The Law of the Colorado River: Coping with Severe Sustained Drought

p. 825-836 : map ; 28 cmhttps://scholar.law.colorado.edu/books_reports_studies/1053/thumbnail.jp

This meat or that alternative? How masculinity stress influences food choice when goals are conflicted

Introduction: This research integrates literature on masculinity stress—the distress experienced as the result of a perceived discrepancy with male gender norms—with research on goal conflict to examine preferences for plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs). Men experiencing masculinity stress are likely to hold salient a goal of being masculine, which should lead to less preference for PBMAs. However, many of these men simultaneously hold competing goals, such as making ethical food choices, which remain inhibited in favor of the focal masculinity goal. We argue that once men experiencing masculinity stress highlight their masculinity through the selection of a manly product, they satisfy that higher-order goal and are then free to pursue previously inhibited goals, such as making an ethical choice through the selection of PBMAs. Methods: We present the results of three studies supporting these expectations. Study 1 tests the link between masculinity stress and meat (alternative) consumption using consumer search behavior collected from Google Trends, showing that masculinity stress is positively (negatively) correlated with searches for red meat (PBMAs). Study 2 shows that men experiencing masculinity stress are more inclined to choose PBMAs, provided they are presented within a masculine product context. Study 3 presents a parallel mediation model, showing that ethical considerations (as opposed to masculine goals) shape the choice of PBMA preference. Results and discussion: We conclude with a discussion of theoretical implications for the impression management strategies utilized by men experiencing masculinity stress and practical implications for the growing PBMA industry

Effects of Anacetrapib in Patients with Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease

BACKGROUND: Patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease remain at high risk for cardiovascular events despite effective statin-based treatment of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels. The inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) by anacetrapib reduces LDL cholesterol levels and increases high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels. However, trials of other CETP inhibitors have shown neutral or adverse effects on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 30,449 adults with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive atorvastatin therapy and who had a mean LDL cholesterol level of 61 mg per deciliter (1.58 mmol per liter), a mean non-HDL cholesterol level of 92 mg per deciliter (2.38 mmol per liter), and a mean HDL cholesterol level of 40 mg per deciliter (1.03 mmol per liter). The patients were assigned to receive either 100 mg of anacetrapib once daily (15,225 patients) or matching placebo (15,224 patients). The primary outcome was the first major coronary event, a composite of coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: During the median follow-up period of 4.1 years, the primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (1640 of 15,225 patients [10.8%] vs. 1803 of 15,224 patients [11.8%]; rate ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 0.97; P=0.004). The relative difference in risk was similar across multiple prespecified subgroups. At the trial midpoint, the mean level of HDL cholesterol was higher by 43 mg per deciliter (1.12 mmol per liter) in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (a relative difference of 104%), and the mean level of non-HDL cholesterol was lower by 17 mg per deciliter (0.44 mmol per liter), a relative difference of -18%. There were no significant between-group differences in the risk of death, cancer, or other serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive statin therapy, the use of anacetrapib resulted in a lower incidence of major coronary events than the use of placebo. (Funded by Merck and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN48678192 ; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01252953 ; and EudraCT number, 2010-023467-18 .)

Out-Side-In : Iain Baxter, Lylian Klimek, William MacDonnell

Guest curator Milthrop describes his attempt to initiate an active dialogue between the museum and the museum goer. The artists outline their respective multimedia installation. Biographical notes. 30 bibl. ref

Better or different? Self‐differentiating appeals interact with self‐theories to predict volunteer intentions

This research explores how charities can harness individuals' desire for self‐enhancement in their advertisements to boost volunteerism. Two studies examine the effects of advertising which promote either horizontal differentiation (appeals to uniqueness, existing skills) or vertical differentiation (appeals to status, skill acquisition) and how these interact with consumers' self‐theories (incremental—belief in changeable attributes through effort, or entity—belief in unchangeable attributes). Study 1 (n = 183, 56% female) shows entity theorists are more inclined to volunteer following horizontally framed appeals, while incremental theorists respond similarly to both types of appeals. Study 2 (n = 107, 58% female) builds on this, revealing that self‐theory influences the type of individuation (horizontal or vertical) sought by individuals, in turn enhancing volunteer intentions. These findings highlight the complex relationship between self‐theory and advertising appeals in motivating volunteerism, offering valuable insights for creating effective charitable ads and understanding volunteer motivations

EFFECTS OF PERCEIVED SCARCITY ON COVID-19 CONSUMER STIMULUS SPENDING: THE ROLES OF ONTOLOGICAL INSECURITY AND MUTABILITY IN PREDICTING PROSOCIAL OUTCOMES

In 2021, the United States government provided a third Economic Impact Payment (EIP) for those designated as experiencing greater need due to the COVID-19 pandemic. With a particular focus on scarcity and ontological insecurity, we collected time-separated data prior to, and following, the third EIP to examine how these variables shape consumer allocation of stimulus funds. We find that scarcity is positively associated with feelings of ontological insecurity, which, interestingly, correlates to a greater allocation of stimulus funds towards charitable giving. We further find evidence that mutability moderates the relationship between ontological insecurity and allocations to charitable giving. In other words, it is those who feel most insecure, but perceive that their resource situation is within their control, who allocated more to charity giving. We discuss the implications of these findings for theory, policy-makers, and the Transformative Consumer Research (TCR) movement