IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v255y2020ics0277953620302379.html

Stereotyping and the opioid epidemic: A conjoint analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Sobotka, Tagart Cain
  • Stewart, Sheridan A.

Abstract

Political attention and media coverage concerning rising rates of opioid addiction and opioid-involved deaths in the United States have been critiqued for focusing almost exclusively on trends among whites. It remains unclear, however, if this “white-washing” of the opioid crisis has coincided with a shift in Americans' stereotypes about who abuses opioids. Understanding these stereotypes is important because they can create or uphold larger structural barriers by impacting the ability of certain groups to access appropriate treatment, influencing public support for various policies, and shaping interactions with law enforcement officials. Utilizing a conjoint survey experiment (n = 3670), we examined the independent effects of a person's race, occupation, gender, age, and region on the probability they would be seen as more likely than another individual to abuse opioids. We found that the probability of being identified as likely to abuse opioids is highest when a profile describes an individual as white or unemployed. This study offers the first systematic, experimental analysis of the independent contributions of various traits to the perception that someone is likely to abuse opioids.

Suggested Citation

  • Sobotka, Tagart Cain & Stewart, Sheridan A., 2020. "Stereotyping and the opioid epidemic: A conjoint analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:255:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620302379
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620302379
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roland G. Fryer & Steven D. Levitt, 2004. "The Causes and Consequences of Distinctively Black Names," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 767-805.
    2. van Ryn, Michelle & Burke, Jane, 2000. "The effect of patient race and socio-economic status on physicians' perceptions of patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 50(6), pages 813-828, March.
    3. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    4. Anne Case & Angua Deaton, 2015. "Rising morbidity and mortality in midlife among white non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st century," Working Papers 15078.full.pdf, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Research Program in Development Studies..
    5. Webster, Fiona & Rice, Kathleen & Sud, Abhimanyu, 2020. "A critical content analysis of media reporting on opioids: The social construction of an epidemic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    6. Jens Hainmueller & Daniel J. Hopkins, 2015. "The Hidden American Immigration Consensus: A Conjoint Analysis of Attitudes toward Immigrants," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(3), pages 529-548, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sauer, Sydney, 2024. "Public stigma against fentanyl overdose decedents in the United States: A conjoint vignette experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).
    2. Helena Biancuzzi & Francesca Dal Mas & Valerio Brescia & Stefano Campostrini & Marco Cascella & Arturo Cuomo & Lorenzo Cobianchi & Ander Dorken-Gallastegi & Anthony Gebran & Haytham M. Kaafarani & Fra, 2022. "Opioid Misuse: A Review of the Main Issues, Challenges, and Strategies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-17, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Catherine E De Vries & Simon Hix & Miriam Sorace, 2025. "Reforming supranational institutions: Insights from a conjoint experiment in 16 countries," European Union Politics, , vol. 26(4), pages 649-666, December.
    2. Vrânceanu, Alina & Dinas, Elias & Heidland, Tobias & Ruhs, Martin, 2023. "The European refugee crisis and public support for the externalisation of migration management," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 279441, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    3. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    4. Liza G. Steele & Laird Gallagher, 2025. "Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Refugees During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the U.S," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 2593-2627, December.
    5. Claire L Adida & Adeline Lo & Melina R Platas, 2019. "Americans preferred Syrian refugees who are female, English-speaking, and Christian on the eve of Donald Trump’s election," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, October.
    6. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Lala Muradova & Ross James Gildea, 2021. "Oil wealth and US public support for war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 3-19, January.
    8. Jaroslaw Kantorowicz & Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko & Gerdien de Vries, 2025. "Public perception of terrorism attacks: A conjoint experiment," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(2), pages 310-327, March.
    9. López García, Ana Isabel & Berens, Sarah, 2025. "Taxing the wealthy in Haiti: Evidence from a conjoint experiment on property tax preferences," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    10. Stefanelli, Alberto & Lukac, Martin, 2020. "Subjects, Trials, and Levels: Statistical Power in Conjoint Experiments," SocArXiv spkcy, Center for Open Science.
    11. Lu, Hui & Rohr, Charlene & Howarth, David & Pollitt, Alexandra & Grant, Jonathan, 2020. "What sort of Brexit do the British people want? A longitudinal study examining the ‘trade-offs’ people would be willing to make in reaching a Brexit deal," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    12. Ari Hyytinen & Jan Jääskeläinen & Antti Sieppi & Vesa-Heikki Soini & Janne Tukiainen, 2026. "Entry barriers in public procurement: Evidence from conjoint survey experiment," Discussion Papers 176, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    13. Gosciak, Jennah & Molitor, Daniel & Lundberg, Ian, 2025. "Adaptive Randomization in Conjoint Survey Experiments," SocArXiv 69y2j_v1, Center for Open Science.
    14. repec:osf:socarx:spkcy_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Marcelo M Leal & Paul Musgrave, 2023. "Hitting back or holding back in cyberspace: Experimental evidence regarding Americans’ responses to cyberattacks," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(1), pages 42-64, January.
    16. Blaine Robbins & Edgar Kiser, 2018. "Legitimate authorities and rational taxpayers: An investigation of voluntary compliance and method effects in a survey experiment of income tax evasion," Rationality and Society, , vol. 30(2), pages 247-301, May.
    17. Alrababa'h, Ala' & Dillon, Andrea Balacar & Williamson, Scott & Hainmueller, Jens & Hangartner, Dominik & Weinstein, Jeremy, 2021. "Attitudes toward migrants in a highly impacted economy: evidence from the Syrian refugee crisis in Jordan," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102980, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Thiptaiya Sydavong & Daisaku Goto & Keisuke Kawata & Shinji Kaneko & Masaru Ichihashi, 2019. "Potential demand for voluntary community-based health insurance improvement in rural Lao People’s Democratic Republic: A randomized conjoint experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-21, January.
    19. Arntz, Melanie & Brüll, Eduard & Lipowski, Cäcilia, 2021. "Do preferences for urban amenities really differ by skill?," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-045, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Sayaka Usui & Benjamin K. Blevins, 2025. "Investing in the Future of Djibouti: A Choice-based Conjoint Analysis for Youth Employment Preferences," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(1), pages 21582440251, March.
    21. Avidit Acharya & Jens Hainmueller & Yiqing Xu, 2026. "Learning Preferences from Conjoint Data: A Structural Deep Learning Approach," Papers 2604.10845, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:255:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620302379. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.