Skip to Content

Register
Log-in
Search
- The Free Speech / Pro White Wiki
- Page Index
- User Index
- Global
- What's New
- Wiki Index

0.0
1
2
3
4
5

0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/06/26 03:09

From 105.1 to 104.1 From 110.1 to 109.1

From version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 02:53

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/04/16 02:46

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Parent

@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
--Main Categories.Science & Research.WebHome
++Main.Studies.WebHome

Content

@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
++
  {{toc/}}
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
--    Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various important Racial themes. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout. I wanted to make this for a couple of reasons. Number one is organization. There are a ton of useful studies out there that expose the truth, sometimes inadvertently. You'll notice that in this initial draft the summaries are often woke and reflect the bias of the AI writing them as well as the researchers politically correct conclusion in most cases. That's because I haven't gotten to going through and pointing out the reasons I put all of them in here.
++    Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various important Racial themes. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout. I wanted to make this for a couple of reasons. Number one is organization. There are a ton of useful studies out there that expose the truth, sometimes inadvertently. You'll notice that in this initial draft the summaries are often woke and reflect the bias of the AI writing them as well as the researchers politically correct conclusion in most cases. That's because I haven't gotten to going through and pointing out the reasons I put all of them in here.
      There is often an underlying hypocrisy or double standard, saying the quiet part out loud, or conclusions that are so much of an antithesis to what the data shows that made me want to include it. At least, thats the idea for once its polished. I have about 150 more studies to upload, so it will be a few weeks before I get through it all. Until such time, feel free to search for them yourself and edit in what you find, or add your own studies. If you like you can do it manually, or if you'd rather go the route I did, just rename the study to its doi number and feed the study into an AI and tell them to summarize the study using the following format:
@@ -20,11 +20,15 @@
++
++
++
++
++
  = Genetics =
--{{expandable summary="
--Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
++{{expandable summary="Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
  **Source:** *Nature*
  **Date of Publication:** *2009*
  **Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
@@ -158,8 +158,9 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
--{{expandable summary="
++{{expandable summary="
++
  Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
  **Source:** *Nature Genetics*
  **Date of Publication:** *2015*
@@ -227,8 +227,9 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
--{{expandable summary="
++{{expandable summary="
++
  Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
  **Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
  **Date of Publication:** *2002*
@@ -296,8 +296,9 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
--{{expandable summary="
++{{expandable summary="
++
  Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
  **Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
  **Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
@@ -708,7 +708,6 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
--
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
@@ -1051,9 +1051,8 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
--{{expandable summary="
--Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
++{{expandable summary="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
  **Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
  **Date of Publication:** *2014*
  **Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
@@ -1388,7 +1388,6 @@
  {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]]
  {{/expandable}}
--{{/expandable}}
  = Media =
@@ -1592,109 +1592,3 @@
  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Study: White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years"}}
--Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
--Date of Publication: February 20, 2024
--Author(s): Julia Diana Lenk, Jochen Hartmann, Henrik Sattler
--Title: "White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years: A Meta-Analysis"
--DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2307505121
--Subject Matter: Advertising, Race, Consumer Behavior, Meta-Analysis
--
--{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
--
--Study Scale:
--
--62 studies, 332 effect sizes, 10,186 participants (Black and White Americans).
--
--Covers the period 1956–2022.
--
--Cohen’s d Effect Sizes (Model-Free):
--
--Black viewers: d = 0.50 → strong, consistent ingroup preference for Black models.
--
--White viewers: d = –0.08 overall; pre-2000: d = –0.16 (ingroup); post-2000: d = +0.02 (outgroup leaning).
--
--Regression Findings:
--
--White viewers’ preference for Black models increases by ~0.0128 d/year since 1956 (p < 0.05).
--
--By 2022, White viewers showed positive directional preference for Black endorsers.
--
--Black viewer preferences remained stable across the 66 years.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
--
--Primary Observations:
--
--Ingroup favoritism is evident: Black viewers consistently prefer Black endorsers.
--
--White viewers’ preferences have shifted significantly over time toward favoring Black endorsers.
--
--Temporal Trends:
--
--Turning point: Around 2002–2003, White viewers began showing a positive (though small) preference for Black endorsers.
--
--Moderator Effects:
--
--Low anti-Black prejudice and low White ethnic identification correlate with greater White preference for Black endorsers.
--
--Economic hardship (e.g., high unemployment) slightly reduces White preference for Black endorsers.
--
--Identification Model:
--
--Preference changes are stronger when outcomes measure identification with endorsers (e.g., similarity, attractiveness).
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
--
--Strengths of the Study:
--
--Longest-running meta-analysis on interracial preferences in advertising.
--
--Includes multilevel modeling and 21 meta-analytic covariates.
--
--Accounts for both perceiver and societal context, and controls for publication bias.
--
--Limitations:
--
--Only examines Black and White racial dynamics—doesn’t cover Hispanic, Asian, or multiracial groups.
--
--72% of effect sizes are from student samples (not fully generalizable).
--
--Social desirability bias may affect lab-based responses.
--
--Suggestions for Improvement:
--
--Include field experiments and more representative samples (age, class, ideology).
--
--Examine how Black models are portrayed, not just if they are shown.
--
--Extend research to other racial groups and multiracial representations.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
--
--Provides empirical support for the dynamic shift in White American attitudes over time.
--
--Directly informs discussions about media representation, consumer behavior, and racial identity.
--
--Supports policy and commercial arguments for including more diverse models in advertising.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
--
--Expand analysis to Latino, Asian, and multiracial models in media.
--
--Study real-world (non-lab) consumer reactions to racial diversity in advertising.
--
--Investigate how economic anxiety influences racial preferences in other domains (e.g., hiring, education).
--
--Explore how virtual influencers or AI-generated models affect racial perceptions.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
--[[Download Full Study>>attach:lenk-et-al-white-americans-preference-for-black-people-in-advertising-has-increased-in-the-past-66-years-a-meta-analysis.pdf]]
--{{/expandable}}
--{{/expandable}}