Predicting Preferences for Types of Sex Education in US Schools

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Amy Bleakley (1)
  Michael Hennessy (1)
  Martin Fishbein (1)
  
• 关键词：Abstinence ; only education ; Comprehensive sex education ; Public opinion ; Condom instruction ; Adolescents
• 刊名：Sexuality Research and Social Policy
• 出版年：2010
• 出版时间：March 2010
• 年：2010
• 卷：7
• 期：1
• 页码：50-57
• 全文大小：173KB
• 参考文献：1. Ajzen, I., & Albarracín, D. (2007). Predicting and changing behavior: A reasoned action approach. In I. Ajzen, D. Albarracín, & R. Hornik (Eds.), / Prediction and change of health behavior (pp. 3-1). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  2. Albert, B. (2004). / American opinion on teen pregnancy and related issues 2003. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
  3. Bleakley, A., Hennessy, M., & Fishbein, M. (2006). Public opinion on sex education in US schools. / Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160, 1151-156. CrossRef
  4. Brückner, H., & Bearman, P. (2005). After the promise: the STD consequences of adolescent virginity pledges. / Journal of Adolescent Health, 36, 271-78. CrossRef
  5. Constantine, N. A., Jerman, P., & Huang, A. X. (2007). California parents' preferences and beliefs regarding school-based sex education policy. / Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 39, 167-75. CrossRef
  6. Eisenberg, M. E., Bernat, D. H., Bearinger, L. H., & Resnick, M. D. (2008). Support for comprehensive sexuality education: perspectives from parents of school-age youth. / Journal of Adolescent Health, 42, 352-59. CrossRef
  7. Fishbein, M. (2000). The role of theory in HIV prevention. / AIDS Care, 12, 273-78. CrossRef
  8. Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. / Psychological Methods, 9, 466-91. CrossRef
  9. Holbert, R., & Stephenson, M. (2003). The importance of indirect effects in media research: testing for mediation in structural equation modeling. / Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47, 556-72. CrossRef
  10. Human Rights Watch. (2004). / Access to condoms and HIV/AIDS information: A global health and human rights concern. New York: Author.
  11. Ito, K. E., Gizlice, Z., Owen-O’Dowd, J., Foust, E., Leone, P. A., & Miller, W. C. (2006). Parent opinion of sexuality education in a state with mandated abstinence education: does policy match parental preference? / Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, 634-41. CrossRef
  12. Jemmott, J., Jemmott, L., & Fong, G. (1998). Abstinence and safer sex HIV risk-reduction interventions for African American adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. / Journal of the American Medical Association, 279, 1529-536. CrossRef
  13. Kantor, L. M., Santelli, J. S., Teitler, J., & Balmer, R. (2008). Abstinence-only policies and programs: an overview. / Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, 5(3), 6-7. CrossRef
  14. Kirby, D. (2007). / Emerging answers 2007: Research findings on programs to reduce teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
  15. Kirby, D. B. (2008). The impact of abstinence and comprehensive sex and STD/HIV education programs on adolescent sexual behavior. / Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, 5(3), 18-7. CrossRef
  16. Kline, R. (2005). / Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford.
  17. Knowledge Networks. (2007). / Field report: Annenberg National Health Communication Survey 2005-006. Menlo Park, CA: Author.
  18. Kohler, P. K., Manhart, L. E., & Lafferty, W. E. (2008). Abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education and the initiation of sexual activity and teen pregnancy. / Journal of Adolescent Health, 42, 344-51. CrossRef
  19. Lin, A. J., & Santelli, J. S. (2008). The accuracy of condom information in three selected abstinence-only education curricula. / Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, 5(3), 56-9. CrossRef
  20. Miller, A. M., & Schleifer, R. A. (2008). Through the looking glass: abstinence-only-until-marriage programs and their impact on adolescent human rights. / Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, 5(3), 28-3. CrossRef
  21. Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2006). / Mplus (Version 5.0) [Computer software]. Los Angeles: Authors.
  22. National Public Radio, Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, & Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government. (2004). NPR/Kaiser/Kennedy School poll: Sex education in America. Retrieved September 10, 2008, from http://www.kff.org/newsmedia/upload/Sex-Education-in-America-Summary.pdf
  23. Preacher, K., & Hayes, A. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. / Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-91. CrossRef
  24. Romer, D., Kenski, K., Winneg, K., Adasiewicz, C., & Jamieson, K. (2006). / Capturing campaign dynamics, 2000 and 2004: The National Annenberg Election Survey. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
  25. Santelli, J. S., & Kantor, L. M. (2008). Human rights, cultural, and scientific aspects of abstinence-only policies and programs. / Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, 5(3), 1-. CrossRef
  26. Santelli, J., Ott, M., Lyon, M., Rogers, J., Summers, D., & Schleifer, R. (2006). Abstinence and abstinence-only education: a review of U.S. policies and programs. / Journal of Adolescent Health, 38, 72-1. CrossRef
  27. Sex, etc. (2009). Show me the money: States rejecting ab-only funding. Retrieved March 12, 2009, from http://www.sexetc.org/page/state_funding
  28. Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. (2008). Federal abstinence-only-until-marriage funding. Retrieved June 17, 2009, from http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=1158
  29. The American National Election Studies (www.electionstudies.org). The ANES guide to public opinion and electoral behavior. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer and distributor]. Date accessed February 1, 2010.
  30. Trenholm, C., Devaney, B., Fortson, K., Quay, L., Wheeler, J., & Clark, M. (2007). / Impacts of four title V, section?510 abstinence education programs: Final report. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.
  31. Trenholm, C., Devaney, B., Fortson, K., Clark, M., Bridgespan, L. Q., & Wheeler, J. (2008). Impacts of abstinence education on teen sexual activity, risk of pregnancy, and risk of sexually transmitted diseases. / Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27, 255-76. CrossRef
  32. U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Population by race and Hispanic or Latino origin, for all ages and for 18?years and over, for the United States: 2000. Retrieved March 28, 2006, from http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/phc-t1/tab01.pdf
  33. U.S. Social Security Administration. (2007). Social security act: Title V: Maternal and child health services block grant. Separate program for abstinence education, Section?510 [42 U.S.C. 710].
  34. Zaller, J. (1992). / The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  
• 作者单位：Amy Bleakley (1)
  Michael Hennessy (1)
  Martin Fishbein (1)
  
  1. Annenberg Public Policy Center, 3620 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA
  

文摘

The authors examined how support for abstinence-only education, comprehensive sex education, and condom instruction in US schools was related to beliefs about their respective efficacy, as well as how policy preferences were related to demographic, political, and social variables such as political orientation, attendance at religious services, and having an adolescent in the household. The authors used structural equation modeling to analyze survey data from a nationally representative sample of adults 18?years of age and older. Frequency of attendance at religious services and political orientation were associated with policy preferences directly and indirectly through their influence on beliefs about the educational efficacy of each approach. Having an adolescent in the household, age, and region of the country were not associated with any of the mediating beliefs or outcomes. Religious and political factors emerged as key characteristics in explaining support or opposition to different sex education approaches in the United States.