This is the first book tackling the topic of world suffering. It compiles in one place the ideas, perspectives, and findings of researchers from around the world who pioneered research-based understanding of human suffering. Some chapters use the paradigm of ℓ́ℓquality of lifeℓ́ℓ to explore ways to enhance knowledge on suffering.℗ℓ Other chapters show how concepts and knowledge from suffering research can benefit studies on quality of life.℗ℓ ℗ℓ ℗ℓ By bringing together in one volume, ideas and research experience from the best minds and leading researchers in the fields of pain, suffering, poverty, deprivation, disability and quality of life (including well-being and happiness), this volume advances social science solutions to a number of major threads of research, most notably suffering. As a whole, the volume advances the fields of suffering and deprivation by suggesting a working typology of suffering and by pointing out the major paradigms for relief of suffering, such as humanitarianism, human rights, caring, and healing. This volume provides a wealth of insights about the interaction between suffering and quality of life, the most up-to-date characterization of worldwide suffering, and a grasp of the implications of these data for local and global policy on health and social well-being.℗ℓ.
Draws on an experiment conducted in four education centers for nontraditional & low-performing secondary students in greater Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN, in 1996 to determine whether adolescents are more honest about sensitive self-disclosure in computerized or paper-&-pencil self-administrated questionnaires. Subjects (Ss)(N = 368 adolescents, age 12+) answered items about drug use, sexual activity, criminal behavior, self-harm, family substance abuse, domestic violence, & sexual abuse/violence via either computer or paper. Analysis finds that Ss using paper reported more of most behaviors/circumstances than did those on computers. This effect was complicated by a distance effect for computer users: those sitting very close to other students made the fewest reports. It is concluded that the lack of privacy available in most computer laboratories may cause adolescent survey Ss to underreport sensitive information. 2 Tables, 21 References. E. Blackwell
2 related propositions are examined: whether the proportion of the electorate construing pol in ideological terms remains fairly constant from one election to the next - ie, whether ideological thinking is influenced by characteristics of the voter more than by characteristics of the pol'al environment: & whether the 1964 election, defined by B. Goldwater as an ideological plebiscite, was recognized as such by the public. The analysis, based on Survey Res Center data, suggests that, indeed, many people understood Goldwater only too well, & casts doubt on the hypothesis that ideological thinking is an invariant attribute of voters. In addition, an attempt is made to assess the direction of ideological sentiment in the US pop. AA.