Type II diabetes affects Hispanic populations disproportionately and is the fifth leading cause of death for Hispanic people in the United States ( Smith & Barnett, 2005 ). Risk of diabetes is of great concern throughout the United States and is clearly of epidemic proportions for regions such as the Southwest and Texas where the primary minority populations are Mexican American. We conducted four focus groups with a total of 49 Hispanic participants (23 adults and 26 adolescents) from rural West Texas communities to gain insights about participants' eating habits, knowledge of diabetes, and potential barriers to preventive care. From the data, we identified a three-tiered predisposition or vulnerability to diabetes-heredity; preferences for unhealthy, culturally based food; and temptations from U.S. mainstream fast food culture. These vulnerabilities added to the sociocultural concerns that participants identified-importance of parental and familial modeling; challenges to healthy eating based on a culturally based diet and mainstream fast food culture; and a lack of support from the larger sociocultural networks such as teachers, community leaders, and the media. From these data, we have a better understanding of familial and sociocultural factors that need to be addressed in the development of preventive public awareness and educational plans. We outline implications for practitioners and educators from an integrated cultural biomedical approach.
This article argues that media researchers should pay closer attention to the benefits and potential pitfalls of using business press and industry trade journal reports to inform academic research. To date, the use of these secondary sources in scholarly research concerning media industries has received little interest, as demonstrated in a preliminary examination of how academic literature and research methods textbooks treat the business press and trade journal reports. The authors call for a dialogue on this significant oversight, and offer suggestions for how researchers might begin addressing it as media across the globe grow in scope and influence during the 21st century.
In our research examining how people think and talk about immigration, we consistently find that people want to have a reasonable conversation about politics, but they often decide that productive conversations are not possible because other people are uninformed, irrational, close-minded, and uncivil. We argue that self-serving biases and phenomenological experiences lead to the biased perception that the self is far more capable of adhering to the ideals of rational deliberation than others, a process that we refer to as deliberative bias. In Study 1, we use data from in-depth interviews to develop the concept of deliberative bias. In Study 2, we use a survey to demonstrate that perceptions that other people are uninformed, irrational, close-minded, and uncivil are related to a decreased likelihood of talking politics with loose ties or those with opposing perspectives. These results suggest that deliberative bias may be a significant impediment to productive political conversations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.