Beyond Binary: Value Conflict and Abortion Ambivalence in Post-Legalization Argentina

IF 2.3 2区社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES

Latin American Politics and Society Pub Date : 2026-05-04 DOI:10.1017/lap.2026.10054

Diego Reynoso

{"title":"Beyond Binary: Value Conflict and Abortion Ambivalence in Post-Legalization Argentina","authors":"Diego Reynoso","doi":"10.1017/lap.2026.10054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the complexity of public opinion on abortion in Argentina following the landmark 2020 legalization. Moving beyond binary “pro-life” versus “pro-choice” classifications, we analyze attitudes through the lens of value conflict and ambivalence within a contentious policy domain. Drawing on original survey data (N = 1,021) from May–June 2022, we utilize a heteroscedastic probit model to estimate both the direction and variance of responses across seven scenarios, ranging from historically established grounds to voluntary interruption. Findings reveal that while consensus is high for historical grounds, ambivalence peaks in voluntary scenarios, driven significantly by the interaction between conflicting core values: the sanctity of life and bodily autonomy. Crucially, this value conflict generates measurable response instability even among citizens with firm opinions, challenging the narrative of a rigidly polarized society. Results demonstrate that legislative resolution does not erase moral tension, suggesting democratic discourse must account for citizens’ cognitive complexity rather than reducing public opinion to absolute alignments.","PeriodicalId":46899,"journal":{"name":"Latin American Politics and Society","volume":"11 1 1","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Latin American Politics and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/lap.2026.10054","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines the complexity of public opinion on abortion in Argentina following the landmark 2020 legalization. Moving beyond binary “pro-life” versus “pro-choice” classifications, we analyze attitudes through the lens of value conflict and ambivalence within a contentious policy domain. Drawing on original survey data (N = 1,021) from May–June 2022, we utilize a heteroscedastic probit model to estimate both the direction and variance of responses across seven scenarios, ranging from historically established grounds to voluntary interruption. Findings reveal that while consensus is high for historical grounds, ambivalence peaks in voluntary scenarios, driven significantly by the interaction between conflicting core values: the sanctity of life and bodily autonomy. Crucially, this value conflict generates measurable response instability even among citizens with firm opinions, challenging the narrative of a rigidly polarized society. Results demonstrate that legislative resolution does not erase moral tension, suggesting democratic discourse must account for citizens’ cognitive complexity rather than reducing public opinion to absolute alignments.

查看原文本刊更多论文

超越二元：后合法化时期阿根廷的价值冲突与堕胎矛盾

本研究考察了阿根廷在2020年具有里程碑意义的堕胎合法化之后，公众对堕胎的看法的复杂性。超越“支持堕胎”与“支持堕胎”的二元分类，我们通过有争议的政策领域中的价值冲突和矛盾心理来分析态度。利用2022年5月至6月的原始调查数据（N = 1,021），我们利用异方差概率模型来估计七种情况下的响应方向和方差，从历史上建立的理由到自愿中断。研究结果显示，虽然基于历史的共识很高，但在自愿的情况下，矛盾心理达到顶峰，这在很大程度上是由生命的神圣性和身体自主权这两个相互冲突的核心价值观之间的相互作用所驱动的。至关重要的是，这种价值观冲突甚至在观点坚定的公民中产生了可衡量的反应不稳定，挑战了一个严格两极化的社会的叙述。结果表明，立法决议并不能消除道德紧张，这表明民主话语必须考虑公民的认知复杂性，而不是将公众舆论降低到绝对一致。

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

Latin American Politics and Society Multiple-

CiteScore

3.10

自引率

5.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Latin American Politics and Society publishes the highest-quality original social science scholarship on Latin America. The Editorial Board, comprising leading U.S., Latin American, and European scholars, is dedicated to challenging prevailing orthodoxies and promoting innovative theoretical and methodological perspectives on the states, societies, economies, and international relations of the Americas in a globalizing world.