Cultural Differences Predict Palliative Care Development Across the United States: The Role of Cultural Tightness and Looseness.

IF 1.3
Omega Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1177/00302228241272635
Brenna Mossman, Damian R Murray, James Gerhart, Sonia Malhotra, Taylor Alcorn, Michael Hoerger
{"title":"Cultural Differences Predict Palliative Care Development Across the United States: The Role of Cultural Tightness and Looseness.","authors":"Brenna Mossman, Damian R Murray, James Gerhart, Sonia Malhotra, Taylor Alcorn, Michael Hoerger","doi":"10.1177/00302228241272635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Across the United States, some regions demonstrate greater readiness to adopt palliative care than others. This geographic variation in access and utilization may be due to cultural variation in \"tightness\" and \"looseness,\" which can be understood as the relative strength and enforcement of social norms and behavioral constraint within a culture. The present study examined the influence of cultural tightness-looseness on access to palliative care (i.e., statewide percentage of hospitals with palliative care programs) across the 50 U.S. states while controlling for demographic covariates. Results of regression analyses demonstrated that states with looser cultures (i.e., less adherence to norms) had better palliative care access (β = .501, <i>p</i> = .012). Additionally, access was better in states with greater proportions of female (β = .455, <i>p</i> = .004) and white, non-Hispanic or Latino/a (β = .359, <i>p</i> = .002) residents. Strategies to improve utilization should consider the influence of culture and the relative strength of existing social norms within the region.</p>","PeriodicalId":74338,"journal":{"name":"Omega","volume":" ","pages":"1767-1779"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Omega","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00302228241272635","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Across the United States, some regions demonstrate greater readiness to adopt palliative care than others. This geographic variation in access and utilization may be due to cultural variation in "tightness" and "looseness," which can be understood as the relative strength and enforcement of social norms and behavioral constraint within a culture. The present study examined the influence of cultural tightness-looseness on access to palliative care (i.e., statewide percentage of hospitals with palliative care programs) across the 50 U.S. states while controlling for demographic covariates. Results of regression analyses demonstrated that states with looser cultures (i.e., less adherence to norms) had better palliative care access (β = .501, p = .012). Additionally, access was better in states with greater proportions of female (β = .455, p = .004) and white, non-Hispanic or Latino/a (β = .359, p = .002) residents. Strategies to improve utilization should consider the influence of culture and the relative strength of existing social norms within the region.

文化差异预测整个美国的姑息治疗发展:文化紧密性和宽松性的作用。
在美国,一些地区比其他地区更愿意采用姑息治疗。这种访问和利用的地理差异可能是由于“紧”和“松”的文化差异,这可以理解为文化中社会规范和行为约束的相对强度和执行。本研究在控制人口统计协变量的情况下,考察了美国50个州的文化紧缩-宽松对获得姑息治疗的影响(即全州范围内具有姑息治疗计划的医院百分比)。回归分析结果表明,文化较松散的州(即对规范的遵守程度较低)具有更好的姑息治疗可及性(β = 0.501, p = 0.012)。此外,在女性(β = .455, p = .004)和白人,非西班牙裔或拉丁裔/a (β = .359, p = .002)居民比例较大的州,获得性更好。提高利用的战略应考虑到文化的影响和区域内现有社会规范的相对力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书