MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380986922 · doi:10.3389/fpos.2023.1036447

Patterns of change in the justifiability of euthanasia across OECD countries

2023· article· en· W4380986922 on OpenAlexaff
Raül Tormos, Maksim Rudnev, Edurne Bartolomé Peral

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Political Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEusko JaurlaritzaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsMultilevel modelCohortDemographyModernization theorySocializationPoliticsPsychologyDemographic economicsSocial psychologyPolitical scienceSociologyMedicineEconomicsLawStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The public's justifiability of euthanasia has increased as more countries have adopted laws permitting a range of end-of-life practices. Despite this trend, there is a dearth of longitudinal and comparative studies investigating attitudes toward euthanasia. Consequently, it remains unclear whether this rise in justifiability is a period-specific trend or generational change. Methods We analyzed data from the European and World Values Survey from 1981 to 2021 to examine period variations, between-cohort differences, and within-cohort changes across 35 affluent countries. This analysis was conducted using dynamic comparative multilevel regression and a comparative version of the cross-classified random effects regressions. Results Our descriptive results supported our hypotheses, indicating an increase in euthanasia's justifiability in virtually all surveyed countries, with both overall and within-cohort changes gravitating toward higher degrees of justifiability. Furthermore, newer periods and younger cohorts were found to be more permissive than their older counterparts. These consistent increases in the justifiability of euthanasia were verified by the multilevel models. Discussion Our results were in line with modernization theory, observing a gradual change in attitudes between cohorts due to generational replacement. However, we also identified intra-cohort changes related to the processes of human development across various countries. Some robustness checks produced ambiguous results in distinguishing period and cohort effects, yet the combination of these components aligns with substantive theory. Conclusion Our findings indicate a more complex pattern of change than predicted by the impressionable years model, a leading approach in political socialization research. This study contributes significantly to our understanding of evolving attitudes toward euthanasia, bridging the gap in longitudinal and comparative studies on the subject.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.221
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Political ScienceSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207