0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From version 114.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 03:54
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 90.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/04/15 21:41
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -Main Categories.Science & Research.WebHome
1 +Main.Studies.WebHome
Content
... ... @@ -1,17 +4,99 @@
1 -{{toc/}}
2 -
3 -
4 4  = Research at a Glance =
5 5  
6 6  
7 7  
8 - 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.
5 + 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.
9 9  
10 10  
11 11   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:
12 12  
10 +{{example}}
11 +~= Study: [Study Title] =
13 13  
13 +~{~{expand title="Study: [Study Title] (Click to Expand)" expanded="false"}}
14 +~*~*Source:~*~* *[Journal/Institution Name]*
15 +~*~*Date of Publication:~*~* *[Publication Date]*
16 +~*~*Author(s):~*~* *[Author(s) Name(s)]*
17 +~*~*Title:~*~* *"[Study Title]"*
18 +~*~*DOI:~*~* [DOI or Link]
19 +~*~*Subject Matter:~*~* *[Broad Research Area, e.g., Social Psychology, Public Policy, Behavioral Economics]* 
14 14  
21 +~-~--
22 +
23 +~#~# ~*~*Key Statistics~*~*
24 +~1. ~*~*General Observations:~*~*
25 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
26 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
27 +
28 +2. ~*~*Subgroup Analysis:~*~*
29 + - [Breakdown of findings by gender, race, or other subgroups]
30 +
31 +3. ~*~*Other Significant Data Points:~*~*
32 + - [Any additional findings or significant statistics]
33 +
34 +~-~--
35 +
36 +~#~# ~*~*Findings~*~*
37 +~1. ~*~*Primary Observations:~*~*
38 + - [High-level findings or trends in the study]
39 +
40 +2. ~*~*Subgroup Trends:~*~*
41 + - [Disparities or differences highlighted in the study]
42 +
43 +3. ~*~*Specific Case Analysis:~*~*
44 + - [Detailed explanation of any notable specific findings]
45 +
46 +~-~--
47 +
48 +~#~# ~*~*Critique and Observations~*~*
49 +~1. ~*~*Strengths of the Study:~*~*
50 + - [Examples: strong methodology, large dataset, etc.]
51 +
52 +2. ~*~*Limitations of the Study:~*~*
53 + - [Examples: data gaps, lack of upstream analysis, etc.]
54 +
55 +3. ~*~*Suggestions for Improvement:~*~*
56 + - [Ideas for further research or addressing limitations]
57 +
58 +~-~--
59 +
60 +~#~# ~*~*Relevance to Subproject~*~*
61 +- [Explanation of how this study contributes to your subproject goals.]
62 +- [Any key arguments or findings that support or challenge your views.]
63 +
64 +~-~--
65 +
66 +~#~# ~*~*Suggestions for Further Exploration~*~*
67 +~1. [Research questions or areas to investigate further.]
68 +2. [Potential studies or sources to complement this analysis.]
69 +
70 +~-~--
71 +
72 +~#~# ~*~*Summary of Research Study~*~*
73 +This study examines ~*~*[core research question or focus]~*~*, providing insights into ~*~*[main subject area]~*~*. The research utilized ~*~*[sample size and methodology]~*~* to assess ~*~*[key variables or measured outcomes]~*~*. 
74 +
75 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
76 +
77 +~-~--
78 +
79 +~#~# ~*~*📄 Download Full Study~*~*
80 +~{~{velocity}}
81 +#set($doi = "[Insert DOI Here]")
82 +#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf")
83 +#if($xwiki.exists("attach~:$filename"))
84 +~[~[Download Full Study>>attach~:$filename]]
85 +#else
86 +~{~{html}}<span style="color:red; font-weight:bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>~{~{/html}}
87 +#end
88 +~{~{/velocity}}
89 +
90 +~{~{/expand}}
91 +
92 +
93 +{{/example}}
94 +
95 +
96 +
15 15  - Click on a **category** in the **Table of Contents** to browse studies related to that topic.
16 16  - Click on a **study title** to expand its details, including **key findings, critique, and relevance**.
17 17  - Use the **search function** (Ctrl + F or XWiki's built-in search) to quickly find specific topics or authors.
... ... @@ -19,12 +19,18 @@
19 19  - You'll also find a download link to the original full study in pdf form at the bottom of the collapsible block.
20 20  
21 21  
104 +{{toc/}}
22 22  
106 +
107 +
108 +
109 +
23 23  = Genetics =
24 24  
25 -{{expandable summary="
26 26  
27 -Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
113 +== Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History ==
114 +
115 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
28 28  **Source:** *Nature*
29 29  **Date of Publication:** *2009*
30 30  **Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
... ... @@ -32,7 +32,10 @@
32 32  **DOI:** [10.1038/nature08365](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08365)
33 33  **Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Population History, South Asian Ancestry* 
34 34  
35 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
123 +----
124 +
125 +## **Key Statistics**##
126 +
36 36  1. **General Observations:**
37 37   - Study analyzed **132 individuals from 25 diverse Indian groups**.
38 38   - Identified two major ancestral populations: **Ancestral North Indians (ANI)** and **Ancestral South Indians (ASI)**.
... ... @@ -44,9 +44,11 @@
44 44  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
45 45   - ANI ancestry ranges from **39% to 71%** across Indian groups.
46 46   - **Caste and linguistic differences** strongly correlate with genetic variation.
47 -{{/expandable}}
48 48  
49 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
139 +----
140 +
141 +## **Findings**##
142 +
50 50  1. **Primary Observations:**
51 51   - The genetic landscape of India has been shaped by **thousands of years of endogamy**.
52 52   - Groups with **only ASI ancestry no longer exist** in mainland India.
... ... @@ -58,9 +58,11 @@
58 58  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
59 59   - **Founder effects** have maintained allele frequency differences among Indian groups.
60 60   - Predicts **higher incidence of recessive diseases** due to historical genetic isolation.
61 -{{/expandable}}
62 62  
63 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
155 +----
156 +
157 +## **Critique and Observations**##
158 +
64 64  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
65 65   - **First large-scale genetic analysis** of Indian population history.
66 66   - Introduces **new methods for ancestry estimation without direct ancestral reference groups**.
... ... @@ -72,34 +72,50 @@
72 72  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
73 73   - Future research should **expand sampling across more Indian tribal groups**.
74 74   - Use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer resolution of ancestry.
75 -{{/expandable}}
76 76  
77 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
171 +----
172 +
173 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
78 78  - Provides a **genetic basis for caste and linguistic diversity** in India.
79 79  - Highlights **founder effects and genetic drift** shaping South Asian populations.
80 -- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.
81 -{{/expandable}}
176 +- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.##
82 82  
83 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
178 +----
179 +
180 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
181 +
84 84  1. Examine **genetic markers linked to disease susceptibility** in Indian subpopulations.
85 85  2. Investigate the impact of **recent migration patterns on ANI-ASI ancestry distribution**.
86 86  3. Study **gene flow between Indian populations and other global groups**.
87 -{{/expandable}}
88 88  
89 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
90 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature08365.pdf]]
91 -{{/expandable}}
92 -{{/expandable}}
186 +----
93 93  
94 -{{expandable summary="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
95 -**Source:** *Nature*
96 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
97 -**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
98 -**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
99 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
100 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics*
188 +## **Summary of Research Study**
189 +This study reconstructs **the genetic history of India**, revealing two ancestral populations—**ANI (related to West Eurasians) and ASI (distinctly South Asian)**. By analyzing **25 diverse Indian groups**, the researchers demonstrate how **historical endogamy and founder effects** have maintained genetic differentiation. The findings have **implications for medical genetics, population history, and the study of South Asian ancestry**.##
101 101  
102 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
191 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
192 +
193 +----
194 +
195 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
196 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature08365.pdf]]##
197 +{{/expand}}
198 +
199 +
200 +== Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations ==
201 +
202 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
203 +**Source:** *Nature*
204 +**Date of Publication:** *2016*
205 +**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
206 +**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
207 +**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
208 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics* 
209 +
210 +----
211 +
212 +## **Key Statistics**##
213 +
103 103  1. **General Observations:**
104 104   - Analyzed **high-coverage genome sequences of 300 individuals from 142 populations**.
105 105   - Included **many underrepresented and indigenous groups** from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.
... ... @@ -111,9 +111,11 @@
111 111  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
112 112   - Identified **5.8 million base pairs absent from the human reference genome**.
113 113   - Estimated that **mutations have accumulated 5% faster in non-Africans than in Africans**.
114 -{{/expandable}}
115 115  
116 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
226 +----
227 +
228 +## **Findings**##
229 +
117 117  1. **Primary Observations:**
118 118   - **African populations harbor the greatest genetic diversity**, confirming an out-of-Africa dispersal model.
119 119   - Indigenous Australians and New Guineans **share a common ancestral population with other non-Africans**.
... ... @@ -125,9 +125,11 @@
125 125  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
126 126   - **Neanderthal ancestry is higher in East Asians than in Europeans**.
127 127   - African hunter-gatherer groups show **deep population splits over 100,000 years ago**.
128 -{{/expandable}}
129 129  
130 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
242 +----
243 +
244 +## **Critique and Observations**##
245 +
131 131  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
132 132   - **Largest global genetic dataset** outside of the 1000 Genomes Project.
133 133   - High sequencing depth allows **more accurate identification of genetic variants**.
... ... @@ -139,36 +139,50 @@
139 139  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
140 140   - Future studies should include **ancient genomes** to improve demographic modeling.
141 141   - Expand research into **how genetic variation affects health outcomes** across populations.
142 -{{/expandable}}
143 143  
144 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
258 +----
259 +
260 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
145 145  - Provides **comprehensive data on human genetic diversity**, useful for **evolutionary studies**.
146 146  - Supports research on **Neanderthal and Denisovan introgression** in modern human populations.
147 -- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.
148 -{{/expandable}}
263 +- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.##
149 149  
150 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
265 +----
266 +
267 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
268 +
151 151  1. Investigate **functional consequences of genetic variation in underrepresented populations**.
152 152  2. Study **how selection pressures shaped genetic diversity across different environments**.
153 153  3. Explore **medical applications of population-specific genetic markers**.
154 -{{/expandable}}
155 155  
156 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
157 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]
158 -{{/expandable}}
159 -{{/expandable}}
273 +----
160 160  
161 -{{expandable summary="
275 +## **Summary of Research Study**
276 +This study presents **high-coverage genome sequences from 300 individuals across 142 populations**, offering **new insights into global genetic diversity and human evolution**. The findings highlight **deep African population splits, widespread archaic ancestry in non-Africans, and unique variants absent from the human reference genome**. The research enhances our understanding of **migration patterns, adaptation, and evolutionary history**.##
162 162  
163 -Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
164 -**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
165 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
166 -**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
167 -**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
168 -**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
169 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science*
278 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
170 170  
171 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
280 +----
281 +
282 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
283 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]##
284 +{{/expand}}
285 +
286 +
287 +== Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies ==
288 +
289 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
290 +**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
291 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
292 +**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
293 +**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
294 +**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
295 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science* 
296 +
297 +----
298 +
299 +## **Key Statistics**##
300 +
172 172  1. **General Observations:**
173 173   - Analyzed **17,804 traits from 2,748 twin studies** published between **1958 and 2012**.
174 174   - Included data from **14,558,903 twin pairs**, making it the largest meta-analysis on human heritability.
... ... @@ -180,9 +180,11 @@
180 180  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
181 181   - **Neurological, metabolic, and psychiatric traits** showed the highest heritability estimates.
182 182   - Traits related to **social values and environmental interactions** had lower heritability estimates.
183 -{{/expandable}}
184 184  
185 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
313 +----
314 +
315 +## **Findings**##
316 +
186 186  1. **Primary Observations:**
187 187   - Across all traits, genetic factors play a significant role in individual differences.
188 188   - The study contradicts models that **overestimate environmental effects in behavioral and cognitive traits**.
... ... @@ -194,9 +194,11 @@
194 194  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
195 195   - Twin correlations suggest **limited evidence for strong non-additive genetic influences**.
196 196   - The study highlights **missing heritability in complex traits**, which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have yet to fully explain.
197 -{{/expandable}}
198 198  
199 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
329 +----
330 +
331 +## **Critique and Observations**##
332 +
200 200  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
201 201   - **Largest-ever heritability meta-analysis**, covering nearly all published twin studies.
202 202   - Provides a **comprehensive framework for understanding gene-environment contributions**.
... ... @@ -208,28 +208,39 @@
208 208  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
209 209   - Future research should use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer-grained heritability estimates.
210 210   - **Incorporate non-Western populations** to assess global heritability trends.
211 -{{/expandable}}
212 212  
213 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
345 +----
346 +
347 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
214 214  - Establishes a **quantitative benchmark for heritability across human traits**.
215 215  - Reinforces **genetic influence on cognitive, behavioral, and physical traits**.
216 -- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.
217 -{{/expandable}}
350 +- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.##
218 218  
219 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
352 +----
353 +
354 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
355 +
220 220  1. Investigate how **heritability estimates compare across different socioeconomic backgrounds**.
221 221  2. Examine **gene-environment interactions in cognitive and psychiatric traits**.
222 222  3. Explore **non-additive genetic effects on human traits using newer statistical models**.
223 -{{/expandable}}
224 224  
225 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
226 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]
227 -{{/expandable}}
228 -{{/expandable}}
360 +----
229 229  
230 -{{expandable summary="
362 +## **Summary of Research Study**
363 +This study presents a **comprehensive meta-analysis of human trait heritability**, covering **over 50 years of twin research**. The findings confirm **genes play a predominant role in shaping human traits**, with an **average heritability of 49%** across all measured characteristics. The research offers **valuable insights into genetic and environmental influences**, guiding future gene-mapping efforts and behavioral genetics studies.##
231 231  
232 -Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
365 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
366 +
367 +----
368 +
369 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
370 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]##
371 +{{/expand}}
372 +
373 +
374 +== Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease ==
375 +
376 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
233 233  **Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
234 234  **Date of Publication:** *2002*
235 235  **Author(s):** *Sarah A. Tishkoff, Scott M. Williams*
... ... @@ -237,7 +237,10 @@
237 237  **DOI:** [10.1038/nrg865](https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg865)
238 238  **Subject Matter:** *Population Genetics, Human Evolution, Complex Diseases* 
239 239  
240 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
384 +----
385 +
386 +## **Key Statistics**##
387 +
241 241  1. **General Observations:**
242 242   - Africa harbors **the highest genetic diversity** of any region, making it key to understanding human evolution.
243 243   - The study analyzes **genetic variation and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in African populations**.
... ... @@ -249,9 +249,11 @@
249 249  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
250 250   - The **effective population size (Ne) of Africans** is higher than that of non-African populations.
251 251   - LD blocks are **shorter in African genomes**, suggesting more historical recombination events.
252 -{{/expandable}}
253 253  
254 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
400 +----
401 +
402 +## **Findings**##
403 +
255 255  1. **Primary Observations:**
256 256   - African populations are the **most genetically diverse**, supporting the *Recent African Origin* hypothesis.
257 257   - Genetic variation in African populations can **help fine-map complex disease genes**.
... ... @@ -263,9 +263,11 @@
263 263  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
264 264   - Admixture in African Americans includes **West African and European genetic contributions**.
265 265   - SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) diversity in African genomes **exceeds that of non-African groups**.
266 -{{/expandable}}
267 267  
268 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
416 +----
417 +
418 +## **Critique and Observations**##
419 +
269 269  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
270 270   - Provides **comprehensive genetic analysis** of diverse African populations.
271 271   - Highlights **how genetic diversity impacts health disparities and disease risks**.
... ... @@ -277,36 +277,50 @@
277 277  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
278 278   - Expand research into **underrepresented African populations**.
279 279   - Integrate **whole-genome sequencing for a more detailed evolutionary timeline**.
280 -{{/expandable}}
281 281  
282 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
432 +----
433 +
434 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
283 283  - Supports **genetic models of human evolution** and the **out-of-Africa hypothesis**.
284 284  - Reinforces **Africa’s key role in disease gene mapping and precision medicine**.
285 -- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.
286 -{{/expandable}}
437 +- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.##
287 287  
288 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
439 +----
440 +
441 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
442 +
289 289  1. Investigate **genetic adaptations to local environments within Africa**.
290 290  2. Study **the role of African genetic diversity in disease resistance**.
291 291  3. Expand research on **how ancient migration patterns shaped modern genetic structure**.
292 -{{/expandable}}
293 293  
294 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
295 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]
296 -{{/expandable}}
297 -{{/expandable}}
447 +----
298 298  
299 -{{expandable summary="
449 +## **Summary of Research Study**
450 +This study explores the **genetic diversity of African populations**, analyzing their role in **human evolution and complex disease research**. The findings highlight **Africa’s unique genetic landscape**, confirming it as the most genetically diverse continent. The research provides valuable insights into **how genetic variation influences disease susceptibility, evolution, and population structure**.##
300 300  
301 -Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
302 -**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
303 -**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
304 -**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
305 -**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
306 -**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
307 -**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection*
452 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
308 308  
309 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
454 +----
455 +
456 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
457 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]##
458 +{{/expand}}
459 +
460 +
461 +== Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA ==
462 +
463 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
464 +**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
465 +**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
466 +**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
467 +**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
468 +**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
469 +**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection* 
470 +
471 +----
472 +
473 +## **Key Statistics**##
474 +
310 310  1. **General Observations:**
311 311   - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
312 312   - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
... ... @@ -318,9 +318,11 @@
318 318  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
319 319   - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
320 320   - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
321 -{{/expandable}}
322 322  
323 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
487 +----
488 +
489 +## **Findings**##
490 +
324 324  1. **Primary Observations:**
325 325   - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
326 326   - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
... ... @@ -333,9 +333,11 @@
333 333   - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
334 334   - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
335 335   - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
336 -{{/expandable}}
337 337  
338 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
504 +----
505 +
506 +## **Critique and Observations**##
507 +
339 339  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
340 340   - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
341 341   - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
... ... @@ -347,34 +347,48 @@
347 347  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
348 348   - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
349 349   - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
350 -{{/expandable}}
351 351  
352 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
520 +----
521 +
522 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
353 353  - Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
354 354  - Supports theories on **polygenic selection shaping human cognition, metabolism, and immunity**.
355 -- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.
356 -{{/expandable}}
525 +- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.##
357 357  
358 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
527 +----
528 +
529 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
530 +
359 359  1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
360 360  2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
361 361  3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
362 -{{/expandable}}
363 363  
364 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
365 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]
366 -{{/expandable}}
367 -{{/expandable}}
535 +----
368 368  
369 -{{expandable summary="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
370 -**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
371 -**Date of Publication:** *2013*
372 -**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
373 -**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
374 -**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
375 -**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology*
537 +## **Summary of Research Study**
538 +This study examines **how human genetic adaptation has unfolded over 14,000 years**, using a **large dataset of ancient DNA**. It highlights **strong selection on immune function, metabolism, and cognitive traits**, revealing **hundreds of loci affected by directional selection**. The findings emphasize **the power of ancient DNA in tracking human evolution and adaptation**.##
376 376  
377 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
540 +----
541 +
542 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
543 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]##
544 +{{/expand}}
545 +
546 +
547 +== Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age ==
548 +
549 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
550 +**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
551 +**Date of Publication:** *2013*
552 +**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
553 +**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
554 +**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
555 +**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology* 
556 +
557 +----
558 +
559 +## **Key Statistics**##
560 +
378 378  1. **General Observations:**
379 379   - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
380 380   - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
... ... @@ -386,9 +386,11 @@
386 386  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
387 387   - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
388 388   - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
389 -{{/expandable}}
390 390  
391 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
573 +----
574 +
575 +## **Findings**##
576 +
392 392  1. **Primary Observations:**
393 393   - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
394 394   - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
... ... @@ -400,9 +400,11 @@
400 400  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
401 401   - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
402 402   - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
403 -{{/expandable}}
404 404  
405 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
589 +----
590 +
591 +## **Critique and Observations**##
592 +
406 406  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
407 407   - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
408 408   - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
... ... @@ -414,34 +414,50 @@
414 414  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
415 415   - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
416 416   - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
417 -{{/expandable}}
418 418  
419 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
605 +----
606 +
607 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
420 420  - Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
421 421  - Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
422 -- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.
423 -{{/expandable}}
610 +- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.##
424 424  
425 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
612 +----
613 +
614 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
615 +
426 426  1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
427 427  2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
428 428  3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
429 -{{/expandable}}
430 430  
431 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
432 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
433 -{{/expandable}}
434 -{{/expandable}}
620 +----
435 435  
436 -{{expandable summary="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
437 -**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
438 -**Date of Publication:** *2010*
439 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
440 -**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
441 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
442 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology*
622 +## **Summary of Research Study**
623 +This study documents **The Wilson Effect**, demonstrating how the **heritability of IQ increases throughout development**, reaching a plateau of **0.80 by adulthood**. The findings indicate that **shared environmental effects diminish with age**, while **genetic influences on intelligence strengthen**. Using **longitudinal twin and adoption data**, the research provides **strong empirical support for the increasing role of genetics in cognitive ability over time**.##
443 443  
444 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
625 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
626 +
627 +----
628 +
629 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
630 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]##
631 +{{/expand}}
632 +
633 +
634 +== Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications ==
635 +
636 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
637 +**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
638 +**Date of Publication:** *2010*
639 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
640 +**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
641 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
642 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology* 
643 +
644 +----
645 +
646 +## **Key Statistics**##
647 +
445 445  1. **General Observations:**
446 446   - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
447 447   - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
... ... @@ -453,9 +453,11 @@
453 453  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
454 454   - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
455 455   - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
456 -{{/expandable}}
457 457  
458 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
660 +----
661 +
662 +## **Findings**##
663 +
459 459  1. **Primary Observations:**
460 460   - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
461 461   - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
... ... @@ -467,9 +467,11 @@
467 467  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
468 468   - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
469 469   - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
470 -{{/expandable}}
471 471  
472 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
676 +----
677 +
678 +## **Critique and Observations**##
679 +
473 473  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
474 474   - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
475 475   - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
... ... @@ -481,36 +481,50 @@
481 481  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
482 482   - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
483 483   - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
484 -{{/expandable}}
485 485  
486 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
692 +----
693 +
694 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
487 487  - Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
488 488  - Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
489 -- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.
490 -{{/expandable}}
697 +- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.##
491 491  
492 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
699 +----
700 +
701 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
702 +
493 493  1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
494 494  2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
495 495  3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
496 -{{/expandable}}
497 497  
498 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
499 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
500 -{{/expandable}}
501 -{{/expandable}}
707 +----
502 502  
503 -= IQ =
709 +## **Summary of Research Study**
710 +This study evaluates **whether Homo sapiens should be classified as a polytypic species**, analyzing **genetic diversity, evolutionary lineage, and morphological variation**. Using comparative analysis with other primates and mammals, the research suggests that **human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**, with implications for **evolutionary biology, anthropology, and medicine**.##
504 504  
505 -{{expandable summary="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
506 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
507 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
508 -**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
509 -**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
510 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
511 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis*
712 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
512 512  
513 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
714 +----
715 +
716 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
717 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]##
718 +{{/expand}}
719 +
720 +
721 +== Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media ==
722 +
723 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
724 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
725 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
726 +**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
727 +**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
728 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
729 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis* 
730 +
731 +----
732 +
733 +## **Key Statistics**##
734 +
514 514  1. **General Observations:**
515 515   - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
516 516   - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
... ... @@ -522,9 +522,11 @@
522 522  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
523 523   - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
524 524   - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
525 -{{/expandable}}
526 526  
527 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
747 +----
748 +
749 +## **Findings**##
750 +
528 528  1. **Primary Observations:**
529 529   - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
530 530   - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
... ... @@ -536,9 +536,11 @@
536 536  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
537 537   - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
538 538   - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
539 -{{/expandable}}
540 540  
541 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
763 +----
764 +
765 +## **Critique and Observations**##
766 +
542 542  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
543 543   - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
544 544   - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
... ... @@ -550,34 +550,50 @@
550 550  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
551 551   - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
552 552   - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
553 -{{/expandable}}
554 554  
555 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
779 +----
780 +
781 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
556 556  - Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
557 557  - Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
558 -- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.
559 -{{/expandable}}
784 +- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.##
560 560  
561 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
786 +----
787 +
788 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
789 +
562 562  1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
563 563  2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
564 564  3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
565 -{{/expandable}}
566 566  
567 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
568 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
569 -{{/expandable}}
570 -{{/expandable}}
794 +----
571 571  
572 -{{expandable summary="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
573 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
574 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
575 -**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
576 -**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
577 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
578 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences*
796 +## **Summary of Research Study**
797 +This study surveys **expert opinions on intelligence research**, analyzing **how backgrounds, political ideologies, and media representation influence perspectives on intelligence**. The findings highlight **divisions in scientific consensus**, particularly on **genetic vs. environmental causes of IQ disparities**. Additionally, the research uncovers **widespread dissatisfaction with media portrayals of intelligence research**, pointing to **the impact of ideological biases on public discourse**.##
579 579  
580 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
799 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
800 +
801 +----
802 +
803 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
804 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]##
805 +{{/expand}}
806 +
807 +
808 +== Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation ==
809 +
810 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
811 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
812 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
813 +**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
814 +**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
815 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
816 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences* 
817 +
818 +----
819 +
820 +## **Key Statistics**##
821 +
581 581  1. **General Observations:**
582 582   - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
583 583   - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
... ... @@ -589,9 +589,11 @@
589 589  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
590 590   - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
591 591   - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
592 -{{/expandable}}
593 593  
594 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
834 +----
835 +
836 +## **Findings**##
837 +
595 595  1. **Primary Observations:**
596 596   - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
597 597   - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
... ... @@ -603,9 +603,11 @@
603 603  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
604 604   - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
605 605   - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
606 -{{/expandable}}
607 607  
608 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
850 +----
851 +
852 +## **Critique and Observations**##
853 +
609 609  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
610 610   - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
611 611   - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
... ... @@ -617,37 +617,78 @@
617 617  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
618 618   - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
619 619   - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
620 -{{/expandable}}
621 621  
622 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
866 +----
867 +
868 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
623 623  - Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
624 624  - Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
625 -- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.
626 -{{/expandable}}
871 +- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.##
627 627  
628 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
873 +----
874 +
875 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
876 +
629 629  1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
630 630  2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
631 631  3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
632 -{{/expandable}}
633 633  
634 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
635 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
636 -{{/expandable}}
637 -{{/expandable}}
881 +----
638 638  
639 -{{expandable summary="Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding"}}
640 -**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
641 -**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
642 -**Author(s):** Smith et al.
643 -**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
644 -**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
645 -**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science
646 -{{/expandable}}
883 +## **Summary of Research Study**
884 +This study reviews **genome-wide association study (GWAS) findings on intelligence**, demonstrating a **strong correlation between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**. The research highlights how **genetic selection may explain population-level cognitive differences beyond genetic drift effects**. Intelligence-linked alleles showed **higher variability across populations than height-related alleles**, suggesting stronger selection pressures.  ##
647 647  
648 -= Dating =
886 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
649 649  
650 -{{expandable summary="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"}}
888 +----
889 +
890 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
891 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]##
892 +{{/expand}}
893 +
894 +
895 +== Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding ==
896 +
897 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Click here to expand details"}}
898 +**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
899 +**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
900 +**Author(s):** Smith et al.
901 +**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
902 +**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
903 +**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science 
904 +
905 +**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
906 +
907 + **Key Statistics**
908 +
909 +1. **General Observations:**
910 + - A near-perfect alignment between self-identified race/ethnicity (SIRE) and genetic ancestry was observed.
911 + - Misclassification rate: **0.14%**.
912 +
913 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
914 + - Four groups analyzed: **White, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic**.
915 + - Hispanic genetic clusters showed significant European and Native American lineage.
916 +
917 + **Findings**
918 +
919 +- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
920 +- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
921 +
922 + **Relevance to Subproject**
923 +
924 +- Reinforces the reliability of **self-reported racial identity** in genetic research.
925 +- Highlights **policy considerations** in biomedical studies.
926 +{{/expand}}
927 +
928 +
929 +----
930 +
931 += Dating and Interpersonal Relationships =
932 +
933 +
934 +== Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018 ==
935 +
936 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"}}
651 651  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
652 652  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
653 653  **Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.*
... ... @@ -655,7 +655,10 @@
655 655  **DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833)
656 656  **Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography* 
657 657  
658 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
944 +----
945 +
946 +## **Key Statistics**##
947 +
659 659  1. **General Observations:**
660 660   - Study analyzed **General Social Survey (2000-2018)** data.
661 661   - Found **declining trends in sexual activity** among young adults.
... ... @@ -667,9 +667,11 @@
667 667  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
668 668   - Frequency of sexual activity decreased by **8-10%** over the studied period.
669 669   - Number of sexual partners remained **relatively stable** despite declining activity rates.
670 -{{/expandable}}
671 671  
672 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
960 +----
961 +
962 +## **Findings**##
963 +
673 673  1. **Primary Observations:**
674 674   - A significant decline in sexual frequency, especially among **younger men**.
675 675   - Shifts in relationship dynamics and economic stressors may contribute to the trend.
... ... @@ -681,9 +681,11 @@
681 681  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
682 682   - **Mental health and employment status** were correlated with decreased activity.
683 683   - Social factors such as **screen time and digital entertainment consumption** are potential contributors.
684 -{{/expandable}}
685 685  
686 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
976 +----
977 +
978 +## **Critique and Observations**##
979 +
687 687  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
688 688   - **Large sample size** from a nationally representative dataset.
689 689   - **Longitudinal design** enables trend analysis over time.
... ... @@ -695,32 +695,55 @@
695 695  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
696 696   - Further studies should incorporate **qualitative data** on behavioral shifts.
697 697   - Additional factors such as **economic shifts and social media usage** need exploration.
698 -{{/expandable}}
699 699  
700 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
992 +----
993 +
994 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
701 701  - Provides evidence on **changing demographic behaviors** in relation to relationships and social interactions.
702 -- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.
703 -{{/expandable}}
996 +- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.##
704 704  
705 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
998 +----
999 +
1000 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1001 +
706 706  1. Investigate the **impact of digital media consumption** on relationship dynamics.
707 707  2. Examine **regional and cultural differences** in sexual activity trends.
708 -{{/expandable}}
709 709  
710 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
711 -
712 -{{/expandable}}
713 -{{/expandable}}
1005 +----
714 714  
715 -{{expandable summary="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
716 -**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
717 -**Date of Publication:** *2012*
718 -**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
719 -**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
720 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
721 -**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities*
1007 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1008 +This study examines **trends in sexual frequency and number of partners among U.S. adults (2000-2018)**, highlighting significant **declines in sexual activity, particularly among young men**. The research utilized **General Social Survey data** to analyze the impact of **sociodemographic factors, employment status, and mental well-being** on sexual behavior.  ##
722 722  
723 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1010 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1011 +
1012 +----
1013 +
1014 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1015 +{{velocity}}
1016 +#set($doi = "10.1001_jamanetworkopen.2020.3833")
1017 +#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf")
1018 +#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename"))
1019 +[[Download>>attach:$filename]]
1020 +#else
1021 +{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
1022 +#end {{/velocity}}##
1023 +{{/expand}}
1024 +
1025 +
1026 +== Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis ==
1027 +
1028 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
1029 +**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
1030 +**Date of Publication:** *2012*
1031 +**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
1032 +**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
1033 +**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
1034 +**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities* 
1035 +
1036 +----
1037 +
1038 +## **Key Statistics**##
1039 +
724 724  1. **General Observations:**
725 725   - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
726 726   - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
... ... @@ -734,9 +734,11 @@
734 734   - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
735 735   - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
736 736   - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
737 -{{/expandable}}
738 738  
739 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1054 +----
1055 +
1056 +## **Findings**##
1057 +
740 740  1. **Primary Observations:**
741 741   - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
742 742   - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
... ... @@ -748,9 +748,11 @@
748 748  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
749 749   - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
750 750   - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
751 -{{/expandable}}
752 752  
753 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1070 +----
1071 +
1072 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1073 +
754 754  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
755 755   - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
756 756   - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
... ... @@ -762,34 +762,48 @@
762 762  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
763 763   - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
764 764   - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
765 -{{/expandable}}
766 766  
767 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1086 +----
1087 +
1088 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
768 768  - Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
769 769  - Supports **research on genetic and environmental influences on neonatal health**.
770 -- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.
771 -{{/expandable}}
1091 +- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.##
772 772  
773 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1093 +----
1094 +
1095 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1096 +
774 774  1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
775 775  2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
776 776  3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
777 -{{/expandable}}
778 778  
779 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
780 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]
781 -{{/expandable}}
782 -{{/expandable}}
1101 +----
783 783  
784 -{{expandable summary="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
785 -**Source:** *Current Psychology*
786 -**Date of Publication:** *2024*
787 -**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
788 -**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
789 -**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
790 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
1103 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1104 +This meta-analysis examines **the impact of biracial parentage on birth outcomes**, showing that **biracial couples face a higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes than White couples but lower than Black couples**. The findings emphasize **maternal race as a key factor in birth risks**, with **Black mothers having the highest rates of preterm birth and low birthweight, regardless of paternal race**.##
791 791  
792 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1106 +----
1107 +
1108 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1109 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]##
1110 +{{/expand}}
1111 +
1112 +
1113 +== Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness ==
1114 +
1115 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
1116 +**Source:** *Current Psychology*
1117 +**Date of Publication:** *2024*
1118 +**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
1119 +**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
1120 +**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
1121 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation* 
1122 +
1123 +----
1124 +
1125 +## **Key Statistics**##
1126 +
793 793  1. **General Observations:**
794 794   - Study analyzed **67 self-identified incels** and **103 non-incel men**.
795 795   - Incels reported **higher loneliness and lower social support** compared to non-incels.
... ... @@ -801,9 +801,11 @@
801 801  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
802 802   - 95% of incels in the study reported **having depression**, with 38% receiving a formal diagnosis.
803 803   - **Higher externalization of blame** was linked to stronger incel identification.
804 -{{/expandable}}
805 805  
806 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1139 +----
1140 +
1141 +## **Findings**##
1142 +
807 807  1. **Primary Observations:**
808 808   - Incels experience **heightened rejection sensitivity and loneliness**.
809 809   - Lack of social support correlates with **worse mental health outcomes**.
... ... @@ -815,9 +815,11 @@
815 815  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
816 816   - Incels **engaged in fewer positive coping mechanisms** such as emotional support or positive reframing.
817 817   - Instead, they relied on **solitary coping strategies**, worsening their isolation.
818 -{{/expandable}}
819 819  
820 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1155 +----
1156 +
1157 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1158 +
821 821  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
822 822   - **First quantitative study** on incels’ social isolation and mental health.
823 823   - **Robust sample size** and validated psychological measures.
... ... @@ -829,36 +829,53 @@
829 829  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
830 830   - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**.
831 831   - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration.
832 -{{/expandable}}
833 833  
834 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1171 +----
1172 +
1173 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
835 835  - Highlights **mental health vulnerabilities** within the incel community.
836 836  - Supports research on **loneliness, attachment styles, and social dominance orientation**.
837 -- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.
838 -{{/expandable}}
1176 +- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.##
839 839  
840 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1178 +----
1179 +
1180 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1181 +
841 841  1. Explore how **online community participation** affects incel mental health.
842 842  2. Investigate **cognitive biases** influencing self-perceived rejection among incels.
843 843  3. Assess **therapeutic interventions** to address incel social isolation.
844 -{{/expandable}}
845 845  
846 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
847 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
848 -{{/expandable}}
849 -{{/expandable}}
1186 +----
850 850  
1188 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1189 +This study examines the **psychological characteristics of self-identified incels**, comparing them with non-incel men in terms of **mental health, loneliness, and coping strategies**. The research found **higher depression, anxiety, and avoidant attachment styles among incels**, as well as **greater reliance on solitary coping mechanisms**. It suggests that **lack of social support plays a critical role in exacerbating incel identity and related mental health concerns**.##
1190 +
1191 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1192 +
1193 +----
1194 +
1195 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1196 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]##
1197 +{{/expand}}
1198 +
1199 +
851 851  = Crime and Substance Abuse =
852 852  
853 -{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
854 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
855 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
856 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
857 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
858 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
859 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
860 860  
861 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1203 +== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1204 +
1205 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1206 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1207 +**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1208 +**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1209 +**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1210 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1211 +**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1212 +
1213 +----
1214 +
1215 +## **Key Statistics**##
1216 +
862 862  1. **General Observations:**
863 863   - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
864 864   - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
... ... @@ -870,9 +870,11 @@
870 870  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
871 871   - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
872 872   - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
873 -{{/expandable}}
874 874  
875 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1229 +----
1230 +
1231 +## **Findings**##
1232 +
876 876  1. **Primary Observations:**
877 877   - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
878 878   - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
... ... @@ -884,9 +884,11 @@
884 884  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
885 885   - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
886 886   - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
887 -{{/expandable}}
888 888  
889 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1245 +----
1246 +
1247 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1248 +
890 890  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
891 891   - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
892 892   - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
... ... @@ -898,34 +898,50 @@
898 898  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
899 899   - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
900 900   - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
901 -{{/expandable}}
902 902  
903 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1261 +----
1262 +
1263 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
904 904  - Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
905 905  - Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
906 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
907 -{{/expandable}}
1266 +- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
908 908  
909 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1268 +----
1269 +
1270 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1271 +
910 910  1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
911 911  2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
912 912  3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
913 -{{/expandable}}
914 914  
915 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
916 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
917 -{{/expandable}}
918 -{{/expandable}}
1276 +----
919 919  
920 -{{expandable summary="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
921 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
922 -**Date of Publication:** *2003*
923 -**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
924 -**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
925 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
926 -**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research*
1278 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1279 +This study examines **factors influencing the completion of drug treatment court programs**, identifying **employment, education, and race as key predictors**. The research underscores **systemic disparities in drug court outcomes**, emphasizing the need for **improved support systems for at-risk populations**.##
927 927  
928 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1281 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1282 +
1283 +----
1284 +
1285 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1286 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1287 +{{/expand}}
1288 +
1289 +
1290 +== Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys ==
1291 +
1292 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
1293 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1294 +**Date of Publication:** *2003*
1295 +**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
1296 +**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
1297 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
1298 +**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research* 
1299 +
1300 +----
1301 +
1302 +## **Key Statistics**##
1303 +
929 929  1. **General Observations:**
930 930   - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
931 931   - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
... ... @@ -937,62 +937,82 @@
937 937  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
938 938   - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
939 939   - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
940 -{{/expandable}}
941 941  
942 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1316 +----
1317 +
1318 +## **Findings**##
1319 +
943 943  1. **Primary Observations:**
944 944   - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
945 945   - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
946 946  
947 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1324 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
948 948   - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
949 949   - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
950 950  
951 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1328 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
952 952   - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
953 953   - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
954 -{{/expandable}}
955 955  
956 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
957 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1332 +----
1333 +
1334 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1335 +
1336 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
958 958   - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
959 959   - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
960 960  
961 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1340 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
962 962   - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
963 963   - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
964 964  
965 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1344 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
966 966   - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
967 967   - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
968 -{{/expandable}}
969 969  
970 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1348 +----
1349 +
1350 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
971 971  - Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
972 972  - Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
973 -- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.
974 -{{/expandable}}
1353 +- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.##
975 975  
976 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1355 +----
1356 +
1357 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1358 +
977 977  1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
978 978  2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
979 979  3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
980 -{{/expandable}}
981 981  
982 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
983 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]
984 -{{/expandable}}
985 -{{/expandable}}
1363 +----
986 986  
987 -{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
988 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
989 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
990 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
991 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
992 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
993 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
1365 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1366 +This study examines **cross-cultural biases in self-reported substance use surveys**, showing that **racial/ethnic minorities are more likely to underreport drug use** due to **social stigma, research distrust, and survey administration methods**. The findings highlight **critical issues in public health data collection and the need for improved survey design**.##
994 994  
995 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1368 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1369 +
1370 +----
1371 +
1372 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1373 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]##
1374 +{{/expand}}
1375 +
1376 +
1377 +== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1378 +
1379 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1380 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1381 +**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1382 +**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1383 +**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1384 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1385 +**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1386 +
1387 +----
1388 +
1389 +## **Key Statistics**##
1390 +
996 996  1. **General Observations:**
997 997   - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
998 998   - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
... ... @@ -1004,9 +1004,11 @@
1004 1004  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1005 1005   - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1006 1006   - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1007 -{{/expandable}}
1008 1008  
1009 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1403 +----
1404 +
1405 +## **Findings**##
1406 +
1010 1010  1. **Primary Observations:**
1011 1011   - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1012 1012   - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
... ... @@ -1018,9 +1018,11 @@
1018 1018  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1019 1019   - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1020 1020   - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1021 -{{/expandable}}
1022 1022  
1023 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1419 +----
1420 +
1421 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1422 +
1024 1024  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1025 1025   - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1026 1026   - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
... ... @@ -1032,36 +1032,117 @@
1032 1032  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1033 1033   - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1034 1034   - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1035 -{{/expandable}}
1036 1036  
1037 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1435 +----
1436 +
1437 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1038 1038  - Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1039 1039  - Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1040 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
1041 -{{/expandable}}
1440 +- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1042 1042  
1043 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1442 +----
1443 +
1444 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1445 +
1044 1044  1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1045 1045  2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1046 1046  3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1047 -{{/expandable}}
1048 1048  
1049 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1050 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
1051 -{{/expandable}}
1052 -{{/expandable}}
1450 +----
1053 1053  
1054 -{{expandable summary="
1452 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1453 +This study examines **factors influencing the completion of drug treatment court programs**, identifying **employment, education, and race as key predictors**. The research underscores **systemic disparities in drug court outcomes**, emphasizing the need for **improved support systems for at-risk populations**.##
1055 1055  
1056 -Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
1057 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1058 -**Date of Publication:** *2014*
1059 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1060 -**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1061 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
1062 -**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
1455 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1063 1063  
1064 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1457 +----
1458 +
1459 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1460 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1461 +{{/expand}}
1462 +
1463 +
1464 +== Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults ==
1465 +
1466 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"}}
1467 + Source: Addictive Behaviors
1468 +Date of Publication: 2016
1469 +Author(s): Andrea Hussong, Christy Capron, Gregory T. Smith, Jennifer L. Maggs
1470 +Title: "Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"
1471 +DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.02.030
1472 +Subject Matter: Substance Use, Mental Health, Adolescent Development
1473 +
1474 +Key Statistics
1475 +General Observations:
1476 +
1477 +Study examined cannabis use trends in young adults over time.
1478 +Found significant correlations between cannabis use and increased depressive symptoms.
1479 +Subgroup Analysis:
1480 +
1481 +Males exhibited higher rates of cannabis use, but females reported stronger mental health impacts.
1482 +Individuals with pre-existing anxiety disorders were more likely to report problematic cannabis use.
1483 +Other Significant Data Points:
1484 +
1485 +Frequent cannabis users showed a 23% higher likelihood of developing anxiety symptoms.
1486 +Co-occurring substance use (e.g., alcohol) exacerbated negative psychological effects.
1487 +Findings
1488 +Primary Observations:
1489 +
1490 +Cannabis use was linked to higher depressive and anxiety symptoms, particularly in frequent users.
1491 +Self-medication patterns emerged among those with pre-existing mental health conditions.
1492 +Subgroup Trends:
1493 +
1494 +Early cannabis initiation (before age 16) was associated with greater mental health risks.
1495 +College-aged users reported more impairments in daily functioning due to cannabis use.
1496 +Specific Case Analysis:
1497 +
1498 +Participants with a history of childhood trauma were twice as likely to develop problematic cannabis use.
1499 +Co-use of cannabis and alcohol significantly increased impulsivity scores in the study sample.
1500 +Critique and Observations
1501 +Strengths of the Study:
1502 +
1503 +Large, longitudinal dataset with a diverse sample of young adults.
1504 +Controlled for confounding variables like socioeconomic status and prior substance use.
1505 +Limitations of the Study:
1506 +
1507 +Self-reported cannabis use may introduce bias in reported frequency and effects.
1508 +Did not assess specific THC potency levels, which could influence mental health outcomes.
1509 +Suggestions for Improvement:
1510 +
1511 +Future research should investigate dose-dependent effects of cannabis on mental health.
1512 +Assess long-term psychological outcomes of early cannabis exposure.
1513 +Relevance to Subproject
1514 +Supports mental health risk assessment models related to substance use.
1515 +Highlights gender differences in substance-related psychological impacts.
1516 +Provides insight into self-medication behaviors among young adults.
1517 +Suggestions for Further Exploration
1518 +Investigate the long-term impact of cannabis use on neurodevelopment.
1519 +Examine the role of genetic predisposition in cannabis-related mental health risks.
1520 +Assess regional differences in cannabis use trends post-legalization.
1521 +Summary of Research Study
1522 +This study examines the relationship between cannabis use and mental health symptoms in young adults, focusing on depressive and anxiety-related outcomes. Using a longitudinal dataset, the researchers found higher risks of anxiety and depression in frequent cannabis users, particularly among those with pre-existing mental health conditions or early cannabis initiation.
1523 +
1524 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1525 +
1526 +📄 Download Full Study
1527 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.addbeh.2016.02.030.pdf]]
1528 +{{/expand}}
1529 +
1530 +
1531 +== Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time? ==
1532 +
1533 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
1534 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1535 +**Date of Publication:** *2014*
1536 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1537 +**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1538 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
1539 +**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics* 
1540 +
1541 +----
1542 +
1543 +## **Key Statistics**##
1544 +
1065 1065  1. **General Observations:**
1066 1066   - The study examines reaction time data from **13 age-matched studies** spanning **1884–2004**.
1067 1067   - Results suggest an estimated **decline of 13.35 IQ points** over this period.
... ... @@ -1073,9 +1073,11 @@
1073 1073  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1074 1074   - The estimated **dysgenic rate is 1.21 IQ points lost per decade**.
1075 1075   - Meta-regression analysis confirmed a **steady secular trend in slowing reaction time**.
1076 -{{/expandable}}
1077 1077  
1078 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1557 +----
1558 +
1559 +## **Findings**##
1560 +
1079 1079  1. **Primary Observations:**
1080 1080   - Supports the hypothesis of **intelligence decline due to genetic and environmental factors**.
1081 1081   - Reaction time, a **biomarker for cognitive ability**, has slowed significantly over time.
... ... @@ -1087,9 +1087,11 @@
1087 1087  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1088 1088   - Cross-national comparisons indicate a **global trend in slower reaction times**.
1089 1089   - Factors like **modern neurotoxin exposure** and **reduced selective pressure for intelligence** may contribute.
1090 -{{/expandable}}
1091 1091  
1092 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1573 +----
1574 +
1575 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1576 +
1093 1093  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1094 1094   - **Comprehensive meta-analysis** covering over a century of reaction time data.
1095 1095   - **Robust statistical corrections** for measurement variance between historical and modern studies.
... ... @@ -1101,177 +1101,226 @@
1101 1101  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1102 1102   - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
1103 1103   - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
1104 -{{/expandable}}
1105 1105  
1106 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1589 +----
1590 +
1591 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1107 1107  - Provides evidence for **long-term intelligence trends**, contributing to research on **cognitive evolution**.
1108 1108  - Aligns with broader discussions on **dysgenics, neurophysiology, and cognitive load**.
1109 -- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
1110 -{{/expandable}}
1594 +- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.##
1111 1111  
1112 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1596 +----
1597 +
1598 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1599 +
1113 1113  1. Investigate **genetic markers associated with reaction time** and intelligence decline.
1114 1114  2. Examine **regional variations in reaction time trends**.
1115 1115  3. Explore **cognitive resilience factors that counteract the decline**.
1116 -{{/expandable}}
1117 1117  
1118 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1119 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]
1120 -{{/expandable}}
1121 -{{/expandable}}
1604 +----
1122 1122  
1606 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1607 +This study examines **historical reaction time data** as a measure of **cognitive ability and intelligence decline**, analyzing data from **Western populations between 1884 and 2004**. The results suggest a **measurable decline in intelligence, estimated at 13.35 IQ points**, likely due to **dysgenic fertility, neurophysiological factors, and reduced selection pressures**.  ##
1608 +
1609 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1610 +
1611 +----
1612 +
1613 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1614 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]##
1615 +{{/expand}}
1616 +
1617 +
1123 1123  = Whiteness & White Guilt =
1124 1124  
1125 -{{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1620 +== Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports ==
1621 +
1622 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1126 1126  **Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
1127 1127  **Date of Publication:** *2019*
1128 1128  **Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
1129 1129  **Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
1130 1130  **DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
1131 -**Subject Matter:** *Critical Race Theory, Sports Sociology, Anti-White Institutional Framing*
1628 +**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sports, Higher Education, Institutional Racism* 
1132 1132  
1133 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1630 +----
1631 +
1632 +## **Key Statistics**##
1633 +
1134 1134  1. **General Observations:**
1135 - - Based on **47 athlete interviews**, cherry-picked from non-revenue Division I sports.
1136 - - The study claims **segregation”**, but presents no evidence of actual exclusion or policy bias — just demographic imbalance.
1635 + - Analyzed **47 college athlete narratives** to explore racial disparities in non-revenue sports.
1636 + - Found three interrelated themes: **racial segregation, racial innocence, and racial protection**.
1137 1137  
1138 1138  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1139 - - Attributes **White participation** in certain sports to "systemic racism", ignoring **self-selection, geography, and cultural affinity**.
1140 - - Claims White athletes are “protected” from race discussions — but never engages with **Black overrepresentation in revenue sports**.
1639 + - **Predominantly white sports programs** reinforce racial hierarchies in college athletics.
1640 + - **Recruitment policies favor white athletes** from affluent, suburban backgrounds.
1141 1141  
1142 1142  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1143 - - White athletes are portrayed as **ignorant of their privilege**, a claim drawn entirely from CRT frameworks rather than behavior or outcome.
1144 - - **No empirical data** is offered on policy, scholarship distribution, or team selection criteria.
1145 -{{/expandable}}
1643 + - White athletes are **socialized to remain unaware of racial privilege** in their athletic careers.
1644 + - Media and institutional narratives protect white athletes from discussions on race and systemic inequities.
1146 1146  
1147 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1646 +----
1647 +
1648 +## **Findings**##
1649 +
1148 1148  1. **Primary Observations:**
1149 - - Frames **normal demographic patterns** (e.g., majority-White rosters in tennis or rowing) as "institutional whiteness".
1150 - - **Ignores the structural dominance** of Black athletes in high-profile revenue sports like football and basketball.
1651 + - Colleges **actively recruit white athletes** from majority-white communities.
1652 + - Institutional policies **uphold whiteness** by failing to challenge racial biases in recruitment and team culture.
1151 1151  
1152 1152  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1153 - - White athletes are criticized for **lacking racial awareness**, reinforcing the moral framing of **Whiteness as inherently problematic**.
1154 - - **Cultural preference, individual merit, and athletic subculture** are all excluded from consideration.
1655 + - **White athletes show limited awareness** of their racial advantage in sports.
1656 + - **Black athletes are overrepresented** in revenue-generating sports but underrepresented in non-revenue teams.
1155 1155  
1156 1156  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1157 - - Argues that college sports **reinforce racial hierarchy** without ever showing how White athletes benefit more than Black athletes.
1158 - - Offers **no comparative analysis** of scholarships, graduation rates, or media portrayal by race.
1159 -{{/expandable}}
1659 + - Examines **how sports serve as a mechanism for maintaining racial privilege** in higher education.
1660 + - Discusses the **role of athletics in reinforcing systemic segregation and exclusion**.
1160 1160  
1161 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1662 +----
1663 +
1664 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1665 +
1162 1162  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1163 - - Useful as a clear example of **how CRT ideologues weaponize demography** to frame White majority spaces as inherently suspect.
1164 - - Shows how **academic literature systematically avoids symmetrical analysis** when outcomes favor White participants.
1667 + - **Comprehensive qualitative analysis** of race in college sports.
1668 + - Examines **institutional conditions** that sustain racial disparities in athletics.
1165 1165  
1166 1166  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1167 - - **Excludes revenue sports**, where Black athletes dominate by numbers, prestige, and compensation.
1168 - - **Fails to explain** how team composition emerges from voluntary participation, geography, or subcultural identity.
1169 - - Treats **racial imbalance as proof of racism**, bypassing merit, interest, or socioeconomic context.
1671 + - Focuses primarily on **Division I non-revenue sports**, limiting generalizability to other divisions.
1672 + - Lacks extensive **quantitative data on racial demographics** in college athletics.
1170 1170  
1171 1171  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1172 - - Include **White athlete perspectives** without pre-framing them as racially naive or complicit.
1173 - - **Compare all sports**, including those where Black athletes thrive and lead.
1174 - - Remove CRT framing and **evaluate outcomes empirically**, not ideologically.
1175 -{{/expandable}}
1675 + - Future research should **compare recruitment policies across different sports and divisions**.
1676 + - Investigate **how athletic scholarships contribute to racial inequities in higher education**.
1176 1176  
1177 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1178 -- Demonstrates how **DEI-aligned research reframes benign patterns** as oppressive when White majorities are involved.
1179 -- Illustrates **anti-White academic framing** in environments where no institutional barrier exists.
1180 -- Provides a concrete example of how **CRT avoids acknowledging Black dominance in elite spaces** (revenue athletics).
1181 -{{/expandable}}
1678 +----
1182 1182  
1183 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1184 -1. Investigate **racial self-sorting and cultural affiliation** in athletic participation.
1185 -2. Compare **media framing of White-majority vs. Black-majority sports**.
1186 -3. Study **how CRT narratives distort athletic merit and demographic outcomes**.
1187 -{{/expandable}}
1680 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1681 +- Provides evidence of **systemic racial biases** in college sports recruitment.
1682 +- Highlights **how institutional policies protect whiteness** in non-revenue athletics.
1683 +- Supports research on **diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in sports and education**.##
1188 1188  
1189 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1190 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]
1191 -{{/expandable}}
1192 -{{/expandable}}
1685 +----
1193 1193  
1687 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1194 1194  
1195 -{{expandable summary="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1689 +1. Investigate how **racial stereotypes influence college athlete recruitment**.
1690 +2. Examine **the role of media in shaping public perceptions of race in sports**.
1691 +3. Explore **policy reforms to increase racial diversity in non-revenue sports**.
1692 +
1693 +----
1694 +
1695 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1696 +This study explores how **racial segregation, innocence, and protection** sustain whiteness in college sports. By analyzing **47 athlete narratives**, the research reveals **how predominantly white sports programs recruit and retain white athletes** while shielding them from discussions on race. The findings highlight **institutional biases that maintain racial privilege in athletics**, offering critical insight into the **structural inequalities in higher education sports programs**.##
1697 +
1698 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1699 +
1700 +----
1701 +
1702 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1703 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]##
1704 +{{/expand}}
1705 +
1706 +
1707 +== Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations ==
1708 +
1709 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1196 1196  **Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1197 1197  **Date of Publication:** *2016*
1198 -**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axt, M. Norman Oliver*
1712 +**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axta, M. Norman Oliver*
1199 1199  **Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
1200 1200  **DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
1201 -**Subject Matter:** *Medical Ethics, Race in Medicine, Implicit Bias*
1715 +**Subject Matter:** *Health Disparities, Racial Bias, Medical Treatment* 
1202 1202  
1203 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1717 +----
1718 +
1719 +## **Key Statistics**##
1720 +
1204 1204  1. **General Observations:**
1205 - - Analyzed responses from **222 white medical students and residents**.
1206 - - Investigated belief in **false biological differences between Black and White people**.
1207 - - Measured how those beliefs affected **pain ratings and treatment recommendations**.
1722 + - Study analyzed **racial disparities in pain perception and treatment recommendations**.
1723 + - Found that **white laypeople and medical students endorsed false beliefs about biological differences** between Black and white individuals.
1208 1208  
1209 1209  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1210 - - **50% of participants endorsed at least one false belief** (e.g., Black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings).
1211 - - Those who endorsed false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients' pain**.
1726 + - **50% of medical students surveyed endorsed at least one false belief about biological differences**.
1727 + - Participants who held these false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients pain levels**.
1212 1212  
1213 1213  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1214 - - Bias was **most prominent among first-year students**, diminishing slightly with experience.
1215 - - Study used **hypothetical case vignettes**, not real patient data.
1216 -{{/expandable}}
1730 + - **Black patients were less likely to receive appropriate pain treatment** compared to white patients.
1731 + - The study confirmed that **historical misconceptions about racial differences still persist in modern medicine**.
1217 1217  
1218 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1733 +----
1734 +
1735 +## **Findings**##
1736 +
1219 1219  1. **Primary Observations:**
1220 - - False biological beliefs were **strongly correlated with racial disparity** in pain assessment.
1221 - - Endorsement of such beliefs led to **less appropriate treatment for Black patients** in fictional cases.
1738 + - False beliefs about biological racial differences **correlate with racial disparities in pain treatment**.
1739 + - Medical students and residents who endorsed these beliefs **showed greater racial bias in treatment recommendations**.
1222 1222  
1223 1223  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1224 - - Medical students with **no false beliefs showed no treatment bias**.
1225 - - No evidence was presented of **active discrimination** — bias appeared linked to **misinformation, not malice**.
1742 + - Physicians who **did not endorse these beliefs** showed **no racial bias** in treatment recommendations.
1743 + - Bias was **strongest among first-year medical students** and decreased slightly in later years of training.
1226 1226  
1227 1227  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1228 - - Fictional vignettes demonstrated that **misinformation about biology**, not systemic malice, led to unequal care.
1229 - - The study **did not show bias against White patients**, nor explore disparities affecting them.
1230 -{{/expandable}}
1746 + - Study participants **underestimated Black patients' pain and recommended less effective pain treatments**.
1747 + - The study suggests that **racial disparities in medical care stem, in part, from these enduring false beliefs**.
1231 1231  
1232 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1749 +----
1750 +
1751 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1752 +
1233 1233  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1234 - - Provides valuable insight into **how medical myths can affect judgment**.
1235 - - Demonstrates the importance of **clinical education and evidence-based practice**.
1754 + - **First empirical study to connect false racial beliefs with medical decision-making**.
1755 + - Utilizes a **large sample of medical students and residents** from diverse institutions.
1236 1236  
1237 1237  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1238 - - Fails to examine **bias affecting White patients**, including under-treatment of opioid dependence or mental health.
1239 - - Only focuses on one direction of disparity, treating **White patients as a control** rather than a population worthy of study.
1240 - - **Overemphasizes "racial bias"** narrative despite the findings being more about **ignorance than intent**.
1758 + - The study focuses on **Black vs. white disparities**, leaving other racial/ethnic groups unexplored.
1759 + - Participants' responses were based on **hypothetical medical cases, not real-world treatment decisions**.
1241 1241  
1242 1242  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1243 - - Include **comparison groups for all races**, not just a binary Black–White framework.
1244 - - Investigate **systemic neglect of poor rural White populations**, especially in Appalachia and the Midwest.
1245 - - Clarify the **distinction between false belief and racial animus**, which the study conflates under CRT framing.
1246 -{{/expandable}}
1762 + - Future research should examine **how these biases manifest in real clinical settings**.
1763 + - Investigate **whether medical training can correct these biases over time**.
1247 1247  
1248 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1249 -- Shows how **DEI-aligned narratives exploit limited findings** to vilify White professionals.
1250 -- Provides an example of a **legitimate medical education issue being repackaged as “racial bias.”**
1251 -- Highlights the **lack of reciprocal scrutiny** of how minorities may receive **preferential narrative framing** or **programmatic support**.
1252 -{{/expandable}}
1765 +----
1253 1253  
1254 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1255 -1. Study whether **DEI training reduces false beliefs** or simply **induces White guilt**.
1256 -2. Investigate **biases against White rural patients**, especially regarding **opioid or pain management stigma**.
1257 -3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**.
1258 -{{/expandable}}
1767 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1768 +- Highlights **racial disparities in healthcare**, specifically in pain assessment and treatment.
1769 +- Supports **research on implicit bias and its impact on medical outcomes**.
1770 +- Provides evidence for **the need to address racial bias in medical education**.##
1259 1259  
1260 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1261 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]
1262 -{{/expandable}}
1263 -{{/expandable}}
1772 +----
1264 1264  
1774 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1265 1265  
1266 -{{expandable summary="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1267 -**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1268 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
1269 -**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
1270 -**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
1271 -**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
1272 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors*
1776 +1. Investigate **interventions to reduce racial bias in medical decision-making**.
1777 +2. Explore **how implicit bias training impacts pain treatment recommendations**.
1778 +3. Conduct **real-world observational studies on racial disparities in healthcare settings**.
1273 1273  
1274 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1780 +----
1781 +
1782 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1783 +This study examines **racial bias in pain perception and treatment** among **white laypeople and medical professionals**, demonstrating that **false beliefs about biological differences contribute to disparities in pain management**. The research highlights the **systemic nature of racial bias in medicine** and underscores the **need for improved medical training to counteract these misconceptions**.##
1784 +
1785 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1786 +
1787 +----
1788 +
1789 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1790 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]##
1791 +{{/expand}}
1792 +
1793 +
1794 +== Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans ==
1795 +
1796 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1797 +**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1798 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
1799 +**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
1800 +**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
1801 +**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
1802 +**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors* 
1803 +
1804 +----
1805 +
1806 +## **Key Statistics**##
1807 +
1275 1275  1. **General Observations:**
1276 1276   - Mortality rates among **middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans (ages 45–54)** increased from 1999 to 2013.
1277 1277   - This reversal in mortality trends is unique to the U.S.; **no other wealthy country experienced a similar rise**.
... ... @@ -1283,9 +1283,11 @@
1283 1283  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1284 1284   - Rising mortality was driven primarily by **suicide, drug and alcohol poisoning, and chronic liver disease**.
1285 1285   - Midlife morbidity increased as well, with more reports of **poor health, pain, and mental distress**.
1286 -{{/expandable}}
1287 1287  
1288 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1820 +----
1821 +
1822 +## **Findings**##
1823 +
1289 1289  1. **Primary Observations:**
1290 1290   - The rise in mortality is attributed to **substance abuse, economic distress, and deteriorating mental health**.
1291 1291   - The increase in **suicides and opioid overdoses parallels broader socioeconomic decline**.
... ... @@ -1297,9 +1297,11 @@
1297 1297  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1298 1298   - **Educational attainment was a major predictor of mortality trends**, with better-educated individuals experiencing lower mortality rates.
1299 1299   - Mortality among **white Americans with a college degree continued to decline**, resembling trends in other wealthy nations.
1300 -{{/expandable}}
1301 1301  
1302 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1836 +----
1837 +
1838 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1839 +
1303 1303  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1304 1304   - **First major study to highlight rising midlife mortality among U.S. whites**.
1305 1305   - Uses **CDC and Census mortality data spanning over a decade**.
... ... @@ -1311,106 +1311,140 @@
1311 1311  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1312 1312   - Future studies should explore **how economic shifts, healthcare access, and mental health treatment contribute to these trends**.
1313 1313   - Further research on **racial and socioeconomic disparities in mortality trends** is needed.
1314 -{{/expandable}}
1315 1315  
1316 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1852 +----
1853 +
1854 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1317 1317  - Highlights **socioeconomic and racial disparities** in health outcomes.
1318 1318  - Supports research on **substance abuse and mental health crises in the U.S.**.
1319 -- Provides evidence for **the role of economic instability in public health trends**.
1320 -{{/expandable}}
1857 +- Provides evidence for **the role of economic instability in public health trends**.##
1321 1321  
1322 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1859 +----
1860 +
1861 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1862 +
1323 1323  1. Investigate **regional differences in rising midlife mortality**.
1324 1324  2. Examine the **impact of the opioid crisis on long-term health trends**.
1325 1325  3. Study **policy interventions aimed at reversing rising mortality rates**.
1326 -{{/expandable}}
1327 1327  
1328 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1329 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]
1330 -{{/expandable}}
1331 -{{/expandable}}
1867 +----
1332 1332  
1333 -{{expandable summary="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
1334 -**Source:** *Urban Studies*
1869 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1870 +This study documents a **reversal in mortality trends among middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans**, showing an increase in **suicide, drug overdoses, and alcohol-related deaths** from 1999 to 2013. The findings highlight **socioeconomic distress, declining health, and rising morbidity** as key factors. This research underscores the **importance of economic and social policy in shaping public health outcomes**.##
1871 +
1872 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1873 +
1874 +----
1875 +
1876 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1877 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]##
1878 +{{/expand}}
1879 +
1880 +
1881 +== Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities? ==
1882 +
1883 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
1884 +**Source:** *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies*
1335 1335  **Date of Publication:** *2023*
1336 -**Author(s):** *Nina Glick Schiller, Jens Schneider, Ayşe Çağlar*
1886 +**Author(s):** *Maurice Crul, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, Ismintha Waldring*
1337 1337  **Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
1338 -**DOI:** [10.1177/00420980231170057](https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231170057)
1339 -**Subject Matter:** *Urban Diversity, Migration, Identity Politics*
1888 +**DOI:** [10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548](https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548)
1889 +**Subject Matter:** *Urban Sociology, Migration Studies, Integration* 
1340 1340  
1341 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1891 +----
1892 +
1893 +## **Key Statistics**##
1894 +
1342 1342  1. **General Observations:**
1343 - - Based on interviews with **White European residents** in three major European cities.
1344 - - Focused on how **"non-migrants" (code for native Whites)** perceive and adapt to so-called “superdiversity”.
1896 + - Study examines the role of **people without migration background** in majority-minority cities.
1897 + - Analyzes **over 3,000 survey responses and 150 in-depth interviews** from six North-Western European cities.
1345 1345  
1346 1346  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1347 - - Interviewees were **overwhelmingly framed as obstacles** to multicultural harmony.
1348 - - Researchers **pathologized attachment to local culture or ethnic identity** as “resistance to change.
1900 + - Explores differences in **integration, social interactions, and perceptions of diversity**.
1901 + - Studies how **class, education, and neighborhood composition** affect adaptation to urban diversity.
1349 1349  
1350 1350  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1351 - - Claims that even positive civic participation by Whites may **“reinforce white privilege.”**
1352 - - Provides **no quantitative data** on actual neighborhood changes or crime statistics.
1353 -{{/expandable}}
1904 + - The study introduces the **Becoming a Minority (BaM) project**, a large-scale investigation of urban demographic shifts.
1905 + - **People without migration background perceive diversity differently**, with some embracing and others resisting change.
1354 1354  
1355 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1907 +----
1908 +
1909 +## **Findings**##
1910 +
1356 1356  1. **Primary Observations:**
1357 - - Argues that White natives, by simply existing and having a historical presence, **“shape urban inequality.”**
1358 - - Positions White cultural norms as inherently oppressive or exclusionary.
1912 + - The study **challenges traditional integration theories**, arguing that non-migrant groups also undergo adaptation processes.
1913 + - Some residents **struggle with demographic changes**, while others see diversity as an asset.
1359 1359  
1360 1360  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1361 - - Critiques White residents for seeking **cultural familiarity or demographic continuity.**
1362 - - Presents **White neighborhood cohesion** as a form of invisible boundary-making.
1916 + - Young, educated individuals in urban areas **are more open to cultural diversity**.
1917 + - Older and less mobile residents **report feelings of displacement and social isolation**.
1363 1363  
1364 1364  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1365 - - Interviews frame **normal concerns about safety, schooling, or housing** as coded “racism.”
1366 - - Treats **multicultural disruption** as inherently positive, and **resistance as bigotry.**
1367 -{{/expandable}}
1920 + - Examines how **people without migration background navigate majority-minority settings** in cities like Amsterdam and Vienna.
1921 + - Analyzes **whether former ethnic majority groups now perceive themselves as minorities**.
1368 1368  
1369 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1923 +----
1924 +
1925 +## **Critique and Observations**##
1926 +
1370 1370  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1371 - - Reveals how **social scientists increasingly treat Whiteness itself as a problem.**
1372 - - Offers an **unintentional case study in academic anti-White framing.**
1928 + - **Innovative approach** by examining the impact of migration on native populations.
1929 + - Uses **both qualitative and quantitative data** for robust analysis.
1373 1373  
1374 1374  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1375 - - **Completely ignores migrant-driven displacement** of working-class Whites.
1376 - - Makes **no attempt to understand White residents sympathetically**, only as barriers.
1377 - - Lacks analysis of **economic factors, crime, housing scarcity, or policy failures** contributing to discontent.
1932 + - Limited to **Western European urban settings**, missing perspectives from other global regions.
1933 + - Does not fully explore **policy interventions for fostering social cohesion**.
1378 1378  
1379 1379  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1380 - - Include **White perspectives without presuming guilt or fragility.**
1381 - - Disaggregate “White” by **class, locality, or experience** — not treat as a monolith.
1382 - - Balance cultural analysis with **hard demographic and economic data.**
1383 -{{/expandable}}
1936 + - Expand research to **other geographical contexts** to understand migration effects globally.
1937 + - Investigate **long-term trends in urban adaptation and community building**.
1384 1384  
1385 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1386 -- Demonstrates how **academic literature increasingly stigmatizes White presence** in urban life.
1387 -- Shows how **“diversity” is defined as the absence or silence of native populations.**
1388 -- Useful for exposing how **CRT and superdiversity discourse erase White communities' legitimacy.**
1389 -{{/expandable}}
1939 +----
1390 1390  
1391 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1392 -1. Study the **psychological impact of demographic displacement** on native European populations.
1393 -2. Examine **rising crime and social fragmentation** in “superdiverse” zones.
1394 -3. Analyze how **housing, schooling, and local economies** are impacted by mass migration.
1395 -{{/expandable}}
1941 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1942 +- Provides a **new perspective on urban integration**, shifting focus from migrants to native-born populations.
1943 +- Highlights the **role of social and economic power in shaping urban diversity outcomes**.
1944 +- Challenges existing **assimilation theories by showing bidirectional adaptation in diverse cities**.##
1396 1396  
1397 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1398 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1177_00420980231170057.pdf]]
1399 -{{/expandable}}
1400 -{{/expandable}}
1946 +----
1401 1401  
1948 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1402 1402  
1950 +1. Study how **local policies shape attitudes toward urban diversity**.
1951 +2. Investigate **the role of economic and housing policies in shaping demographic changes**.
1952 +3. Explore **how social networks influence perceptions of migration and diversity**.
1953 +
1954 +----
1955 +
1956 +## **Summary of Research Study**
1957 +This study examines how **people without migration background experience demographic change in majority-minority cities**. Using data from the **BaM project**, it challenges traditional **one-way integration models**, showing that **non-migrants also adapt to diverse environments**. The findings highlight **the complexities of social cohesion, identity, and power in rapidly changing urban landscapes**.##
1958 +
1959 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1960 +
1961 +----
1962 +
1963 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
1964 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]]##
1965 +{{/expand}}
1966 +
1967 +
1403 1403  = Media =
1404 1404  
1405 -{{expandable summary="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic"}}
1406 -**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
1407 -**Date of Publication:** *2021*
1408 -**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
1409 -**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
1410 -**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
1411 -**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies*
1412 1412  
1413 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1971 +== Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic ==
1972 +
1973 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"}}
1974 +**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
1975 +**Date of Publication:** *2021*
1976 +**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
1977 +**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
1978 +**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
1979 +**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies* 
1980 +
1981 +----
1982 +
1983 +## **Key Statistics**##
1984 +
1414 1414  1. **General Observations:**
1415 1415   - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
1416 1416   - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
... ... @@ -1422,9 +1422,11 @@
1422 1422  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1423 1423   - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
1424 1424   - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
1425 -{{/expandable}}
1426 1426  
1427 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1997 +----
1998 +
1999 +## **Findings**##
2000 +
1428 1428  1. **Primary Observations:**
1429 1429   - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
1430 1430   - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
... ... @@ -1436,9 +1436,11 @@
1436 1436  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1437 1437   - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
1438 1438   - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
1439 -{{/expandable}}
1440 1440  
1441 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
2013 +----
2014 +
2015 +## **Critique and Observations**##
2016 +
1442 1442  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1443 1443   - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
1444 1444   - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
... ... @@ -1450,34 +1450,48 @@
1450 1450  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1451 1451   - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
1452 1452   - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
1453 -{{/expandable}}
1454 1454  
1455 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
2029 +----
2030 +
2031 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1456 1456  - Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
1457 1457  - Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
1458 -- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.
1459 -{{/expandable}}
2034 +- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.##
1460 1460  
1461 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
2036 +----
2037 +
2038 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2039 +
1462 1462  1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
1463 1463  2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
1464 1464  3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
1465 -{{/expandable}}
1466 1466  
1467 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1468 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]
1469 -{{/expandable}}
1470 -{{/expandable}}
2044 +----
1471 1471  
1472 -{{expandable summary="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
1473 -**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
1474 -**Date of Publication:** *2007*
1475 -**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
1476 -**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
1477 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
1478 -**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence*
2046 +## **Summary of Research Study**
2047 +This study examines **how online communication intensifies intergroup conflict**, using a dataset of **500,000+ social media interactions**. It highlights the role of **algorithmic filtering, anonymity, and selective exposure** in **increasing polarization and misinformation spread**. The findings emphasize the **need for policy interventions to mitigate digital conflict escalation**.##
1479 1479  
1480 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
2049 +----
2050 +
2051 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
2052 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]##
2053 +{{/expand}}
2054 +
2055 +
2056 +== Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions ==
2057 +
2058 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
2059 +**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
2060 +**Date of Publication:** *2007*
2061 +**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
2062 +**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
2063 +**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
2064 +**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence* 
2065 +
2066 +----
2067 +
2068 +## **Key Statistics**##
2069 +
1481 1481  1. **General Observations:**
1482 1482   - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
1483 1483   - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
... ... @@ -1489,9 +1489,11 @@
1489 1489  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1490 1490   - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
1491 1491   - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
1492 -{{/expandable}}
1493 1493  
1494 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
2082 +----
2083 +
2084 +## **Findings**##
2085 +
1495 1495  1. **Primary Observations:**
1496 1496   - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
1497 1497   - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
... ... @@ -1503,9 +1503,11 @@
1503 1503  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1504 1504   - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
1505 1505   - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
1506 -{{/expandable}}
1507 1507  
1508 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
2098 +----
2099 +
2100 +## **Critique and Observations**##
2101 +
1509 1509  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1510 1510   - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
1511 1511   - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
... ... @@ -1517,34 +1517,48 @@
1517 1517  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1518 1518   - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
1519 1519   - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
1520 -{{/expandable}}
1521 1521  
1522 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
2114 +----
2115 +
2116 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1523 1523  - Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
1524 1524  - Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
1525 -- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.
1526 -{{/expandable}}
2119 +- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.##
1527 1527  
1528 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
2121 +----
2122 +
2123 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2124 +
1529 1529  1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
1530 1530  2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
1531 1531  3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
1532 -{{/expandable}}
1533 1533  
1534 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1535 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]
1536 -{{/expandable}}
1537 -{{/expandable}}
2129 +----
1538 1538  
1539 -{{expandable summary="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
1540 -**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1541 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
1542 -**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
1543 -**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
1544 -**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
1545 -**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion*
2131 +## **Summary of Research Study**
2132 +This study examines **how media framing influences public attitudes on same-sex marriage and civil unions**, analyzing **news coverage from 2004 to 2011**. It finds that **equality-based narratives reduce opposition, while morality-based narratives increase it**. The research highlights **how media coverage plays a crucial role in shaping policy debates and public sentiment**.##
1546 1546  
1547 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
2134 +----
2135 +
2136 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
2137 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]##
2138 +{{/expand}}
2139 +
2140 +
2141 +== Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion ==
2142 +
2143 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
2144 +**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
2145 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
2146 +**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
2147 +**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
2148 +**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
2149 +**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion* 
2150 +
2151 +----
2152 +
2153 +## **Key Statistics**##
2154 +
1548 1548  1. **General Observations:**
1549 1549   - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
1550 1550   - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
... ... @@ -1556,9 +1556,11 @@
1556 1556  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1557 1557   - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
1558 1558   - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
1559 -{{/expandable}}
1560 1560  
1561 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
2167 +----
2168 +
2169 +## **Findings**##
2170 +
1562 1562  1. **Primary Observations:**
1563 1563   - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
1564 1564   - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
... ... @@ -1570,9 +1570,11 @@
1570 1570  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1571 1571   - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
1572 1572   - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
1573 -{{/expandable}}
1574 1574  
1575 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
2183 +----
2184 +
2185 +## **Critique and Observations**##
2186 +
1576 1576  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1577 1577   - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
1578 1578   - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
... ... @@ -1584,189 +1584,29 @@
1584 1584  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1585 1585   - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
1586 1586   - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
1587 -{{/expandable}}
1588 1588  
1589 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
2199 +----
2200 +
2201 +## **Relevance to Subproject**
1590 1590  - Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
1591 1591  - Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
1592 -- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.
1593 -{{/expandable}}
2204 +- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.##
1594 1594  
1595 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
2206 +----
2207 +
2208 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2209 +
1596 1596  1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
1597 1597  2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
1598 1598  3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
1599 -{{/expandable}}
1600 1600  
1601 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1602 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]
1603 -{{/expandable}}
1604 -{{/expandable}}
2214 +----
1605 1605  
1606 -{{expandable summary="Study: White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years"}}
1607 -Source: Journal of Advertising Research
1608 -Date of Publication: 2022
1609 -Author(s): Peter M. Lenk, Eric T. Bradlow, Randolph E. Bucklin, Sungeun (Clara) Kim
1610 -Title: "White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years: A Meta-Analysis"
1611 -DOI: 10.2501/JAR-2022-028
1612 -Subject Matter: Advertising Trends, Racial Representation, Cultural Shifts
2216 +## **Summary of Research Study**
2217 +This study analyzes **how digital media influences political persuasion**, using **12 experimental studies**. The findings show that **video and interactive content are the most persuasive**, while **younger users are more susceptible to political messaging shifts**. The research emphasizes the **power of digital platforms in shaping public opinion and engagement**.##
1613 1613  
1614 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
2219 +----
1615 1615  
1616 -**General Observations:**
1617 -
1618 -Meta-analysis of 74 studies conducted between 1955 and 2020 on racial representation in advertising.
1619 -
1620 -Sample included mostly White U.S. participants, with consistent tracking of their preferences.
1621 -
1622 -**Subgroup Analysis:**
1623 -
1624 -Found a steady increase in positive responses toward Black models/actors in ads by White viewers.
1625 -
1626 -Recent decades show equal or greater preference for Black faces compared to White ones.
1627 -
1628 -**Other Significant Data Points:**
1629 -
1630 -Study frames this shift as a positive move toward diversity, ignoring implications for displaced White cultural representation.
1631 -
1632 -No equivalent data was collected on Black or Hispanic attitudes toward White representation.
1633 -{{/expandable}}
1634 -
1635 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1636 -
1637 -**Primary Observations:**
1638 -
1639 -White Americans have become increasingly receptive or favorable toward Black figures in advertising, even over timeframes of widespread cultural change.
1640 -
1641 -These preferences held across product types, media formats, and ad genres.
1642 -
1643 -**Subgroup Trends:**
1644 -
1645 -Studies from the 1960s–1980s showed preference for in-group racial representation, which has dropped sharply for Whites in recent decades.
1646 -
1647 -The largest positive attitudinal shift occurred between 1995–2020, coinciding with major DEI and cultural programming trends.
1648 -
1649 -**Specific Case Analysis:**
1650 -
1651 -The authors position this as “progress,” but offer no critical reflection on the effects of displacing White imagery from national advertising narratives.
1652 -
1653 -Completely omits consumer preference studies in countries outside the U.S., especially in more homogeneous nations.
1654 -{{/expandable}}
1655 -
1656 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1657 -
1658 -**Strengths of the Study:**
1659 -
1660 -Large-scale dataset across decades provides a clear empirical view of long-term trends.
1661 -
1662 -Useful as a benchmark of how White American preferences have evolved under sociocultural pressure.
1663 -
1664 -**Limitations of the Study:**
1665 -
1666 -Fails to ask whether increasing diversity is consumer-driven or culturally imposed.
1667 -
1668 -Ignores the potential alienation or displacement of White cultural identity from mainstream advertising.
1669 -
1670 -Assumes “diverse equals better” without testing economic or emotional impact of those shifts.
1671 -
1672 -**Suggestions for Improvement:**
1673 -
1674 -Include non-White viewer reactions to all-White or traditional American imagery for balance.
1675 -
1676 -Test whether consumers notice racial proportions or experience fatigue from overcorrection.
1677 -
1678 -Explore regional or class-based variance among White viewers, not just aggregate averages.
1679 -{{/expandable}}
1680 -
1681 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1682 -
1683 -Demonstrates how White cultural imagery has been steadily replaced or downplayed in the public sphere.
1684 -
1685 -Useful for showing how marketing professionals and researchers frame White displacement as “progress.”
1686 -
1687 -Empirically supports the decline of White in-group preference — possibly due to reeducation, guilt framing, or media saturation.
1688 -{{/expandable}}
1689 -
1690 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1691 -
1692 -Study how overrepresentation of minorities in advertising compares to actual demographics.
1693 -
1694 -Examine whether consumers feel represented or alienated by identity-based marketing.
1695 -
1696 -Investigate the psychological and cultural impact of long-term demographic displacement in national advertising.
1697 -{{/expandable}}
1698 -
1699 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1700 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.2501_JAR-2022-028.pdf]]
1701 -{{/expandable}}
1702 -{{/expandable}}
1703 -
1704 -{{expandable summary="Study: Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"}}
1705 -**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1706 -**Date of Publication:** *2020*
1707 -**Author(s):** *John A. Banas, Lauren L. Miller, David A. Braddock, Sun Kyong Lee*
1708 -**Title:** *"Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"*
1709 -**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqz032](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz032)
1710 -**Subject Matter:** *Media Psychology, Prejudice Reduction, Intergroup Relations*
1711 -
1712 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1713 -1. **General Observations:**
1714 - - Aggregated **71 studies involving 27,000+ participants**.
1715 - - Focused on how **media portrayals of out-groups (primarily minorities)** affect attitudes among dominant in-groups (i.e., Whites).
1716 -
1717 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1718 - - **Fictional entertainment** had stronger effects than news.
1719 - - **Positive portrayals of minorities** correlated with significant reductions in “prejudice”.
1720 -
1721 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1722 - - Effects were stronger when minority characters were portrayed as **warm, competent, and morally relatable**.
1723 - - Contact was more effective when it mimicked **face-to-face friendship narratives**.
1724 -{{/expandable}}
1725 -
1726 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1727 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1728 - - Media is a **powerful tool for shaping racial attitudes**, capable of reducing “prejudice” without real-world contact.
1729 - - **Repeated exposure** to positive portrayals of minorities led to increased acceptance and reduced negative bias.
1730 -
1731 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1732 - - **White participants** were the primary targets of reconditioning.
1733 - - Minority participants were not studied in terms of **prejudice against Whites**.
1734 -
1735 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1736 - - “Parasocial” relationships with minority characters (TV/movie exposure) had comparable psychological effects to actual friendships.
1737 - - Media framing functioned as a **top-down mechanism for social engineering**, not just passive reflection of society.
1738 -{{/expandable}}
1739 -
1740 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1741 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1742 - - High-quality quantitative meta-analysis with clear design and robust statistical handling.
1743 - - Acknowledges **media’s ability to alter long-held social beliefs** without physical contact.
1744 -
1745 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1746 - - Only defines “prejudice” as **negative attitudes from Whites toward minorities** — no exploration of anti-White media narratives or bias.
1747 - - Ignores the effects of **overexposure to minority portrayals** on cultural alienation or backlash.
1748 - - Assumes **assimilation into DEI norms is inherently positive**, and any reluctance to accept them is “prejudice”.
1749 -
1750 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1751 - - Study reciprocal dynamics — how **minority media portrayals impact attitudes toward Whites**.
1752 - - Investigate whether constant valorization of minorities leads to **resentment, guilt, or political disengagement** among White viewers.
1753 - - Analyze **media saturation effects**, especially in multicultural propaganda and corporate DEI messaging.
1754 -{{/expandable}}
1755 -
1756 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1757 -- Provides **direct evidence** that media is being used to **reshape racial attitudes** through emotional, parasocial contact.
1758 -- Reinforces concern that **“tolerance” is engineered via asymmetric emotional exposure**, not organic consensus.
1759 -- Useful for documenting how **Whiteness is often treated as a bias to be corrected**, not a culture to be respected.
1760 -{{/expandable}}
1761 -
1762 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1763 -1. Investigate **reverse parasocial effects** — how negative portrayals of White men affect self-perception and mental health.
1764 -2. Study how **mass entertainment normalizes demographic shifts** and silences native concerns.
1765 -3. Compare effects of **Western vs. non-Western media systems** in promoting diversity narratives.
1766 -{{/expandable}}
1767 -
1768 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1769 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf]]
1770 -{{/expandable}}
1771 -{{/expandable}}
1772 -
2221 +## **📄 Download Full Study**
2222 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]##
2223 +{{/expand}}
lenk-et-al-white-americans-preference-for-black-people-in-advertising-has-increased-in-the-past-66-years-a-meta-analysis.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2.1 MB
Content