Victoriano Gutierrez

Victoriano Gutierrez

591

Revisiting the Contact Hypothesis: The Case of Public Exposure to Homelessness discusses how in-groups or domicile individual's contact influences attitudes towards out-groups or homeless. Contact was divided into interactions, observations, membership, and information. Attitudes about in-groups relied on exposure. The length, atmosphere or temperament, and degree of exposure changed some out-group member's attitudes in cases and increased prior attitudes in other cases. A national phone survey of 1,507 interviews was used to test the contact hypothesis. Overall, more exposure to the out-group members meant better attitudes, and less exposure meant more negative attitudes. Justification for this finding presumes that within in-groups judgement is cast on out-groups. Judgement that it is wrong to panhandle, sleep in public, rummage through garbage, and use drugs. Members within in-groups influenced and shaped each other's cognizance which meant less contact with the out-group. Once exposed to various interaction and observation scenarios, other than panhandling and looking for cans, in-group members had less negative attitudes and even felt compassion or sympathy. Some discrepancies were found. The contact hypothesis was accurate for predominately white in-groups, but not for minority in-groups. Reasoning for this concludes white in-groups do not have enough contact with the out-group so any contact would be better than none. Their negative attitude toward out-groups comes from lack of exposure and judgement that may not be true, but they would not know because they are not exposed. Once they are exposed some of their attitudes change direction. Contrarily, minority in-groups have too much contact with the out-group. The homeless is a nuisance in these communities. These communities have constant exposure to homeless using drugs, panhandling, rummaging for cans, and sleeping in the public areas. These in-groups see a large population of out-groups all behaving similarly which lead to more negatives attitudes.   

A Decade of Change: Measuring the Extent, Depth, and Severity of Food Insecurity analyzes the correlation between Hispanic, White, and African American low-income households with or without children, and the depth, severity, and prevalence of food insecurity. The results were found by incorporating information from the Current Population Survey which administered the Food Security Supplement to over 250,000 households from 2001-2003, 2006-2008, and 2011-2013. Food insecurity was most common among households with children, but households without children saw a more rapid increase in food insecurity. African American households with and without children experienced food insecurity. Mostly white American households without children experienced food insecurity. The article noted that food insecurity relief programs such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program will lose beneficiaries due to time restraints, and will lead to more families having less food.

Government assistance programs aim to help low-income and no income households and/or individuals. These programs are not adequately funded to support everyone, and applicants need certain qualifications. Households with many children receive aid if the head/s of the household have minimal income or zero income. If both parents found minimum wage jobs they could pay for necessities like PG&E, clothes, and rent but not all necessities. They could not afford to live and pay the food bill for growing children. If they stayed unemployed the benefits would continue. Some families need more help than others because household income fluctuates, and household size differs. Government assistance programs need to make stronger evaluations of households and their situations. Household income, the individual's/s' mental state/s, and the size of the household should determine the amount of government aid for families. To prevent the growing number of starving families programs cannot solely look at income because many variables effect where and how money is spent.