| Abstrakt: |
To reduce the global shortage of life-saving human organs, four controversial policies have emerged in some nations today: Transplant Tourism, Mandated Prisoner Donation, Free Market Sales, Presumed Consent. How do people regard these practices? Here, 127 students in five colleges in New York City completed a survey rating each of these four practices on a 0-9 scale, how much they regarded that practice as a 'human rights issue' (HR), and how much they 'personally accepted' that practice (PA); After a brief informational message on these four practices, they completed a post-survey using the same scales. Three results emerged: (a) Students were extremely divided in their ratings of all four practices, with scores ranging from 0 to 9, in near-bimodal distributions (overall HR mean= 23.0, s.d.= 9.2, PA mean= 16.0, s.d.= 9.5). (b) These ratings were unchanged after hearing details on these four practices (total HR mean= 23.3, s.d.= 10.6, PA mean=15.5, s.d.= 10.4). (c) There were a few possible demographic correlates of one's attitudes-one's gender, political affiliation, and whether one considered registering to be an organ donor themselves. Future research can improve upon the limitations of the current study--including a longer and more powerful video message, and modification of the survey for clearer responding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
