Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study

Landmark legislative events can shift public opinion. We conducted a longitudinal survey examining abortion attitudes before and after Dobbs v. Jackson which overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Wave 1 (N = 1,014) was conducted in June 2022, and Wave 2 (N = 792) in October–November 2022. Using bivariate...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Xiana Bueno, Lucrecia Mena-Meléndez, Brandon L. Crawford, Ronna C. Turner, Wen-Juo Lo, Kristen N. Jozkowski
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2025-12-01
Series:Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/26410397.2025.2518669
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850077944043536384
author Xiana Bueno
Lucrecia Mena-Meléndez
Brandon L. Crawford
Ronna C. Turner
Wen-Juo Lo
Kristen N. Jozkowski
author_facet Xiana Bueno
Lucrecia Mena-Meléndez
Brandon L. Crawford
Ronna C. Turner
Wen-Juo Lo
Kristen N. Jozkowski
author_sort Xiana Bueno
collection DOAJ
description Landmark legislative events can shift public opinion. We conducted a longitudinal survey examining abortion attitudes before and after Dobbs v. Jackson which overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Wave 1 (N = 1,014) was conducted in June 2022, and Wave 2 (N = 792) in October–November 2022. Using bivariate analyses, we assessed people’s attitudes towards the Dobbs decision and potential changes in abortion attitudes over time, across different abortion identity sub-groups (e.g. pro-life, pro-choice). Results indicate that people were informed about (90%) and disagreed (56%) with the decision, and did not report or experience a change in attitudes after the decision (68–73%). However, among those who did change, respondents were more inclined to endorse legal abortion after the decision (19–22%) than indicate abortion should not be legal (6–13%). Through analysing open-ended data, we found that participants more inclined to endorse legal abortion described the ruling as eroding personal rights, government intrusion, and threatening access to healthcare. Participants less inclined to endorse legal abortion indicated the ruling reinforced their belief in defending fetal rights. While not necessarily advocating outright illegality, such participants favoured stricter regulations. Notably, people who identified as “both/neither/prefer not to answer” tended to disagree with the Dobbs decision and lean towards greater endorsement of legal abortion. Uncertainty regarding (dis)agreement with the Dobbs decision was also higher among people who identified as pro-life and “both/neither/prefer not to answer” than among those who identified as pro-choice. These findings highlight important nuances that exist in abortion attitudes beyond the perceived dichotomy of the pro-life/pro-choice spectrum.
format Article
id doaj-art-2ec017da44a3477ca3878aa63d0ed663
institution DOAJ
issn 2641-0397
language English
publishDate 2025-12-01
publisher Taylor & Francis Group
record_format Article
series Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters
spelling doaj-art-2ec017da44a3477ca3878aa63d0ed6632025-08-20T02:45:42ZengTaylor & Francis GroupSexual and Reproductive Health Matters2641-03972025-12-0133110.1080/26410397.2025.2518669Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal studyXiana Bueno0Lucrecia Mena-Meléndez1Brandon L. Crawford2Ronna C. Turner3Wen-Juo Lo4Kristen N. Jozkowski5Associate Research Scientist, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USAAssistant Research Scientist, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USAAssociate Professor, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USAProfessor, Educational Statistics and Research Methods, College of Education and Health Professions, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USAAssociate Professor, Educational Statistics and Research Methods, College of Education and Health Professions, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USAWilliam L. Yarber Endowed Professor in Sexual Health, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.Landmark legislative events can shift public opinion. We conducted a longitudinal survey examining abortion attitudes before and after Dobbs v. Jackson which overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Wave 1 (N = 1,014) was conducted in June 2022, and Wave 2 (N = 792) in October–November 2022. Using bivariate analyses, we assessed people’s attitudes towards the Dobbs decision and potential changes in abortion attitudes over time, across different abortion identity sub-groups (e.g. pro-life, pro-choice). Results indicate that people were informed about (90%) and disagreed (56%) with the decision, and did not report or experience a change in attitudes after the decision (68–73%). However, among those who did change, respondents were more inclined to endorse legal abortion after the decision (19–22%) than indicate abortion should not be legal (6–13%). Through analysing open-ended data, we found that participants more inclined to endorse legal abortion described the ruling as eroding personal rights, government intrusion, and threatening access to healthcare. Participants less inclined to endorse legal abortion indicated the ruling reinforced their belief in defending fetal rights. While not necessarily advocating outright illegality, such participants favoured stricter regulations. Notably, people who identified as “both/neither/prefer not to answer” tended to disagree with the Dobbs decision and lean towards greater endorsement of legal abortion. Uncertainty regarding (dis)agreement with the Dobbs decision was also higher among people who identified as pro-life and “both/neither/prefer not to answer” than among those who identified as pro-choice. These findings highlight important nuances that exist in abortion attitudes beyond the perceived dichotomy of the pro-life/pro-choice spectrum.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/26410397.2025.2518669abortion attitudesabortion identityattitudinal changelongitudinal surveypublic opinionDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
spellingShingle Xiana Bueno
Lucrecia Mena-Meléndez
Brandon L. Crawford
Ronna C. Turner
Wen-Juo Lo
Kristen N. Jozkowski
Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study
Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters
abortion attitudes
abortion identity
attitudinal change
longitudinal survey
public opinion
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
title Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study
title_full Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study
title_fullStr Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study
title_short Assessing the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study
title_sort assessing the impact of the dobbs v jackson decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels a mixed methods longitudinal study
topic abortion attitudes
abortion identity
attitudinal change
longitudinal survey
public opinion
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
url https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/26410397.2025.2518669
work_keys_str_mv AT xianabueno assessingtheimpactofthedobbsvjacksondecisiononabortionattitudesbyabortionidentitylabelsamixedmethodslongitudinalstudy
AT lucreciamenamelendez assessingtheimpactofthedobbsvjacksondecisiononabortionattitudesbyabortionidentitylabelsamixedmethodslongitudinalstudy
AT brandonlcrawford assessingtheimpactofthedobbsvjacksondecisiononabortionattitudesbyabortionidentitylabelsamixedmethodslongitudinalstudy
AT ronnacturner assessingtheimpactofthedobbsvjacksondecisiononabortionattitudesbyabortionidentitylabelsamixedmethodslongitudinalstudy
AT wenjuolo assessingtheimpactofthedobbsvjacksondecisiononabortionattitudesbyabortionidentitylabelsamixedmethodslongitudinalstudy
AT kristennjozkowski assessingtheimpactofthedobbsvjacksondecisiononabortionattitudesbyabortionidentitylabelsamixedmethodslongitudinalstudy