Search results

This Pew Research Center survey asked a nationally representative sample of 7,006 Asian American adults about their experiences living in, and views of, the United States. It covers topics such as racial and ethnic identity, religious identities and practices, policy priorities, discrimination and racism in America, affirmative action, global affairs, living with economic hardship and immigrant experiences.

The survey sampled U.S. adults who self-identify as Asian, either alone or in combination with other races or Hispanic ethnicity. It included oversamples of the Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Korean and Vietnamese populations. Respondents were drawn from a national sample of residential mailing addresses, which included addresses from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Specialized surname list frames were used to supplement the sample. The survey was conducted on paper and web in six languages: Chinese (Simplified and Traditional), English, Hindi, Korean, Tagalog and Vietnamese. Responses were collected from July 5, 2022, to Jan. 27, 2023.

This data collection contains the results of a follow-up cross-sectional study to the 2016 assessment of the current campus climate with respect to diversity, equity, and inclusion. The sample survey of the University of Michigan (U-M), Ann Arbor, faculty, staff, and students was meant to represent the full diversity of the community and to capture information and perceptions on demographics, climate, institutional commitment and inclusive and equitable treatment, departmental norms, intergroup interactions, and discrimination. With input from committees of students, faculty, and staff, the survey instrument was developed collaboratively by the U-M Office of the Provost, U-M's Survey Research Center, and administered by SoundRocket, an external social science survey research company. The instrument was delivered as a web survey, and several notifications and reminders were used to encourage completion, as well as an incentive. These notifications and reminders were delivered in phases.

Variables in the collection describe age, gender and gender identity, race/ethnicity, school/department/unit, religious affiliation, disability status, campus safety, rating of campus climate, intergroup interaction, discriminatory events, composite rating scores, and more.

Since 2013, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) has led the development of a pioneering national action framework to advance a "culture that enables all in our diverse society to lead healthier lives now and for generations to come." Accomplishing these principles requires a national paradigm shift from a traditionally disease and health care-centric view of health toward one that focuses on well-being. Recognizing that paradigm shifts require intentional actions, RWJF worked with RAND researchers to design an actionable path to fulfill the Culture of Health (CoH) vision. A central piece of this work is the development of measures to assess constructs underlying a CoH.

The National Survey of Health Attitudes (NSHA) is a survey that RWJF and RAND analysts developed and conducted as part of the foundation's CoH strategic framework. The foundation undertook this survey to measure key constructs that could not be measured in other data sources. Thus, the survey was not meant to capture the full action framework that informs CoH, but rather just selected measure areas. The questions in this survey primarily addressed the action area: making health a shared value. The survey covers a variety of topics, including views regarding what factors influence health, such as the notion of health interdependence (peer, family, neighborhood, and workplace drivers of health), values related to national and community investment for health and well-being; behaviors around health and well-being, including civic engagement on behalf of health, and the role of community engagement and sense of community in relation to health attitudes and values.

This study includes the results from the 2023 RWJF National Survey of Health Attitudes. The 2023 survey is the third wave of the NSHA. The first wave was conducted in 2015 (ICPSR 37405) and the second wave in 2018 (ICPSR 37633). The 2023 report complements the overview of the 2015 survey described in the RAND report Development of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation National Survey of Health Attitudes (Carman et al., 2016), and its subsequent topline 2018 Survey of National Health Attitudes: Description and Top-Line Summary (Carman et al., 2019) and is organized similarly for consistency. A companion set of longitudinal surveys during the COVID-19 pandemic was fielded between 2020 and 2021 and is further described in four top-line reports, COVID-19 and the Experiences of Populations at Greater Risk (Carman et al., 2020-2021).

The questions in the 2023 survey uniquely capture aspects of American mindset about health, health equity, structural racism, and wellbeing in ways that are not present in other surveys. This version of the NSHA can be viewed in three main sections: (1) individual health experiences, perspectives, and knowledge (making health a shared value); (2) health equity perspectives; and (3) community wellbeing, including climate views and barriers to community engagement. Insights from the surveys referenced above, including this one, have established a baseline and set of cross-sectional pulse checks on where the American public is regarding their recognition of social determinants of health, their understanding of health inequities including structural racism, their willingness to address those inequities and their indication of who in society should be responsible for solving health inequities.

The Longitudinal Examination of Victimization Experiences of Latinos (LEVEL) study surveyed Latino adults from four major cities across the United States to evaluate the past-year incidence and prevalence of bias or hate motivated victimization. This study is a follow-up to the Understanding and Measuring Bias Victimization Against Latinos study, ICPSR 37598, that was conducted in 2018-2019. The hope of this follow-up study, in conjunction with the original study "Wave 1", is to provide greater context into bias victimization by breaking apart the diverse nature of Latinx communities in regards to immigration status, language use, origin, acculturation, and enculturation.

In the context of COVID-19, RAND and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation have partnered to build from the National Survey of Health Attitudes to implement a longitudinal survey to understand how health views and values have been affected by the experience of the pandemic, with particular focus on populations deemed vulnerable or underserved, including people of color and those from low-to moderate-income backgrounds.

Questions in this COVID-19 survey focused specifically on experiences related to the pandemic (e.g., financial, physical, emotional), how respondents viewed the disproportionate impacts of the pandemic, whether and how respondents' views and priorities regarding health actions and investments are changing (including the roles of government and the private sector), and how general values about such issues as freedom and racism may be related to pandemic views and response expectations.

This study includes the results for Wave 1 for the general population.

Demographic information includes sex, marital status, household size, race and ethnicity, family income, employment status, age, and census region.

Over the past two decades, as the proportion of older Americans has increased, so too have instances of elder abuse, including physical, emotional, and sexual abuse; financial exploitation; and caregiver neglect. The most recent national survey estimates show at least 1 in 10 community-residing older adults experience elder abuse each year, which translates to over 7 million Americans annually. Rates of abuse are magnified for older adults with the least financial and social resources, including those with low incomes, living in isolated rural communities, and facing structural barriers such as systemic racism. Emerging research on the COVID-19 pandemic prompts even greater concern for elder abuse: the virus has disproportionately affected older adults, resulting in increased social isolation, physical health impairment, and exposure to COVID-related fraud.

Recognizing the urgent need to develop and rigorously evaluate programs aimed at preventing elder abuse, the US Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice funded a demonstration from 2017 to 2021 during which researchers from the Urban Institute and practitioners at the Phoenix-based Area Agency on Aging, Region One ("the Area Agency") co-developed an elder abuse prevention program in Maricopa County, Arizona, which Urban's team then evaluated through a randomized controlled pilot study. This multiphase demonstration included an initial planning phase and a subsequent pilot study, which is the focus of this report.

The EMPOWER: Building Late-Life Resilience program is a 12-week in-home intervention, with one-hour weekly visits designed to empower community-residing older adults with the resiliency and resources to lead safe and healthy lives throughout the aging process. EMPOWER provides one-on-one assessments, client-centered prevention education, and needs-responsive life skills training embedded in a series of cognitive reframing conversations with an experienced facilitator. The program has eight modules, each of which culminates in an action plan focused on strengthening a client's internal assets and identifying sources of positive social support. Caseworkers facilitate motivational discussions centered on clients' self-identified goals and action planning, with the aim of optimizing clients' home safety, physical health, social connectedness, and emotional and financial well-being.

In the context of COVID-19, RAND and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation have partnered to build from the National Survey of Health Attitudes to implement a longitudinal survey to understand how health views and values have been affected by the experience of the pandemic, with particular focus on populations deemed vulnerable or underserved, including people of color and those from low-to moderate-income backgrounds.

In the context of COVID-19, RAND and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation partnered again to build from the National Survey of Health Attitudes to implement a longitudinal survey to understand how health views and values have been affected by the experience of the pandemic, with particular focus on populations deemed vulnerable or underserved, including people of color and those from low- to moderate-income backgrounds.

The study is a longitudinal study, collecting data in four waves. The study also included 2 populations: A sample of populations at greater risk, and a general population sample. This study includes the results for Wave 2 for populations at greater risk.

One previous wave and two future waves were conducted. The questions in the surveys were largely similar across all four waves. All respondents who participated in Wave 1 were invited to participate in the future waves.

Demographic info includes sex, marital status, household size, race and ethnicity, family income, employment status, age, and census region.

This data collection contains the results of a sample survey of University of Michigan (U-M), Ann Arbor, faculty, staff, and students meant to represent the full diversity of the community and to capture information and perceptions on demographics, climate, institutional commitment and inclusive and equitable treatment, departmental norms, intergroup interactions, and discrimination. With input from committees of students, faculty, and staff, the survey instrument was developed collaboratively by the U-M Office of the Provost, U-M's Survey Research Center, and administered by SoundRocket, an external social science survey research company. The instrument was delivered as a web survey, and several notifications and reminders were used to encourage completion, as well as an incentive. These notifications and reminders were delivered in phases.

Variables in the collection describe age, gender and gender identity, race/ethnicity, school/department/unit, religious affiliation, disability status, campus safety, rating of campus climate, intergroup interaction, discriminatory events, composite rating scores, and more.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

Within the past fifteen years, policymakers across the country have increasingly supported criminal justice reforms designed to reduce the scope of mass incarceration in favor of less costly, more evidence-based approaches to preventing and responding to crime. One of the primary reform efforts is the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), a public-private partnership through which state governments work to diagnose the primary drivers of their state incarceration rates, reform their sentencing policies to send fewer nonviolent offenders to prison, and reinvest the saved money that used to go into prisons into alternatives to incarceration, instead.

This mixed-methods study sought to assess public opinion about the justice reinvestment paradigm of reform and to determine whether exposure to racialized and race-neutral cues affects people's willingness to allocate money into criminal justice institutions versus community-based social services in order to reduce and prevent crime.

This survey explored the ways in which social influences, such as stress and racism, affected health, and the impact these influences had on the respondents' outlook on life. Respondents were questioned about their health status and their exercise, smoking, sleeping, and dieting habits, as well as about diagnosed health problems and depression and their effects on daily activities. Respondents were also asked a series of questions regarding their employment status, type of job and whether it was a supervisory position, the racial makeup of their workgroup, their perceptions of their position and job, the likelihood of their finding another job, hassles experienced while at work, and whether they had any trouble balancing family and work. Another series of questions asked respondents whether they had been a victim of a serious physical attack or assault, robbery, or home burglary, if they had ever been unfairly searched, stopped, or questioned by police, why they felt they had been treated this way, and if they felt they had ever been treated unfairly by a teacher, landlord, or neighbor. Opinions were also solicited on the respondents' experience with depression and anxiety. Respondents were asked whether they felt it was possible to reach their goals, how satisfied they were with their present situation, how often they felt depressed and how long this feeling lasted, whether they lost weight or sleep due to this feeling, how this feeling of depression made them view themselves, how often and how long they were worried about things that were not likely to happen, how often they worried about non-serious things, and how they felt physically when they were anxious or depressed. Another set of questions queried respondents on alcohol and drug use. Respondents were asked how often they drank alcohol, the most they had to drink at one time, whether they had experienced any addiction to alcohol or experienced any emotional or psychological problems associated with drinking, whether they had any problem controlling their drinking, whether they had used drugs outside of a doctor's order, what types of drugs they had used, how often and in what type of situations they had used these drugs, and whether they had any addiction to the drugs. Respondents were also asked whether they had a regular doctor, whether they went to a doctor's office or clinic to seek medical attention, the last time they had gone for a checkup, how they were treated by staff at the visit, whether they trusted their doctor, the reasons why they did or did not receive medical attention, and whether they had health insurance. Respondents were also asked for their perceptions of differences between Blacks and whites, attitudes toward affirmative action with regard to employment, and their attitude toward interracial relationships. Another battery of questions queried respondents on any fears or phobias they had, such as a fear of animals, water, or visiting a doctor or dentist. Questions focused on the severity of these fears, how long they had had these fears, and how much these fears interfered in daily activities. A final set of questions gathered demographic information on respondents such as highest level of education completed, political affiliation, religious affiliation, level of religious participation, importance of religion, birth date, whether they owned their own home or rented, how much they spent on food each week, total family income for the year 1994, and the height and weight of respondents.