Attitudes about Childlessness and Infertility Treatments: A Comparison of Turkish and American University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of contemporary attitudes about childlessness and infertility have focused mainly on highly industrialized countries, with less attention to developing countries like Turkey. This project explored attitudes about childlessness and infertility treatments and their interrelations among university students, who are often the forerunners of new attitudes and social change, in Turkey (N = 850) and the United States (Florida; N = 761). Turkish students, especially men, reported more negative attitudes about permanent childlessness and reported more positive attitudes about ethics and availability of infertility treatments. Students in Florida had more favorable attitudes toward childlessness and supported broader social access to infertility treatments (e.g., for those who were unmarried or who had chosen to delay childbearing). Women in both samples generally reported more positive attitudes about childlessness and the ethics and availability of infertility treatments than men. In addition, Turkish students who were female, from urban areas, or who aspired to a doctoral education reported more positive attitudes about childlessness than others. Regression analyses of pooled data confirmed persistent gender and country differences. In both samples, positive attitudes about childlessness were correlated with support for broader social access to infertility treatments. The results suggest that infertility treatments are viewed as a means for avoiding childlessness by those with traditional perspectives, but are seen as a mechanism for allowing for broader social access to parenthood and greater choice about reproduction among those with less traditional viewpoints.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".