Objective: The aim of this study is to examine how situational abortion attitudes differ when including additional context related to the gestational age of the pregnancy.Method: Ordinary Least Squares Regression models predicting abortion attitudes across four different sets of abortion attitude questions, using data collected from an online panel weighted to match U.S. benchmarks.Results: Later gestational ages are associated with less support for abortion. Although there is some variation in the amount that support decreases across different socio‐demographic groups, the predictors of abortion attitudes remain relatively stable across gestational ages. Abortion attitudes questions with no reference to weeks' gestation appear to be the most similar to questions referencing early weeks' gestation.Conclusion: When answering abortion attitude questions that do not include any reference to weeks' gestation, respondents may be more likely to think about abortion early in pregnancy. Including references to weeks' gestation may provide a more nuanced and complete understanding of abortion attitudes.

Although media response to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision was widespread in the United States, the extent to which people were aware of the Mississippi law leading to the decision, the Dobbs v. Jackson case, is unclear, as are the resulting effects of the decision on legal abortion. As such, we examined people's awareness of abortion legality prior to and after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision announcement, as well as the potential implications associated with the decision (i.e. overturning of Roe v. Wade). We also examined people's attitudes toward abortion legality, specifically focusing on 15 weeks' gestation to correspond with the Mississippi law that led to Dobbs v. Jackson. Data were collected across two studies at different times. In Study 1, a 15-minute survey was administered to IPSOS' KnowledgePanel (N = 1014) prior to the decision announcement. A shorter version of that survey was administered to a second sample using NORC's AmeriSpeak Omnibus panel (N = 1002). Nearly half of that sample (42.2%) completed the survey prior to the decision announcement. People were generally unaware of the Mississippi law, the Dobbs v. Jackson case, and implications associated with the decision (e.g. overturning Roe v. Wade). People generally endorsed abortion being legal at 15 weeks or later, but this varied by circumstance. We did not find meaningful effects of the decision announcement on people's knowledge and attitudes. Our findings suggest that the intense response to the decision from the media and people involved in the abortion movement may not represent the general public's reaction.

In the United States, legislation intended to limit abortion access based on fetal development markers (e.g., heartbeat, fetal pain) has become increasingly common. We found that people’s support for legal abortion decreases when survey items mention fetal developmental markers compared with items that do not. However, the majority of participants supported access to legal abortion in health-related circumstances or pregnancies as a result of rape at the detection of a fetal heartbeat. Using terms that personify the fetus may evoke responses from participants that limit their endorsement of abortion. Thus, including this terminology in the public and political discourse seems to influence abortion attitudes. This might have implications related to electoral outcomes which eventually determine whether pregnant people are guaranteed access to abortion.