Tolerance, Urbanism and Region

Abrahamson, Mark; Carter, Valerie J.

doi:10.2307/2095522

Cited by 60 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The sample in the current study was recruited from a four-year public regional university located in the Southeast region of the United States. Southerners are more likely to report conservative values than individuals from other regions of the United States (Abrahamson & Carter, 1986;Carter & Borch, 2005). This includes an increased likelihood to endorse traditional gender role attitudes (Donnelly et al, 2015;Hurlbert, 1989), which have been consistently linked to rape-supportive attitudes (Page, 2008).…”

Section: Differences Between Sorority and Fraternity Membersmentioning

confidence: 99%

College Students’ Attitudes toward Debt

Beale¹,

Cude²

2017

IJURCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work has undergone a double-blind review by a minimum of two faculty members from institutions of higher learning from around the world. The faculty reviewers have expertise in disciplines closely related to those represented by this work. If possible, the work was also reviewed by undergraduates in collaboration with the faculty reviewers. AbstractFraternity and sorority members are overrepresented as perpetrators and victims of sexual assault, respectively. The current study examined rape myth acceptance, bystander attitudes, and bystander efficacy across four groups: sorority women, fraternity men, non-affiliated women, and non-affiliated men. Data were collected from 912 college undergraduates. Greek affiliated students were more accepting of rape myths than non-affiliated students. There were no differences in bystander attitudes based on Greek affiliation; however, Greek affiliated students did report significantly lower bystander efficacy than non-affiliated students. Sorority women and fraternity men reported no differences in their acceptance of rape myths or bystander efficacy; however, sorority women did report higher bystander attitudes than fraternity men. Based on the findings, it is recommended that prevention practitioners work to change norms within fraternities and sororities to promote a social identity that is associated with gender equality and a willingness, perhaps even an obligation, to intervene in risky situations.

show abstract

Section: Differences Between Sorority and Fraternity Membersmentioning

confidence: 99%

College Students’ Attitudes toward Debt

Beale¹,

Cude²

2017

IJURCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People located outside of the South and/or inside urban areas have been found to exhibit significantly higher tolerance levels than people residing in the South and/or rural areas (Abrahamson and Carter 1984;Dynes 1967;Nunn, Crockett and Williams 1978;Wilson 1991Wilson , 1994.…”

Section: Theoretical and Empirical Evidence Theoretical Explanations mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This research has been primarily focused on the individual-level determinants of tolerance, but it has also shown that significant spatial variations in tolerance exist. Specifically, individuals who live in the South and in rural areas are on average less tolerant than people who live outside of the South and in urban areas, even after controlling for individual factors (Abrahamson and Carter 1984;Dynes 1967;Nunn, Crockett and Williams 1978;Wilson 1991Wilson , 1994.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the numerous studies of tolerance to date have focused almost exclusively on individual-level factors and have not sought to explain these spatial variations (Abrahamson and Carter 1984;Beatty and Walter 1984;Dynes 1967;Ellison and Musick 1993;Nunn, Crockett and Williams 1978;Stouffer 1963;Tuch 1987;Weakliem and Biggert 1999;Williams, Nunn and St. Peter 1976;Wilson 1991Wilson , 1994.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accounting for Spatial Variation in Tolerance: The Effects of Education and Religion

Moore

Ovadia

2006

Social Forces

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research has shown that individuals living in Southern areas express significantly less tolerant attitudes than the rest of the nation, while individuals residing in urban areas express significantly more tolerant attitudes than their rural peers. We seek to explain these generally unspecified Southern and urban effects by identifying demographic contextual factors that affect individuals' tolerance levels. Using 1976 General Social Survey and 1990 Census data, we find that net of individual factors, residing in an area with a larger proportion of college graduates significantly increases individual levels of tolerance, while residing in an area with a larger proportion of evangelical Protestants significantly decreases tolerance. We also find that the Southern and urban effects on tolerance become non-significant once contextual-level controls are added.

show abstract

“…Because studies have indicated that regional differences can mask the effects of urbanism (Abrahamson and Carter, 1986) …”

Section: Regionsmentioning

confidence: 99%