^ Not sure your expectations for what the dissertation SHOULD have done match the author’s purpose. The author sees a landmark court decision originally constructed to present a compromise as having failed in that task. The author has chosen to frame both the challenge and the solution within a “legal” context, since that’s considered relevant to legislative processes as well as any future court decision (which will obviously address Roe/Casey directly). There are PLENTY of polls out there to highlight the “abortion question” from the perspective of “whether or when it’s OK.” NORC is no different (see the questions on page five of the GSS report). The author was actually asking different questions; regarding references to outside polling, Marist was actually more consistent with the author’s line of questioning. Neither polling group is “better” or “worse” - they are asking different questions. In that sense, this work is definitely outside the box, since it asked different questions than did NORC and many others. You may not like those specific questions, but they appear to be consistent with the issues brought up and addressed in Roe - and the challenges to and chipping away at Roe is the entire basis for this dissertation.