Injustice was the leading explanation
Among 512 first- and second-year nursing students at Gaziantep University in Türkiye, “injustice” was the most common answer when students were asked to choose a perceived cause of poverty. It was selected by 220 students, or 43.0%. “Lack of opportunity” came next, chosen by 141 students, or 27.5%. Because the question allowed only one answer, the results show each student’s selected explanation rather than the full range of causes a student might have endorsed.
The survey was conducted in June and July 2025. Of 523 questionnaires returned, 512 records were analysed. The study used the total Perception of Poverty Scale, or PPS, as its primary outcome. In ordinary terms, this was the main score used to summarize students’ poverty perceptions. The average total score was 40.80; the Work and Employment subscale averaged 15.04, and the Socio-Economic and Political subscale averaged 25.77.
Students who chose “injustice” also had higher average PPS scores than students who chose “lack of opportunity” or “sometimes people are to blame.” The means were 42.45 versus 39.43 for the first comparison and 42.45 versus 39.18 for the second. The gaps were 3.02 and 3.27 points. These results describe an association between a selected explanation and poverty-perception scores, not evidence that one caused the other.
The differences across students were modest
PPS scores also differed across maternal-education groups. Students whose mothers had completed high school had an average score of 38.89, compared with 41.60 among students whose mothers had completed primary school, a difference of 2.71 points. This was the only significant pairwise contrast in the follow-up comparisons, although the overall comparison across maternal-education groups was statistically significant.
In the initial, unadjusted comparison, women had a higher average PPS score than men: 41.22 versus 39.81. The reported Hedges’ g, a standardized way of expressing the gap, was 0.19. After several characteristics were considered together, the female-male difference was 1.29 points, with a 95% confidence interval from -0.11 to 2.69 and p=0.072. The adjusted estimate therefore remained uncertain.
No statistical evidence of PPS differences was found across paternal-education or family-income groups, or by study year, student employment, or maternal or paternal employment status. A non-significant comparison does not prove that an association is exactly zero; it means this analysis did not provide statistical evidence for a difference.
The model explained only a small part of the variation
To examine several characteristics at once, the researchers used hierarchical multiple linear regression, a method for estimating adjusted associations with total PPS scores. The model included six predictors and was not designed to establish causal effects or make individual predictions. In the final model, each higher maternal-education category was associated with a 1.15-point lower PPS score, while selecting “injustice” was associated with a 2.88-point higher score than selecting other explanations. The model’s R-squared, a measure of the share of score variation accounted for by the model, was 0.075.
No hypotheses were preregistered. All analyses were exploratory, and the regression model was specified after the initial analyses had been examined. The findings are therefore exploratory associations rather than a test of a pre-set prediction.
A snapshot, not a verdict
The design puts a clear limit on the conclusions. The survey was cross-sectional, capturing responses at one point in time, so it cannot establish cause. It was also a voluntary online survey at one university, which limits how confidently the results can be generalized to other students or settings. Duplicate submissions could not be ruled out, and the model explained only a small share of between-student variation.
The results are therefore a snapshot of responses from first- and second-year nursing students to the study’s poverty-perception measure. They do not show that maternal education or a selected explanation causes a student’s score to change. The authors declared that no financial support was received for the work or its publication.
Paper data and sources
Original title: Perceptions of poverty and associated factors among first- and second-year nursing students: a cross-sectional study
Authors: Ataman Bor N, Berşe S, Özer R
Journal/Repository: Frontiers in public health
Status: Peer-reviewed
First online: 2026-10-08
DOI: Not available
Original paper · Full text