The development of affordable housing often involves a contentious siting process. Proposed housing developments frequently trigger concern among neighbors and community groups about potential negative impacts on neighborhood quality of life and property values. Advocates, developers, and researchers have long suspected that some of these concerns stem from racial or class prejudice, yet, to date, these assumptions lack empirical evidence. My research seeks to examine the roles that perceptions of race and class play in shaping opinions that underlie public opposition to affordable housing. Such opposition often earns the label "Not in my Backyard" (NIMBY). The application of a mixed-methods approach helps determine why the public opposes the development of affordable housing in their neighborhoods and towns. The focus group and survey results provide a rich understanding of the underlying attitudes that trigger opposition to affordable housing when proposed nearby. This study demonstrates that stereotypes and perceptions of the poor and minorities are particularly strong determinants of affordable housing opposition. This research improves our understanding of public attitudes toward affordable housing attitudes, leading to a more focused and effective policies and plans for the siting of affordable housing. The results provide advocates, planners, developers, and researchers with a more accurate portrayal of affordable housing opposition, thereby allowing the response to be shaped in a more appropriate manner. / text

The thesis is organised around an empirical investigation of the relationship between residents of a Hertfordshire village and people who are, or who have been, patients at a nearby psychiatric hospital, some of whom regularly venture into the village to use local facilities. The research employs the method of participant observation and draws upon the discourse analytic approach of Potter and Wetherell, together with the rhetorical perspective of Michael Billig. In particular, the research focuses upon the discursive practices of local people, practices which function to sustain, amplify or minimise difference between themselves and others who are patients. The critical theory of Jürgen Habermas is drawn upon to complement and extend the discourse analysis approach, which receives critical evaluation. In addition, the time-geography of Alan Pred is employed as an heuristic for the representation of journeys of patients in the village. The historical dimension of the relationship between village and hospital is addressed by drawing upon Parish Council minutes and local newspaper reports. The thesis contains a conceptual investigation of public anxieties concerning mental disorder, an overview and discussion of the contemporary relevance of the labelling perspective, and a review of relevant literature. In addition it provides an exploration of methodological and textual issues.

Organ transplantation is a method of treatment of damaged or missing organ by replacement by a new one that is removed from a donor. Donors may be not only living people but also dead people after cardiac arrest or people with brain death. The aim of the study was to assess the attitude of laymen to organ transplantation. The quantitative research used questionnaires which were distributed since 25th October - 31st December 2017 to non-medical adults older than 18 years living in the Czech Republic. The results demonstrated that the laymen have basic knowledge which organs and tissues can be used for transplantation in humans. Total 110 respondents answered that organs can be removed from people with diagnosed brain death. Knowledge of legislation was a surprise. Over one half of respondents knew about implied consent with organ removal after death and knew at least one possibility how to deny post-mortem organ harvesting. Generally, the public lacks interest in organ donation. People dislike registration unless necessary and dislike discussion concerning death which is a symbol of pain and suffering. Majority of public agree that there is need for more education in the field of organ transplantation and donation. They would prefer a specialised lecture or discussion with medical professionals....

Bakgrund Psykisk ohälsa är vanligt förekommande och kan uppvisas genom symtom som exempelvis ångest, oro, sömnproblem, stress och självmordstankar. Psykisk ohälsa kan tillsammans med ärftliga faktorer och livshändelser leda till att psykisk sjukdom utvecklas. Det finns fortfarande mycket fördomar och negativa attityder gentemot personer med psykisk sjukdom i samhället vilket bidrar till att många inte vågar tala om sin sjukdom. En förklaring till varför det finns negativa attityder gentemot personer med psykisk sjukdom är att människor ofta har en dålig kunskap om fenomenet och därför blir rädda för det som är främmande. Sjuksköterskestudenter delar ofta denna allmänna uppfattning gentemot personer med psykisk sjukdom. Syfte Syftet var att beskriva attityder till psykisk sjukdom samt psykiatrisk vård före, under och efter den kliniska utbildningen inom psykiatrin hos sjuksköterskestudenter i Sverige. Metod För att kunna besvara syftet valdes metoden kvalitativ forskningsintervju med deskriptiv design. Sex intervjuer genomfördes med sjuksköterskestudenter som studerade på ett sjuksköterskeprogram vid en högskola i Stockholm. Resultat Flertalet av de intervjuade sjuksköterskestudenterna beskrev att de upplevde att det fanns fördomar mot de psykiskt sjuka både i samhället i stort och inom vården. Studenterna beskrev att de fått erfarenheter av att det var viktigt i samvaron med patienten att fokusera på det friska, inte enbart det sjuka. Alla de intervjuade sjuksköterskestudenterna beskrev att de efter kursen i klinisk psykiatri har fått en ökad kunskap om psykisk sjukdom vilket lett till en positivare attityd, bättre förståelse samt bättre bemötande. Det framkom även att sjuksköterskestudenterna kunde tänka sig att arbeta inom psykiatrisk vård i framtiden, vilket inte fanns några planer kring innan kursen. Slutsats Klinisk utbildning inom psykiatri har en betydande roll vad det gäller förändringen av sjuksköterskestudenters uppfattning och attityd till personer med psykisk sjukdom samt psykiatrisk vård.

In 1997, both the United States (U.S.) and the European Union (EU) signed the Kyoto Protocol, the first legally binding international treaty with targets for greenhouse gas emissions reductions. However, in 2001, the United States withdrew from the Protocol. This thesis seeks to understand some of the reasons why the European Union embraced the Kyoto Protocol while the United States did not. Using an overall framework of comparative politics, research is undertaken through three lenses. First, an overview of public opinion toward global warming and climate change in the U.S. and the EU analyzes potential differences or similarities from surveys carried out in each area. Second, I examine the prevailing political ideology in each polity, with emphasis on the period when climate change arose as a major global challenge. Finally, two case studies examine the theory of environmental federalism and how it might affect climate change policy action. I obtained the following results. Public opinion research has revealed that, on average, the American public is nearly as concerned with climate change as the European public. However, the overarching political ideology in the U.S. was one of conservatism, while that in Europe was one of social democracy, with left and center-left governments, contributing to a greater or lesser degree, and through indirect mechanisms, to the political stances adopted. Finally, the case of Germany shows that member state actions, such as the implementation of ambitious reductions targets, can still play a crucial role in leadership even in the presence of action at the central government level (EU). The California case study shows that state-level efforts can rise to fill a vacuum created by the absence of central government action. In the end, behavior of each polity regarding international climate agreements, particularly the Kyoto Protocol, cannot be explained in simple terms.; The complexity of the issues revolving climate change require further interdisciplinary research and collaboration among multiple actors including scientists, policymakers, nongovernmental organizations, and other stakeholders.

Background: Public attitudes toward depression and help-seeking behaviour are important factors influencing depressed people to obtain professional help and adequate treatment. OSPI-Europe is a multi-level suicide prevention programme including a public awareness campaign. It was implemented in four regions of four European countries (Germany, Hungary, Ireland and Portugal). This paper reports the results of the evaluation of the campaign, including its visibility and effects of the campaign on stigma associated with depression and help-seeking behaviour. Methods: A representative general population survey (N = 4004) including measures on personal stigma, perceived stigma, openness to help, perceived value of help, and socio-demographic variables was conducted in the four intervention and four control regions in a cross-sectional pre-post design. Results: The public awareness campaign was considerably more visible in Germany and Portugal compared to Ireland and Hungary. Visibility was further affected by age and years of schooling. Personal stigma, perceived stigma and openness toward professional help varied significantly across the four countries. Respondents in the intervention regions showed significantly less personal depression stigma than respondents in the control regions after the campaign. Respondents of the intervention region who were aware of the campaign reported more openness toward seeking professional help than respondents who were unaware of it. Conclusion: The OSPI-Europe awareness campaign was visible and produced some positive results. At the same time, it proved to be difficult to show strong, measurable and unambiguous effects, which is in line with previous studies. Public awareness campaigns as conducted within OSPI-Europe can contribute to improved attitudes and knowledge about depression in the general public and produce synergistic effects, in particular when the dissemination of awareness campaign materials is simultaneously reinforced by other intervention levels of a multi-level intervention programme. Limitations: The survey was cross-sectional and based on self-report, so no causal inferences could be drawn.

Master of Regional and Community Planning / Department of Landscape Architecture/Regional and Community Planning / John W. Keller / The Great Plains possesses one of the best sources of wind energy in North America. Based upon the need to diversify energy production domestically, wind energy’s future in both the immediate and long term should be dynamic. The success of wide scale development of this potential will be largely determined by the perceptions of local residents, who are most affected by the siting and design of wind energy projects. Currently, regulation of this natural resource is left largely to state and county governments. A majority of these entities in the Great Plains region have no regulations governing wind energy development or employ a patchwork of "borrowed" codes from across the nation. The system of regulation of natural resources by political boundary is archaic. It fails to recognize that there are high degrees of correlation between social, economic, and natural resources without respect for artificial political boundaries. This study is the first in the Great Plains to examine public attitudes toward the development of wind energy and its relationship to the landscape based upon ecological regions rather than political boundaries. The analysis of collected data will provide a useful tool for local planners, policy makers, and the general public in understanding the prevalent issues involved with wind energy development in this region.

This paper analyzes how the explained and unexplained part of the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition has changed due to a shift in attitudes towards immigrants in Germany. We use the migration crisis in 2015 as an exogenous source of variation in attitudes towards immigrants. As many studies analyze labor market discrimination, there are very few studies examining discrimination in the German labor market by conducting a natural experiment. In contrast to previous empirics, this paper sets out to explain and decompose the differences between immigrants and natives using a rather unique method. This paper is based on data from the European Social Survey (ESS) conducted in 2014 and 2016 and is analyzed using measures of public attitudes, the linear probability model, and the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition. The results indicate that there are rather great differences in employment probabilities, human capital and family constellations between immigrants and natives. Measuring public attitudes, it is evident that there has been a general decline in positive attitudes towards immigrants post the migration crisis in 2015. Analyzing the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, it is evident that the unexplained (discriminatory) part of the decomposition has decreased which is referred to as a decrease in discrimination in the labor market. Even though that a general decline in positive attitudes towards immigrants is present, an increase in the unexplained part of the decomposition is not observed. As no correlation between public attitudes and the unexplained part of the decomposition is apparent, it is most likely that employers base their employment decision on the extent of information provided. This indicating that discrimination in the labor market most likely is due to statistical discrimination and not due to the preferences of the employer.

The aim of the thesis is to answer the question how differ the attitudes of zoologists and general public on suitability of various mammals kept in zoos. The theory of cultural stereotypes is theoretical starting point where i assume that evaluation is influenced on the basis of cultural stereotypes among general public (n = 100) versus expert evaluation of graduates of zoology (n = 60). Questionnaire with a scale enumeration concerning the assessment of the suitability of selected groups of mammals for breeding in zoos was used as the main data collection instrument. Results of the survey showed that experts evaluated the suitability of mamals for breeding in zoo more positive than laymens in general. According general public were equines and rodents rated as relatively unsuitable for breeding in zoos in comparison with expert evaluation. Elephant, orangutan, platypus, tiger, bear and cheetah were rated as relatively suitable for breeding in zoos by general public against expert evaluation. The possible interpretation might be that these mammals belong to the most popular and therefore respondents want to experience personal contact with them. Statistical testing found no gender differences in the rating. Key words: zoos, public attitudes, zoologists' attitudes, mammals, cultural stereotypes,...

Med utgångspunkt i kändisars förmedlade erfarenheter av egenupplevd psykisk ohälsa i podcasts syftar denna studie till att belysa hur kändisar pratar om sin psykiska ohälsa i sociala medier. Den här studien baseras på material från 10 intervjuer med kändisar och har inhämtats från sex olika podcasts: Ångestpodden, Framgångspodden, Söndagsintervjun i P1, Helt ärligt med Sebastian Stakset, Värvet och Talk to me. Metoden som använts för att analysera materialet är en tematisk analys vilket har resulterat i att två teman har identifierats: ”Att hjälpa andra” och ”Att undanhålla och distansera”. Det första temat handlar om att kändisarna genom att dela med sig av sina erfarenheter av sin psykiska ohälsa vill hjälpa andra i liknande situation. Det andra temat handlar om att kändisarna i sättet de uttrycker sig i viss mån undanhåller och på olika sätt distanserar sig från sin psykiska ohälsa. Tillsammans tydliggör dessa teman en dubbelhet, trots att kändisarna uttrycker att de vill hjälpa andra framkommer det samtidigt tendenser att undanhålla och distansera sig från sin ohälsa. Den tematiska analysen kommer sedan analyseras med begrepp från Erving Goffmans stigmateori. Denna studie bidrar till en ökad medvetenhet om vilken påverkan media har vid framställande av psykisk ohälsa och kan ge en ökad förståelse för hur ett stigmatiserat fenomen hanteras av de människor som utsätts för det. / Based on celebrities’ mediated experiences of self-perceived mental illness in podcasts, this study aims to shed light on how celebrities talk about their mental illness on social media. This study is based on material from 10 interviews with celebrities and has been obtained from six different podcasts: Ångestpodden, Framgångspodden, Söndagsintervjun i P1, Helt ärligt med Sebastian Stakset, Värvet and Talk to me. The method used to analyse the material is a thematic analysis, which has resulted in two themes being identified: “Helping others” and “Withhold and distancing”. The first theme is about the celebrities wanting to help others in a similar situation by sharing their experiences of their mental illness. The second theme is about the celebrities in the way they express themselves to some extent withholding and in different ways distancing themselves from their mental illness. Together, these themes clarify a duality, despite the fact that celebrities express that they want to help others, there are tendencies to withhold and distance themselves from their ill health. The thematic analysis will then be analysed with concepts from Erving Goffman’s stigma theory. This study contributes to an increased awareness of the impact of the media in the representation of mental illness and can provide an increased understanding of how a stigmatized phenomenon is handled by the people who are exposed to it.