The effects of race and class on community-level stigmatization of opioid use and policy preferences.

BACKGROUND: With opioid use and overdose rates continuing to plague minority communities in the U.S., we explored whether a geographic community's racial composition and social class affect how opioid use in the community is stigmatized and what policy preferences arise in response. METHODS: We use case vignettes in a randomized, between-subjects study (N = 1478) with a nation-wide survey. The vignettes describe a community where opioids are harmfully used, varying whether the community was (1) wealthy or poor, (2) predominantly Black or White and (3) facing prevalent use of painkillers or heroin. We tested how these variables affect public stigmatization of opioid use (measured with ratings of responsibility, dangerousness, sympathy, concern, anger, and disappointment) preferred levels of social distance from communities with opioid use (measured with responses to questions about living, working, and interacting in the community), and policy preferences for responding to opioid use (measured with levels of support for providing a safe-consumption site in the community, treating drug use in the community punitively, treating drug use in the community as an illness, and funding drug treatment in the community through income redistribution). RESULTS: Compared to wealthy communities with opioid use, poor communities with opioid use were less stigmatized in terms of responsibility, sympathy, concern, anger, and disappointment; they were also met with less support for punitiveness, more support for treating drug use as an illness, and preferences for greater social distance. Compared to White communities with opioid use, Black communities with opioid use were less stigmatized in terms of responsibility, and they were met with stronger preferences to not live and work there and with reduced support for using income redistribution to provide drug treatment for people in the community. Poor-Black communities with opioid use were also perceived to be more dangerous than both poor-White and wealthy-Black communities with opioid use. CONCLUSION: These results point to class- and race-based territorial stigma affecting how communities with opioid use are judged and whether policies for providing communities with treatment are supported.

The impact of race, gender, and heroin use on opioid addiction stigma.

INTRODUCTION: Stigmatization of an opioid addiction acts as a barrier to those seeking substance use treatment. As opioid use and overdoses continue to rise and affect minority populations, understanding the impact that race and other identities have on stigma is pertinent. METHODS: This study aimed to examine the degree to which race and other identity markers (i.e., gender and type of opioid used) interact and drive the stigmatization of an opioid addiction. To assess public perceptions of stigma, this research team conducted a randomized, between-subjects case vignette study (N = 1833) with a nation-wide survey. Participants rated a hypothetical individual who became addicted to opioids on four stigma indices (responsibility, dangerousness, positive affect, and negative affect) based on race (White or Black), gender (male or female), and end point (an individual who transitioned to using heroin or who continued using prescription painkillers). RESULTS: Our results first showed that the White individual had higher stigma ratings compared to the Black individual (range of partial η2 = 0.002-0.004). An interaction effect demonstrated that a White female was rated with higher responsibility for opioid use than a Black female (Cohen's d = 0.21) and a Black male was rated with higher responsibility for opioid use than a Black female (Cohen's d = 0.26). Last, we showed that a male and an individual who transitioned to heroin had higher stigma than a female and an individual who continued to use prescription opioids (range of partial η2 = 0.004-0.007). CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that information about multiple identities can impact stigmatizing attitudes, which can provide deeper knowledge on the development of health inequities for individuals with an opioid addiction.

Context and the Perceived Fairness of Price Increases Coming out of COVID-19.

Objective: As the U.S. economy responds to prolonged COVID-19 disruptions, it is important to understand what factors affect the perceived fairness of pandemic-driven price increases. Methods: Participants read a vignette and rated how fair they found a pandemic-driven price increase. Versions vary (1) the source (hardware-store products or bus fare), (2) the magnitude of the price increase (6 percent or 18 percent), and (3) the tone of an initial description of COVID (positive or negative). Results: The price increase was perceived to be fairer when it involved the hardware store or when it was smaller. The relationship between fairness and magnitude was context-specific, as fairness perceptions were insensitive to the magnitude of the price increase in the bus scenario or when the initial description of COVID had a positive tone. Conclusion: Retailers and municipalities may face different fairness constraints as they consider pandemic-driven price increases. The tone of COVID information may affect price fairness through its impact on sensitivity to magnitude.

Stigma and policy preference toward individuals who transition from prescription opioids to heroin.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of understanding of what contributes to attitudes toward individuals with an opioid addiction and preferences for policies that support them. METHODS: This study aimed to investigate stigmatization of an opioid addiction and support for publicly funded drug treatment. A randomized, between-subjects case vignette study (N = 1998) was conducted with a nation-wide online survey. To assess public perceptions of stigma and support for publicly funded drug treatment, participants rated a hypothetical individual who became addicted to prescription opioids across three conditions: 1) male or female, 2) an individual who was prescribed prescription painkillers or took prescription painkillers from a friend and 3) an individual who transitioned to using heroin or who continued using prescription painkillers. RESULTS: Our results showed that there were stronger negative attitudes towards a male (p < .01) and toward an individual who took prescription painkillers from a friend (all p's < .05), and both stronger positive and negative attitudes toward an individual who transitioned to heroin from prescription painkillers (all p's < .05). Next, we demonstrated that the probability that someone supports publicly funded drug treatment increases by 3.6 percentage points for each unit increase along a 12-point scale of positive attitudes (p < .0005), 1.3 percentage points for each unit decrease along a 12-point scale of negative attitudes (p < .005), 7.3 percentage points for each unit increase along a 6-point scale of perceived treatment efficacy (p < .0001), 0.1 percentage points for each unit decrease along a 100-point scale that measures the strength of one's belief that addiction is controllable (p < .005) and 0.2 percentage points for each unit decrease along a 100-point scale that measures the strength of one's belief that income is controllable (p < .005). Lastly, when controlling for the effects of stigma, the probability of supporting publicly funded drug treatment decreases by 6.3 percentage points (p < 0.001) when an individual was prescribed prescription painkillers from a doctor. However, path analysis identified a channel through which a doctor's prescription increased support for publicly funded drug treatment by influencing positive attitudes, negative attitudes, and responsibility. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide further evidence that information about individuals who become addicted to opioids can influence stigma perceptions and support for publicly funded drug treatment.

Sociodemographic Characteristics and the Stigmatization of Prescription Opioid Addiction.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between participants' sociodemographic characteristics and the degree to which they stigmatize people with an opioid addiction. METHODS: A randomized, between-subjects case vignette study (n = 2605) was conducted with a nationwide online survey. We investigated how the stigmatization toward a hypothetical individual who misused prescription opioids differed across participants' sociodemographic factors (ie, age, gender, education, race, and income). RESULTS: Our results showed that study participants who were male, white, low-income, college graduates, and younger rated the hypothetical individual with an opioid addiction with lower stigma. In addition, we showed that participant gender moderated the relationship between information given about initiation of opioid use (received prescription opioids from a doctor vs took prescription opioids from a friend) and opioid stigma perceptions. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support previous findings that stigmatizing attitudes towards drug use vary across participant sociodemographic characteristics. The findings from our study provide a better understanding of how stigmatizing attitudes towards prescription opioid use differ across sociodemographic characteristics and can serve to improve negative perceptions of those with an opioid addiction.

Waking Up from Dreamland: Opioid Addiction Precipitance and Support for Redistributive Drug Treatment.

Motivated by the historical components of the ongoing U.S. opioid epidemic, this study examines how public support for redistributive drug treatment changes with awareness that someone's opioid addiction started with a legally acquired prescription. Using different versions of a vignette, we vary in a randomized design whether someone's addiction to painkillers started with a legally acquired prescription or with the decision to take pills from a friend. After reading the vignette, participants expressed their level of support for a policy that uses income redistribution to fund a program that provides the person in the vignette with drug treatment. We find that participants are less likely to support redistributive drug treatment when a prescription precipitates the addiction. The results imply that emphasizing the medical establishment's role in the opioid epidemic may actually make people less likely to favor using redistributive drug treatment to provide support.

Opioid use and stigma: The role of gender, language and precipitating events.

The stigma of drug addiction is associated with negative perceptions and can be a barrier to treatment. With the rise in opioid overdose deaths, understanding stigmatizing attitudes towards individuals who use opioids is a crucial matter. There is a lack of opioid use research on stigma and, therefore, we aimed to discern stigmatizing attitudes towards people with opioid addiction. A randomized, between-subjects case vignette study (n = 2605) was conducted with a nation-wide online survey. Participants rated a hypothetical individual addicted to opioids on different dimensions of stigma after seeing one version of a vignette that varied by three conditions: 1) a male versus a female, 2) an individual labeled as being a "drug addict" versus having an "opioid use disorder" and 3) an individual whose use started by taking prescription opioids from a friend versus receiving a prescription from a doctor. Our results indicated that there were higher stigmatizing attitudes overall towards a male, an individual labeled as a "drug addict" and an individual who took prescription opioids from a friend. Interaction effects also showed that a female labeled with an "opioid use disorder" and male labeled as a "drug addict" were rated with higher stigma. The findings from our study are the first to show that information about gender, precipitating events and language matter when assessing stigma and opioid use and may affect the delivery of patient care.