IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v350y2024ics0277953624003812.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public stigma against fentanyl overdose decedents in the United States: A conjoint vignette experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Sauer, Sydney

Abstract

The United States is facing a drug overdose crisis, and stigma against people who use drugs is a major roadblock to implementing solutions. Despite the public health importance of understanding and mitigating substance use stigma, prior research has focused mainly on perceptions of individuals with substance use disorders and a limited set of demographic traits. This leaves critical gaps in our understanding of stigma against fentanyl overdose decedents, who represent a much broader group, including people who use substances recreationally. This study develops a more robust understanding of these attitudes through an experimental vignette survey fielded to a national sample of American adults (n = 1432). Respondents were shown two fictional fentanyl overdose obituaries where a complex suite of decedent characteristics—including demographic traits and contexts of substance use—were randomly varied in a conjoint design. Respondents then endorsed one of the two decedents for each of several attitudinal outcomes, including blameworthiness and support for various interventions, and justified their choices in an open-ended format. Results indicate that the public assesses victims of fentanyl overdose meritocratically, making judgments based on personal history and life experience rather than traditional race, class, and gender status beliefs. While certainly a signal of progress on some fronts, this meritocratic lens conflicts with the public health model of addressing the overdose crisis and exposes the alarming persistence of explicit stigma against people who use drugs.

Suggested Citation

  • Sauer, Sydney, 2024. "Public stigma against fentanyl overdose decedents in the United States: A conjoint vignette experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:350:y:2024:i:c:s0277953624003812
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116937
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624003812
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116937?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 search for a different version of it.

    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:350:y:2024:i:c:s0277953624003812. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.