Assignment #3: Birth Rate & Ideology

1. Christina Vasiliou

Predominantly Catholic Countries

Ireland

·      87.4% Roman Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 15.5 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 2.01 children/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 3.78 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 80.44 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 64.8% (as of 2004/2005)

·      School Life expectancy: 19 years

·      GDP per capita: $42,600

Panama

·      85% Roman Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 18.91 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 2.4 children/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 11.01 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 78.13 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 52.2% (as of 2009)

·      School Life expectancy: 13 years

·      GDP per capita: $15,900

France

·      83-88% Roman Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 12.6 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 2.08 children/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 3.34 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 81.56 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 76.4% (as of 2008)

·      School Life expectancy: 16 years

·      GDP per capita: $36,100

Haiti

·      80% Roman Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 23.35 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 2.88 children/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 50.92 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 62.85 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 34.5%

·      School Life expectancy: not available

·      Literacy: 48.5% (age 15+)

·      GDP per capita: $1,300

Colombia

·      90% Roman Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 16.98 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 2.1 children/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 15.46 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 75.02 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 79.1%

·      School Life Expectancy: 14 years

·      GDP per capita: $11,000

Bolivia

·      95% Roman Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 23.77 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 2.87 children/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 39.76 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 68.22 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 60.5% (as of 2008)

·      School Life Expectancy: 14 years

·      GDP per capita: $5,200

Outgroup

Japan

·      2% Christianity

·      Birth Rate: 8.23 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 1.39 children/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 2.17 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 84.19 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 54.3% (as of 2005)

·      School Life Expectancy: 15 years

·      GDP per capita: $36,900

Mongolia

·      Less than 5% Roman Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 20.34 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 2.18 children born/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 34.78 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Life Expectancy: 68.95 years

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 55%

·      School Life Expectancy: 14 years

·      GDP per capita: $5,500

Ethiopia

·      .7% Catholic

·      Birth Rate: 38.07 births/1,000 population

·      Total Fertility Rate: 5.31 children born/woman

·      Infant Mortality Rate: 58.28 deaths/1,000 live births

·      Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: 28.6% (as of 2010/2011)

·      School Life Expectancy: 9 years

·      GDP per capita: $1,200

Many conclusions can be made from examining this data collected about predominantly Catholic countries and comparing it to countries that are not predominantly Catholic.  All of the predominantly Catholic countries have Catholic populations ranging from 80% (Haiti) to 95% (Bolivia); however, the birth rates and total fertility rates have a much wider range.  This immediately shows that even within heavily Catholic populated countries some have much higher birth rates than others, so Catholicism does not inherently lead to high birth rates.  It would be expected that contraceptive use would be low in all predominantly Catholic countries because birth control is prohibited in Catholicism.  The reality is though, that contraceptive use varies between these countries as well, with France having a rate of 76.4% using birth control during childbearing ages.  This is a surprisingly high percentage for a population that is 83-88% Catholic.  Additionally, Columbia has a contraceptive prevalence rate of 79.1% and a Catholic population of 90%.  Haiti has the lowest contraceptive rate (of the countries evaluated) at 34.5% and has the lowest Catholic population (of the countries evaluated) at 80%.  Clearly, acceptance of Catholicism does not immediately lead to high birth rates due to refusal to use contraception. 

Other more relevant evidence of why birth rates are increased in some Catholic countries over others is probably the infant mortality rate.  If the infant mortality rate is very high, the birth rate must be higher in order to “absorb” the high mortality rate and sustain a population.  High infant mortality rates are typically seen in the less developed countries (in my evidence, Haiti and Bolivia have very high rates, 50.92 deaths/1,000 live births and 39.76 deaths/1,000 live births, respectively).  Less developed countries have less resources and a lower standard of living that is not conducive to caring for infants.  Additionally, without technology such as vaccines that are much more readily available in developed countries, infant mortality rates increase.

This supports the conclusion that one of the most telltale signs of whether there will be a high birth rate, high infant mortality rate, and high total fertility rate is not the predominance of Catholicism but the GDP of the country.  The GDP is a sign of the development of the country, which is also telling of the standard of living, availability of resources, education levels, and the average life span of individuals.  Less developed countries lacks the developed technology that developed countries have that allow humans to live longer and live in better conditions.  Haiti is an example of a country that has a GDP per capita of $1,300, which is very low and labels Haiti an underdeveloped country.  The infant mortality rate is thus very high and the average life span is relatively low.  This equates to having a higher birth rate to try to “absorb” these losses and sustain a population.  It is fair to conclude that these high birth rates and lack of contraceptive use are not a reflection of the predominance of Catholicism in the country but instead a reflection of the lack of development and technology in the country.  Additionally, some of the non-predominantly Catholic data can be used to support this.  Ethiopia has (somewhat) comparable numbers to Haiti (in birth rate, average life span, infant mortality rate, contraceptive use, and GDP) but has a .7% Catholic population (their only main difference).  This supports the conclusion of undeveloped countries having higher birth rates and more developed countries having lower birth rates regardless of the predominance of Catholicism.

2. Lyndsay Aronson (admin)

To examine whether or not Catholic prohibition of contraceptives really influence birth rate, I examined 9 countries total, 6 with a Catholic majority and 9 with a Catholic minority (under 5% guideline, however these countries have less than 1% of Catholics). Just immediately looking at the contraceptive prevalence rate in the predominantly catholic countries, it is clear that even though their religion may mandate the abstinence from contraceptives, most do not practice what the church preaches. It is clear that higher birth rates are more prevalent in countries with a low GDP per capita (and a higher poverty percentage) and a high infant mortality rate, keeping in line with the R/K selection theory. In countries like these, people are more likely to have more offspring because they have (relatively) shorter lifespans and therefore less time to reproduce; they have less stable resources to care for their children in an unstable environment which translates into less certainty that offspring will survive – so it makes more sense from an evolutionary perspective to bear more children. In countries with a higher GDP per capita (i.e. wealthier nations), the education level is generally higher as well and the infant mortality rate is lower, meaning that its citizens take longer to reproduce (usually focusing on careers, schooling, or other tasks that take priority over settling down) and have fewer children, choosing to invest more of their limited, yet stable, resources into their offspring – and the chances that their children will survive is much higher.

3. IYAH TURMINI
 DATA:

Nations with High Percentage of Roman Catholicism (65% or higher):

1. Italy: → DEVELOPED



90% Roman Catholic

9.18 births/1000

Life expectancy: 81.7 years

Infant mortality: 3.38 deaths/1000

Population under poverty line: 19.6%

2. Spain: → DEVELOPED



96% Roman Catholic

10.66 births/1000

Life expectancy: 81.2 years

Infant mortality: 3.39 deaths/1000

Population under poverty line: 21.1%

3. Mexico: → UNDERDEVELOPED



76.5% Roman Catholic

19.13 births/1000

Life expectancy: 76.5 years

Infant mortality: 17.29 deaths /1000

Population under poverty line: 51.3%



 4. Poland → DEVELOPED

89.8% Roman Catholic

9.88 births/1000

Life expectancy: 76.45 years

Infant mortality: 6.3 deaths/1000

Population under poverty line: 10.6% 



5. Philippines → UNDERDEVELOPED

80.9% Roman Catholic

24.62 births/1,000

Life expectancy: 72.21 years 

Infant mortality: 18.19 deaths/1,000 live births

Population under poverty line: 26.5%



6. Ireland → DEVELOPED



87.4% Roman Catholic

15.5 births/1000

Life expectancy: 80.44 years

Infant mortality: 3.78 deaths/1000

Population under poverty line: 5.5%

Non-Catholic (less than 5%) countries without a major religion prohibiting/

encouraging birth control:

7. Israel → DEVELOPED 

1.5% Roman Catholics

18.71 births/1,000 population

Life expectancy: 81.17 years

Infant mortality: 4.03 deaths/1,000

Population under poverty line: 23.6%

8. India → UNDERDEVELOPED

1.58% Roman Catholic

20.24 births/1000

Life expectancy: 74.99 years

Infant mortality: 15.2 /1000

Population under poverty line: 29.8%

9. Japan → DEVELOPED

0.4% Roman Catholic

8.23 births/1,000 

Life expectancy: 84.19 years

Infant mortality: 2.17 deaths/1,000

Population under poverty line: 16%

ANALYSIS:

For the high percentage Roman Catholic grouping of countries, I examined Mexico, 

Italy, Poland, Ireland, the Philippines, and Spain. For the low percentage (less than 5%) Roman 

Catholic grouping of countries, which featured no religion/governmental policy strongly 

promoting or prohibiting the use of birth control, I chose to look at Israel, India, and Japan. The 

statistical variables that I used, courtesy of the CIA World Factbook, were life expectancy, infant 

mortality, and poverty.

From an examination of the first six countries, all of which have a relatively high 

percentage of the population (over 65%) identifying as Roman Catholic, it would seem that 

Catholicism on its own doesn’t seem to have a strong correlation with higher birth rates. 

Variables of higher infant mortality, higher poverty levels, and relatively lower life expectancy 

rates appear to correlate much more closely with the incidence of higher birth rates than 

religious belief. These variables are all correlated with underdevelopment in a country, and 

indeed, the two high percentage Roman Catholic countries which demonstrated these statistical 

variables, the Philippines and Mexico, were the only two categorized as underdeveloped. In 

Poland, Ireland, Spain and Italy, birth rates were significantly lower than in Mexico and the 

Philippines. These countries also feature lower infant mortality rates, lower poverty rates, and 

longer life expectancies. Not coincidentally, these are all countries that fallen into the category of 

being developed. These trends held when I compared the same statistical variable in the 

contexts of Israel, India, and Japan. In the developed countries, Israel and Japan, the birth rate 

was significantly lower than in India, which is considered underdeveloped. None of these 

countries have a large percentage of the population practicing Roman Catholicism, or any other 

religion/governmental initiative which strongly promoted or prohibited the use of birth control. 

I would conclude that high percentages of Catholicism, while not insignificant in their 

correlation to the birth rates of their respective countries, do not correlate as strongly with 

higher birth rates as the statistical variables indicative of underdevelopment like higher poverty, 

higher infant mortality, and lower life expectancy. So, although there are technologically 

conservative prohibitions within Catholic populations, these don’t seem to be reflected in 

behavior. As discussed in class, underdeveloped countries feature higher birth rates because the 

population is attempting to compensate for the high rates of infant mortality, increasing the 

chances of survival for some of the above average (when compared to developed countries) 

numbers of children born. In developed countries, the infant mortality rates are significantly 

lower and parents do not feel the need to have more children to compensate for those that might 

not reach maturity. 

A few things of note: While India’s birth rate remains remarkably high, it has, in fact, 

been reduced by half in the last 40+ years. Initiatives undertaken between the 1970s and early 

2000s resulted in a more than 30% increase in the use of birth control by women. Also, in Japan 

the birth rate is conversely remarkably low. This has been attributed, among other things, to the 

low marriage rate, later occurrence of marriage, and very low incidence of out-of-wedlock births 

(around 50% lower than that of the United States and among the lowest in the entire world). 

The final thing I would mention is that high percentages of those identifying as Roman Catholics 

doesn’t equate to equally high percentages of those actively practicing Roman Catholicism. It 

could be that those countries that feature more active practice of the religion of identification 

might also be those countries that feature higher rates of birth and adherence to birth control 

prohibitions. Just sayin’.

4. Lucy Ni

5. Laura O'Neill

6. Virginia Lam

7. LARA SARKISSIAN

Assignment #2: Would This Technology Get Adopted?

Lara Sarkissian

Panasonic Prototype, 3D Plasma TV

http://www.techhive.com/article/172700/Panasonic_Prototype_3D_Plasma_TV.html

·      Panasonic’s plan is to create a plasma TV with 3D capabilities, so families can sit and watch 3D movies at the comfort of their own home. I think this will be adopted (slowly), since audiences enjoy the “true to life” experience 3D movies give, as well as more interaction with the visual information. Also, this means audiences won’t only have access to 3D in theatres, but also in their own home.

·      However, I believe the 3D capable plasma TV would have a very slow adoption rate. Currently, there are only a handful of features that are created for 3D by filmmakers per year. This means there will be more 3D content needed to feed audiences interest and reason to buy the 3D capable plasma TV and throw out the TV they have currently.

·       Relative advantage: 3D capable TV would bring higher quality, “true to life” and more interactive experience compared to non-3D capable TV’s out there.

·      Compatibility:  It would be compatible only in the sense that 3D productions will now be able to stream at home vs. only at the theater.

·      Adaptability (re-inventablity): However, there aren’t enough 3D productions out there, to go out of the way and spend a lot of money to buy a new TV specializing in 3D productions and completely change the system currently used. Therefore, harder to adapt to and less willing to purchase because of affordability. 3DTV requires “active glasses” as well, which are pricy.

·      Observability: Compared to non-3d capable TVs, the 3D capable TV will have positive effects sensed because of having higher quality and giving more sensual information along with visuals. However it is unclear what will come next and what new innovation will outdo the 3D TV’s and the progress that can be made in the future.

·      Errors: Not enough 3D content out there to buy a new (expensive) TV specializing in 3d.

·      Improvement: Possible techniques to create imitated 3D versions of current films.

The Kitchen Safe – Will it be adopted?

Christina Vasiliou

The Kitchen Safe, with built-in time lock, was created by David Krippendorf as a tool to help in avoiding temptation; the user can put food items in the container and then set the timer for any time – from 1 minute to 10 days – and lock the items in the container for the aforementioned period of time. 

Relative Advantage

            The Kitchen Safe has relative advantage for those who are dieting who have little willpower to avoid snacking on unhealthy foods.  This purpose was David Krippendorf’s original goal in creating the Kitchen Safe.  Apart from not buying unhealthy foods or having someone else hide such foods from you, there are no kitchen specific, time-lock safe predecessors, so the relative advantage of The Kitchen Safe is pretty apparent.  Additionally, The Kitchen Safe is a less expensive alternative to expensive, fancy diet plans, when you can instead just lock away the food for certain period of time.  However, the relative cost advantage of the safe to just not buying unhealthy foods is not high – it would definitely be more cost effective to not buy unhealthy foods than buy a $39.95 safe.  However, The Kitchen Safe is designed for those who cannot resist buying and eating the unhealthy foods. 

Compatibility

            The Kitchen Safe is definitely compatible with the values and norms of our social system because a healthy lifestyle has been deemed a valuable characteristic to have in our society.  Additionally, many feel that we live in an over consumptive society, so an innovation that works to cut down consumption (of many things beyond food) can be seen as very compatible with society’s values.  The Kitchen Safe would not be compatible with people who do not have “temptation” problems and who do not have a food or object that they feel is to tempting to resist – or one that does not fit in the 3.5 quart container.

Adaptability

            The Kitchen Safe is very adaptable and can lock up a large variety of temptation inducing things.  While it was originally designed for irresistible, unhealthy snack foods, it is also pictured containing cigarettes, computer mouses, cell phones, credit cards, dog food, and kids’ toys.  If you are trying to limit yourself to only smoking once a day, you can set the timer for 24 hours and physically restrict yourself to access to your cigarettes once a day.  If you want the entire family to be cell phone free for a 20 minute dinner, everyone can put their cell phones into The Kitchen Safe for that certain period of time.  Another useful way to use The Kitchen Safe is for dog food because then it will avoid the question of whether someone else in the house has fed the dog yet which can be a common problem in families.  

Observability

            The observability of The Kitchen Safe depends on what it is being used for.  If it is being used to limit snack foods in hopes of losing weight or becoming more healthy then the observability of these results is not very noticeable in the short term.  If it is to limit cell phone use at the dinner table, then the observability is very good because the results are immediate.  In both cases, the restriction begins immediately so the actual process of the technology is very observable, but it depends on what the goals of using the technology are to rank the observability.

Possible design errors

            The main error in the functioning of The Kitchen Safe is that while it aims to take away temptation, there is no limit on the time the container can be open.  While it may be locked for three days, it can be open for an indefinite amount of time, so if after three days, you are really fiending for cookies, there is nothing stopping you from eating ALL the cookies that have been locked away for 72 hours.  This also goes for cigarettes.  Furthermore, the effectiveness of the product relies solely on human will power, the exact thing it is attempting to solve the problem of.  If you don’t have the willpower to not smoke cigarettes, you might not have the willpower to physically lock them in a box for a predetermined amount of time.  Additionally, in some cases (like food) only one temptation can be locked away at a time if you only have one safe. 

            Overall, on the basis of relative advantage, compatibility, adaptability, and observability The Kitchen Safe has a good chance of being adopted rather quickly.  The Kitchen Safe has varied possibilities for usage and fits into the weight/health conscious values of a large portion of the population of society.  Its potential errors are only realized after purchase and are only applicable to some of the functions.  For instance, using the safe for technology, children’s toys, dog food, etc. avoid the “overcoming temptation” error that is possible with snack foods and cigarettes. 

 http://www.dudeiwantthat.com/gear/gadgets/the-kitchen-safe-time-lock-vice-guard.asp

http://www.coolthings.com/kitchen-time-lock-safe/

http://www.thekitchensafe.com/pages/overview

VIRGINIA LAM:

This item is designed to be a laptop stand where one can flip it and use it upside down. This laptop stand is much more convenient than previous laptop stands due to the capability of being used upside down. It is convenient for those who would enjoy using their laptop for work or pleasure while being in a more relaxed position. However this item is not a necessity but rather an item for pleasure. The benefits from this stand seem to only last for a certain amount of time because I believe that most laptop users would not lay down for an extended period of time. But this innovation is very compatible with society right now because large amounts of people use laptops in this current generation. This innovation seems simple enough to understand for a wide range of users and does not seem complex at all since the stand only requires two bolts. I feel as if the adaptability for this product is low as it is only used to hold a laptop. However the only other ways I could think about it being used would be to read books or other devices upside down as well. I would say that the downfall in this stand is that it is more bulky than normal laptop stands, so I believe that it will be adopted at a much slower rate. Another down side to this innovation is that I feel as if this design could not be very beneficial to the longevity of the computer. Many laptops probably won’t run as well upside down compared to right side up. Maybe they can develop a fan in addition to the stand to cool the laptop if it were to overheat. Overall, I believe that this innovation could be adopted but it might be adopted at an extremely slow rate and it would not be bought by most of the general public but rather a small population.
 

JILLIAN FIRESTONE:

IYAH TURMINI:

http://www.amazon.com/CTA-Digital-iPotty-Activity-Seat/dp/B00B3G8UGQ?tag=vglnk-c297-20#productDetails

The product I chose for this assignment is the iPotty. Yeah, the iPotty. It’s basically a potty training seat with a stand that holds iPads. So your potty-training child can have the pleasure of excreting fecal matter while entertaining themselves with several hundred dollars worth of technology.

Right off the bat, this product has a few major design flaws. First, excrement and iPads should never come into such close contact. Second, the product is manufactured by CTA Digital and made in China, which I’m gonna venture a guess and say means that it’s almost guaranteed to have high levels of lead. I honestly doubt this product would be adopted at all considering people tend to treat their tech like their children. Beyond that, why would you want to get your child used to using the restroom with an iPad. They’d just end up that freaky kid in school who totes their tech to the lavatory (and not in the acceptable-iPhone form).

In terms of relative advantage, the iPotty doesn’t have too much of an advantage over the old standby potty training toilet seat. I don’t really understand how entertaining a child will develop their ability to use a toilet or induce bowel movements.

I wouldn’t say this product is necessarily incompatible with today’s tech-obsessed society. It just strikes me that this goes a bit too far. What parent wants their friends to come over, use their bathroom, and find the iPotty in there? Seems like it’d be embarrassing. It’s just so bougie and ridiculous.

The iPotty is definitely not adaptable. It’s too specialized to be re-invented into something else. It’s not as useful as general technology (once your children are beyond the potty training age it just becomes a lead-laden crap-seat) or even a very useful specialized technology.

While the iPotty isn’t preventative tech, making it’s dismal rate of adoption slightly higher than it might otherwise be, it’s results aren’t necessarily easily observable. Potty training can take a lot of time. And this product seems like it would require a lot Clorox wipes and a really good iPad insurance policy from Apple.