Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorLeahey, Erinen
dc.contributor.authorMota-Back, Xóchitl Reneé
dc.creatorMota-Back, Xóchitl Reneéen
dc.date.accessioned2017-09-27T22:47:19Z
dc.date.available2017-09-27T22:47:19Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/625675
dc.description.abstractThis dissertation is a historical analysis of the dominant framing practices utilized by both liberal and conservative advocacy organizations and individuals in the domain of sex education throughout the 20th century and into the 21st. It is in two parts. In the first part, I construct a strategic narrative to answer the question why did conservative organizations, despite their documented anti-science sentiments, begin to embrace expertise-based frames? Utilizing a mixed-method approach, I analyze primary and secondary documents to trace the diffusion of expertise-based framing practices by liberal and conservative actors in the field of sex education. I find that the domain of sex education has always utilized expertise-based frames, though it has experienced disruptions spurred by major socio-political shifts (e.g., McCarthyism, the AIDS epidemic). In the second part, I present the results of an experimental vignette study. While the strategic narrative focuses on organizational and institutional shifts in framing practices, the experiment seeks insight into whether and how "expert cues" are noticed by a non-scientific professional audience, specifically parents (N=202) of school-aged children (5–17). The results provide weak support for the claim that parents will more favorably evaluate a sex education lesson plan when it includes expert cues, irrespective of their religious and political identities. I conclude by discussing theoretical implications for the study of framing, sociology of science, and public understanding of science as well as future directions for this research.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en
dc.subjectexpertiseen
dc.subjectframingen
dc.subjectsex educationen
dc.titleExpertly Framed: How Science and Evidence Came to Dominate the Sex Ed Debateen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Dissertationen
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen
dc.contributor.committeememberLeahey, Erinen
dc.contributor.committeememberGalaskiewicz, Josephen
dc.contributor.committeememberCroissant, Jenniferen
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen
thesis.degree.disciplineSociologyen
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en
refterms.dateFOA2018-06-15T21:11:45Z
html.description.abstractThis dissertation is a historical analysis of the dominant framing practices utilized by both liberal and conservative advocacy organizations and individuals in the domain of sex education throughout the 20th century and into the 21st. It is in two parts. In the first part, I construct a strategic narrative to answer the question why did conservative organizations, despite their documented anti-science sentiments, begin to embrace expertise-based frames? Utilizing a mixed-method approach, I analyze primary and secondary documents to trace the diffusion of expertise-based framing practices by liberal and conservative actors in the field of sex education. I find that the domain of sex education has always utilized expertise-based frames, though it has experienced disruptions spurred by major socio-political shifts (e.g., McCarthyism, the AIDS epidemic). In the second part, I present the results of an experimental vignette study. While the strategic narrative focuses on organizational and institutional shifts in framing practices, the experiment seeks insight into whether and how "expert cues" are noticed by a non-scientific professional audience, specifically parents (N=202) of school-aged children (5–17). The results provide weak support for the claim that parents will more favorably evaluate a sex education lesson plan when it includes expert cues, irrespective of their religious and political identities. I conclude by discussing theoretical implications for the study of framing, sociology of science, and public understanding of science as well as future directions for this research.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
azu_etd_15852_sip1_m.pdf
Size:
2.381Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record