Journal article
Kathryn J LaRoche, K. Jozkowski, Brandon L. Crawford, Frederica Jackson
Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health, 2024
Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health, 2024
Semantic Scholar
DOI
PubMed
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
LaRoche, K. J., Jozkowski, K., Crawford, B. L., & Jackson, F. (2024). Can someone be both pro-life and pro-choice? Results from a national survey of US adults. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
LaRoche, Kathryn J, K. Jozkowski, Brandon L. Crawford, and Frederica Jackson. “Can Someone Be Both pro-Life and pro-Choice? Results from a National Survey of US Adults.” Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health (2024).
MLA
Click to copy
LaRoche, Kathryn J., et al. “Can Someone Be Both pro-Life and pro-Choice? Results from a National Survey of US Adults.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2024.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{kathryn2024a,
title = {Can someone be both pro-life and pro-choice? Results from a national survey of US adults.},
year = {2024},
journal = {Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health},
author = {LaRoche, Kathryn J and Jozkowski, K. and Crawford, Brandon L. and Jackson, Frederica}
}
Abstract
"Pro-life" and "pro-choice" are closely associated with discussions about abortion; we refer to the extent that people identify with these terms as "abortion identity." Most polling measures present pro-life and pro-choice as mutually exclusive options, but there is a dearth of information about people who might simultaneously endorse both (or neither) labels.
METHOD We administered a survey to adults in the United States (n = 580) that included two different formats for participants to select their abortion identity: a categorical item with response options ranging from strongly pro-choice to strongly pro-life (and "both" and "neither") and two separate items (sliders) that asked people the extent to which they identify with each term. We asked participants endorsing both pro-life and pro-choice to some extent on the slider items to explain their responses in an open-ended item. We used logistic regression to examine the relationship between participants' socio-demographic characteristics and the likelihood of dual identification slider scores; we analyzed open-ended data for content and themes.
RESULTS On the sliders, more than 64% of participants identified as both pro-life and pro-choice to some extent. Variability existed between people's abortion identity on the close-ended items and their response to the open-ended questions. Among those with mixed abortion identities, participants described abortion as a serious and undesirable option but reflected positively on notions of personal choice and bodily autonomy.
CONCLUSIONS Our findings demonstrate complexity in measuring people's endorsement of abortion identity labels. We recommend developing more nuanced and consistent measures to assess abortion attitudes.
