis and suggest that voters were most likely to reject the political status quo (choose Brexit) when concerns that immigration levels were too high were combined with a low level of trust in politicians.
Project description:HIV/AIDS is the second cause of mortality globally and there are 5000 new infections each day. Globally, sex workers are 13 times more at risk of HIV than the general population and in Senegal they have an HIV prevalence 16.5 times greater. Therefore, it is urgent to encourage behaviour change, which requires a better understanding of the reasons why sex workers engage in risky behaviours. We provide new evidence of the role of risk preferences on sexual behaviours, health behaviours and health outcomes of 600 female sex workers in Senegal in July and August 2017. We measure risk aversion of sex workers using an incentivised Gneezy and Potters task in addition to specific risk-taking scales in four domains (in general, finance, health and sex). Understanding of the experimental task was high despite low literacy level of participants. Using ordinary least squares, we find that risk aversion is an important predictor of sex workers' sexual behaviours. We find that sex workers with higher level of risk aversion have less sex acts with clients, have less clients at risk of HIV, are more likely to engage in protected sex acts and as a result earn less money per sex act. Furthermore, we find that sex workers exhibiting higher level of risk aversion are less likely to be infected with sexually transmitted infections. Results highlight that some associations between risk preferences and sexual and health behaviours are domain specific. To conclude, our results confirm the role of risk preferences in the spread of HIV/AIDS epidemic and suggest the importance of collecting information on self-reported risk aversion to identify individuals who are at a greater risk of HIV/AIDS. Finally, our results provide some rationale in using lottery-based financial incentives to prevent sexually transmitted infections and HIV/AIDS among high-risk populations.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To provide a 7-year update of the most recent systematic review about the relationships between political features and population health outcomes. SETTING:Internationally comparative scholarly literature. DATA SOURCES:Ten scholarly bibliographic databases plus supplementary searches in bibliographies and Google Scholar were used to update a previous systematic review. The final search was conducted in November 2017. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Any population health outcome measure, apart from healthcare spending. RESULTS:73 unique publications were identified from the previous systematic review. The database searches to update the literature identified 45?356 raw records with 35?207 remaining following de-duplication. 55 publications were identified from supplementary searches. In total, 258 publications proceeded to full-text review and 176 were included in narrative synthesis. 85 studies were assessed at low risk of bias, 89 at moderate risk of bias and none at high risk of bias. Assessment could not be conducted for two studies that had only book chapters. No meta-analysis was conducted. 102 studies assessed welfare state generosity and 79 found a positive association. Of the 17 studies that assessed political tradition, 15 were found to show a positive association with the left-of-centre tradition. 44 studies assessed democracy and 34 found a positive association. 28 studies assessed globalisation and 14 found a negative association, while seven were positive and seven inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS:This review concludes that welfare state generosity, left-of-centre democratic political tradition and democracy are generally positively associated with population health. Globalisation may be negatively associated with population health, but the results are less conclusive. It is important for the academic public health community to engage with the political evidence base in its research as well as in stakeholder engagement, in order to facilitate positive outcomes for population health.
Project description:SignificanceRecent political events show that members of extreme political groups support partisan violence, and survey evidence supposedly shows widespread public support. We show, however, that, after accounting for survey-based measurement error, support for partisan violence is far more limited. Prior estimates overstate support for political violence because of random responding by disengaged respondents and because of a reliance on hypothetical questions about violence in general instead of questions on specific acts of political violence. These same issues also cause the magnitude of the relationship between previously identified correlates and partisan violence to be overstated. As policy makers consider interventions designed to dampen support for violence, our results provide critical information about the magnitude of the problem.
Project description:The current project examines how psychological reactance and conflict orientation relate to the highly politicized debate over mask-wearing in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore how psychological reactance and conflict orientation are related to self-reported mask-wearing, and how these same predispositions are correlated with political beliefs. We then assess how favorability towards President Trump in the context of the 2020 Election was uniquely correlated with these traits and how Trump favorability both mediated and moderated the effects of conflict orientation and psychological reactance on individuals' likelihood of wearing masks. Results from a national survey of U.S. adults from Nov-Dec 2020 suggest that Trump favorability was positively associated with trait reactance, negatively associated with conflict aversion, and negatively associated with self-reported mask-wearing. The opposite was true of favorability towards Joe Biden. Moderation analyses indicate that conflict-approaching Biden detractors were especially unlikely to report wearing masks, while mediation analyses show that political preferences significantly mediated the relationships between both psychological traits and self-reported mask-wearing. Implications for the politicization of health messaging and health behavior are discussed.
Project description:We argue that research on political behavior, including political participation, public opinion, policy responsiveness, and political inequality will be strengthened by studying the role of health. We then provide evidence that health matters for voter turnout and partisanship. Using the General Social Survey (GSS) and The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), we find that people who report poor health are less likely to vote and identify with the Republican Party. Moreover, the effects of health on voter turnout and partisanship appear to have both developmental and contemporaneous components. Taken together, our findings suggest that health inequalities may have significant political consequences.
Project description:This study examined the role of women's political leadership at the community level in China, a context that has experienced recent political and socioeconomic change and has a distinctive rural-urban divide. Drawing on longitudinal data from the China Family Panel Studies (N range = 40,918-52,406 person-year observations), we found that female community directors outnumbered male directors in urban China but were much less common in rural areas. Female community directors had higher levels of human capital regardless of rural or urban location. Residents living in female-directed communities reported better mental health but not physical health or life satisfaction compared to those living in male-directed communities, and this association was most robust among rural women. For rural women, the mental health benefit of living in female-directed communities was partially explained by reduced personal experience of gender discrimination, suggesting that female leadership fosters ideational change toward women that lowers discriminatory behaviors among constituents.
Project description:BackgroundAnxiety disorders are associated with disruptions in both emotional processing and decision making. As a result, anxious individuals often make decisions that favor harm avoidance. However, this bias could be driven by enhanced aversion to uncertainty about the decision outcome (e.g., risk) or aversion to negative outcomes (e.g., loss). Distinguishing between these possibilities may provide a better cognitive understanding of anxiety disorders and hence inform treatment strategies.MethodsTo address this question, unmedicated individuals with pathological anxiety (n = 25) and matched healthy control subjects (n = 23) completed a gambling task featuring a decision between a gamble and a safe (certain) option on every trial. Choices on one type of gamble-involving weighing a potential win against a potential loss (mixed)-could be driven by both loss and risk aversion, whereas choices on the other type-featuring only wins (gain only)-were exclusively driven by risk aversion. By fitting a computational prospect theory model to participants' choices, we were able to reliably estimate risk and loss aversion and their respective contribution to gambling decisions.ResultsRelative to healthy control subjects, pathologically anxious participants exhibited enhanced risk aversion but equivalent levels of loss aversion.ConclusionsIndividuals with pathological anxiety demonstrate clear avoidance biases in their decision making. These findings suggest that this may be driven by a reduced propensity to take risks rather than a stronger aversion to losses. This important clarification suggests that psychological interventions for anxiety should focus on reducing risk sensitivity rather than reducing sensitivity to negative outcomes per se.
Project description:This study examines the effects of chronic (i.e., repeated and cumulative) mediated exposure to political violence on ideological beliefs regarding political conflict. It centers on these effects on young viewers, from preadolescents to adolescents. Ideological beliefs refers here to support of war, perception of threat to one's nation, and normative beliefs concerning aggression toward the out-group. A longitudinal study was conducted on a sample of Israeli and Palestinian youths who experience the Israeli-Palestinian conflict firsthand (N = 1,207). Two alternative hypotheses were tested: that chronic exposure via the media increases support for war and aggression and elevates feeling of threat, or that chronic exposure via the media strengthens preexisting beliefs. Results demonstrated that higher levels of exposure were longitudinally related to stronger support for war. Regarding normative beliefs about aggression and threat to one's nation, mediated exposure reinforced initial beliefs, rendering the youths more extreme in their attitudes. These results mostly support the conceptualization of the relation between media violence and behaviors as "reciprocally determined" or "reinforcing spirals." The results are also discussed in light of the differences found between the effect of exposure to political violence firsthand and exposure via the media.