... |
... |
@@ -22,8 +22,9 @@ |
22 |
22 |
|
23 |
23 |
= Genetics = |
24 |
24 |
|
25 |
|
-{{expandable summary=" |
|
25 |
+{{expandable summary=" |
26 |
26 |
|
|
27 |
+ |
27 |
27 |
Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}} |
28 |
28 |
**Source:** *Nature* |
29 |
29 |
**Date of Publication:** *2009* |
... |
... |
@@ -1051,8 +1051,9 @@ |
1051 |
1051 |
{{/expandable}} |
1052 |
1052 |
{{/expandable}} |
1053 |
1053 |
|
1054 |
|
-{{expandable summary=" |
|
1055 |
+{{expandable summary=" |
1055 |
1055 |
|
|
1057 |
+ |
1056 |
1056 |
Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}} |
1057 |
1057 |
**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)* |
1058 |
1058 |
**Date of Publication:** *2014* |
... |
... |
@@ -1122,138 +1122,66 @@ |
1122 |
1122 |
|
1123 |
1123 |
= Whiteness & White Guilt = |
1124 |
1124 |
|
1125 |
|
-{{expandable summary="Study: Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"}} |
1126 |
|
-**Source:** *Psychological Science* |
1127 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2014* |
1128 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Caleb E. Lai, Anthony G. Greenwald, et al.* |
1129 |
|
-**Title:** *"Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"* |
1130 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1177/0956797614535812](https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614535812) |
1131 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Implicit Bias, Racial Psychology, Psychological Conditioning* |
1132 |
|
- |
1133 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}} |
1134 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1135 |
|
- - Tested **17 different interventions** across **6,321 participants**, all measured via IAT (Implicit Association Test). |
1136 |
|
- - Focused exclusively on reducing **pro-White, anti-Black preferences** — no reciprocal testing on anti-White bias. |
1137 |
|
- |
1138 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1139 |
|
- - Educational and exposure-based interventions (e.g., multiculturalism, egalitarian messaging) failed to reduce bias significantly. |
1140 |
|
- - Most effective short-term results came from **trauma-based or emotionally coercive interventions**. |
1141 |
|
- |
1142 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1143 |
|
- - The **"Black hero" intervention**, where participants imagined being violently attacked by a White man and rescued by a Black man, was among the most effective. |
1144 |
|
- - Effects of even the most extreme interventions **dissipated within 24–72 hours**, with no long-term behavioral change. |
1145 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1146 |
|
- |
1147 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}} |
1148 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1149 |
|
- - The interventions that produced the most dramatic IAT changes used **emotionally graphic narratives** depicting Whites as violent aggressors and Blacks as saviors. |
1150 |
|
- - Merely showing positive Black images or promoting egalitarian values had minimal effect on implicit associations. |
1151 |
|
- |
1152 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1153 |
|
- - In the **"Black hero" condition**, participants were asked to imagine being physically beaten by a White person and then rescued by a Black person — an intentionally vivid and disturbing scenario. |
1154 |
|
- - The **"Black victim" intervention** relied on emotionally shocking imagery of anti-Black violence (e.g., lynching) to induce guilt and disrupt positive associations with Whiteness. |
1155 |
|
- |
1156 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1157 |
|
- - None of the scenarios reversed the framing (e.g., Black aggressor/White victim), confirming the ideological goal was **to degrade White identity**, not merely reduce bias. |
1158 |
|
- - The study was **cited by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)** to justify DEI-aligned policy recommendations. |
1159 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1160 |
|
- |
1161 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}} |
1162 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1163 |
|
- - Large sample size and systematic comparison across diverse intervention types. |
1164 |
|
- - Clearly shows that **implicit preference is resilient** and not easily changed by education or exposure alone. |
1165 |
|
- |
1166 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1167 |
|
- - The most “effective” methods **relied on emotional manipulation, not persuasion or evidence**. |
1168 |
|
- - Assumes **natural in-group preference is pathological** when expressed by White subjects but makes no effort to test other groups. |
1169 |
|
- - **Zero attention to pro-Black or anti-White bias** — only White attitudes are pathologized. |
1170 |
|
- |
1171 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1172 |
|
- - Test the **psychological harm** and ethical implications of using graphic racial trauma to coerce attitude change. |
1173 |
|
- - Include interventions that **strengthen ingroup empathy** without demonizing other groups. |
1174 |
|
- - Disaggregate bias by **class, region, and individual experience**, rather than racially reducing all bias to “Whiteness.” |
1175 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1176 |
|
- |
1177 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}} |
1178 |
|
-- Provides direct evidence that **DEI-style implicit bias training** is based on emotionally abusive and **anti-White psychological framing**. |
1179 |
|
-- Shows how **social science selectively targets Whites for attitude correction**, often using fictionalized racial trauma scenarios. |
1180 |
|
-- Demonstrates that even extreme interventions **fail to achieve long-term change**, undermining the scientific justification for such policies. |
1181 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1182 |
|
- |
1183 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}} |
1184 |
|
-1. Investigate **implicit bias training outcomes** in real-world institutional settings. |
1185 |
|
-2. Study **the ethical limits of psychological reprogramming** in DEI policies. |
1186 |
|
-3. Explore **natural ingroup preference across all races** using morally neutral frameworks. |
1187 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1188 |
|
- |
1189 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}} |
1190 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:lai2014.pdf]] |
1191 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1192 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1193 |
|
- |
1194 |
|
- |
1195 |
1195 |
{{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}} |
1196 |
|
-**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education* |
1197 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2019* |
1198 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum* |
1199 |
|
-**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"* |
1200 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140) |
1201 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Critical Race Theory, Sports Sociology, Anti-White Institutional Framing* |
|
1128 |
+**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education* |
|
1129 |
+**Date of Publication:** *2019* |
|
1130 |
+**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum* |
|
1131 |
+**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"* |
|
1132 |
+**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140) |
|
1133 |
+**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sports, Higher Education, Institutional Racism* |
1202 |
1202 |
|
1203 |
1203 |
{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}} |
1204 |
1204 |
1. **General Observations:** |
1205 |
|
- - Based on **47 athlete interviews**, cherry-picked from non-revenue Division I sports. |
1206 |
|
- - The study claims **“segregation”**, but presents no evidence of actual exclusion or policy bias — just demographic imbalance. |
|
1137 |
+ - Analyzed **47 college athlete narratives** to explore racial disparities in non-revenue sports. |
|
1138 |
+ - Found three interrelated themes: **racial segregation, racial innocence, and racial protection**. |
1207 |
1207 |
|
1208 |
1208 |
2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1209 |
|
- - Attributes **White participation** in certain sports to "systemic racism", ignoring **self-selection, geography, and cultural affinity**. |
1210 |
|
- - Claims White athletes are “protected” from race discussions — but never engages with **Black overrepresentation in revenue sports**. |
|
1141 |
+ - **Predominantly white sports programs** reinforce racial hierarchies in college athletics. |
|
1142 |
+ - **Recruitment policies favor white athletes** from affluent, suburban backgrounds. |
1211 |
1211 |
|
1212 |
1212 |
3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1213 |
|
- - White athletes are portrayed as **ignorant of their privilege**, a claim drawn entirely from CRT frameworks rather than behavior or outcome. |
1214 |
|
- - **No empirical data** is offered on policy, scholarship distribution, or team selection criteria. |
|
1145 |
+ - White athletes are **socialized to remain unaware of racial privilege** in their athletic careers. |
|
1146 |
+ - Media and institutional narratives protect white athletes from discussions on race and systemic inequities. |
1215 |
1215 |
{{/expandable}} |
1216 |
1216 |
|
1217 |
1217 |
{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}} |
1218 |
1218 |
1. **Primary Observations:** |
1219 |
|
- - Frames **normal demographic patterns** (e.g., majority-White rosters in tennis or rowing) as "institutional whiteness". |
1220 |
|
- - **Ignores the structural dominance** of Black athletes in high-profile revenue sports like football and basketball. |
|
1151 |
+ - Colleges **actively recruit white athletes** from majority-white communities. |
|
1152 |
+ - Institutional policies **uphold whiteness** by failing to challenge racial biases in recruitment and team culture. |
1221 |
1221 |
|
1222 |
1222 |
2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1223 |
|
- - White athletes are criticized for **lacking racial awareness**, reinforcing the moral framing of **Whiteness as inherently problematic**. |
1224 |
|
- - **Cultural preference, individual merit, and athletic subculture** are all excluded from consideration. |
|
1155 |
+ - **White athletes show limited awareness** of their racial advantage in sports. |
|
1156 |
+ - **Black athletes are overrepresented** in revenue-generating sports but underrepresented in non-revenue teams. |
1225 |
1225 |
|
1226 |
1226 |
3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1227 |
|
- - Argues that college sports **reinforce racial hierarchy** without ever showing how White athletes benefit more than Black athletes. |
1228 |
|
- - Offers **no comparative analysis** of scholarships, graduation rates, or media portrayal by race. |
|
1159 |
+ - Examines **how sports serve as a mechanism for maintaining racial privilege** in higher education. |
|
1160 |
+ - Discusses the **role of athletics in reinforcing systemic segregation and exclusion**. |
1229 |
1229 |
{{/expandable}} |
1230 |
1230 |
|
1231 |
1231 |
{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}} |
1232 |
1232 |
1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1233 |
|
- - Useful as a clear example of **how CRT ideologues weaponize demography** to frame White majority spaces as inherently suspect. |
1234 |
|
- - Shows how **academic literature systematically avoids symmetrical analysis** when outcomes favor White participants. |
|
1165 |
+ - **Comprehensive qualitative analysis** of race in college sports. |
|
1166 |
+ - Examines **institutional conditions** that sustain racial disparities in athletics. |
1235 |
1235 |
|
1236 |
1236 |
2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1237 |
|
- - **Excludes revenue sports**, where Black athletes dominate by numbers, prestige, and compensation. |
1238 |
|
- - **Fails to explain** how team composition emerges from voluntary participation, geography, or subcultural identity. |
1239 |
|
- - Treats **racial imbalance as proof of racism**, bypassing merit, interest, or socioeconomic context. |
|
1169 |
+ - Focuses primarily on **Division I non-revenue sports**, limiting generalizability to other divisions. |
|
1170 |
+ - Lacks extensive **quantitative data on racial demographics** in college athletics. |
1240 |
1240 |
|
1241 |
1241 |
3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1242 |
|
- - Include **White athlete perspectives** without pre-framing them as racially naive or complicit. |
1243 |
|
- - **Compare all sports**, including those where Black athletes thrive and lead. |
1244 |
|
- - Remove CRT framing and **evaluate outcomes empirically**, not ideologically. |
|
1173 |
+ - Future research should **compare recruitment policies across different sports and divisions**. |
|
1174 |
+ - Investigate **how athletic scholarships contribute to racial inequities in higher education**. |
1245 |
1245 |
{{/expandable}} |
1246 |
1246 |
|
1247 |
1247 |
{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}} |
1248 |
|
-- Demonstrates how **DEI-aligned research reframes benign patterns** as oppressive when White majorities are involved. |
1249 |
|
-- Illustrates **anti-White academic framing** in environments where no institutional barrier exists. |
1250 |
|
-- Provides a concrete example of how **CRT avoids acknowledging Black dominance in elite spaces** (revenue athletics). |
|
1178 |
+- Provides evidence of **systemic racial biases** in college sports recruitment. |
|
1179 |
+- Highlights **how institutional policies protect whiteness** in non-revenue athletics. |
|
1180 |
+- Supports research on **diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in sports and education**. |
1251 |
1251 |
{{/expandable}} |
1252 |
1252 |
|
1253 |
1253 |
{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}} |
1254 |
|
-1. Investigate **racial self-sorting and cultural affiliation** in athletic participation. |
1255 |
|
-2. Compare **media framing of White-majority vs. Black-majority sports**. |
1256 |
|
-3. Study **how CRT narratives distort athletic merit and demographic outcomes**. |
|
1184 |
+1. Investigate how **racial stereotypes influence college athlete recruitment**. |
|
1185 |
+2. Examine **the role of media in shaping public perceptions of race in sports**. |
|
1186 |
+3. Explore **policy reforms to increase racial diversity in non-revenue sports**. |
1257 |
1257 |
{{/expandable}} |
1258 |
1258 |
|
1259 |
1259 |
{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}} |
... |
... |
@@ -1261,70 +1261,66 @@ |
1261 |
1261 |
{{/expandable}} |
1262 |
1262 |
{{/expandable}} |
1263 |
1263 |
|
1264 |
|
- |
1265 |
1265 |
{{expandable summary="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}} |
1266 |
|
-**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)* |
1267 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2016* |
1268 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axt, M. Norman Oliver* |
|
1195 |
+**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)* |
|
1196 |
+**Date of Publication:** *2016* |
|
1197 |
+**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axta, M. Norman Oliver* |
1269 |
1269 |
**Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"* |
1270 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113) |
1271 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Medical Ethics, Race in Medicine, Implicit Bias* |
|
1199 |
+**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113) |
|
1200 |
+**Subject Matter:** *Health Disparities, Racial Bias, Medical Treatment* |
1272 |
1272 |
|
1273 |
1273 |
{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}} |
1274 |
1274 |
1. **General Observations:** |
1275 |
|
- - Analyzed responses from **222 white medical students and residents**. |
1276 |
|
- - Investigated belief in **false biological differences between Black and White people**. |
1277 |
|
- - Measured how those beliefs affected **pain ratings and treatment recommendations**. |
|
1204 |
+ - Study analyzed **racial disparities in pain perception and treatment recommendations**. |
|
1205 |
+ - Found that **white laypeople and medical students endorsed false beliefs about biological differences** between Black and white individuals. |
1278 |
1278 |
|
1279 |
1279 |
2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1280 |
|
- - **50% of participants endorsed at least one false belief** (e.g., Black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings). |
1281 |
|
- - Those who endorsed false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients' pain**. |
|
1208 |
+ - **50% of medical students surveyed endorsed at least one false belief about biological differences**. |
|
1209 |
+ - Participants who held these false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients’ pain levels**. |
1282 |
1282 |
|
1283 |
1283 |
3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1284 |
|
- - Bias was **most prominent among first-year students**, diminishing slightly with experience. |
1285 |
|
- - Study used **hypothetical case vignettes**, not real patient data. |
|
1212 |
+ - **Black patients were less likely to receive appropriate pain treatment** compared to white patients. |
|
1213 |
+ - The study confirmed that **historical misconceptions about racial differences still persist in modern medicine**. |
1286 |
1286 |
{{/expandable}} |
1287 |
1287 |
|
1288 |
1288 |
{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}} |
1289 |
1289 |
1. **Primary Observations:** |
1290 |
|
- - False biological beliefs were **strongly correlated with racial disparity** in pain assessment. |
1291 |
|
- - Endorsement of such beliefs led to **less appropriate treatment for Black patients** in fictional cases. |
|
1218 |
+ - False beliefs about biological racial differences **correlate with racial disparities in pain treatment**. |
|
1219 |
+ - Medical students and residents who endorsed these beliefs **showed greater racial bias in treatment recommendations**. |
1292 |
1292 |
|
1293 |
1293 |
2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1294 |
|
- - Medical students with **no false beliefs showed no treatment bias**. |
1295 |
|
- - No evidence was presented of **active discrimination** — bias appeared linked to **misinformation, not malice**. |
|
1222 |
+ - Physicians who **did not endorse these beliefs** showed **no racial bias** in treatment recommendations. |
|
1223 |
+ - Bias was **strongest among first-year medical students** and decreased slightly in later years of training. |
1296 |
1296 |
|
1297 |
1297 |
3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1298 |
|
- - Fictional vignettes demonstrated that **misinformation about biology**, not systemic malice, led to unequal care. |
1299 |
|
- - The study **did not show bias against White patients**, nor explore disparities affecting them. |
|
1226 |
+ - Study participants **underestimated Black patients' pain and recommended less effective pain treatments**. |
|
1227 |
+ - The study suggests that **racial disparities in medical care stem, in part, from these enduring false beliefs**. |
1300 |
1300 |
{{/expandable}} |
1301 |
1301 |
|
1302 |
1302 |
{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}} |
1303 |
1303 |
1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1304 |
|
- - Provides valuable insight into **how medical myths can affect judgment**. |
1305 |
|
- - Demonstrates the importance of **clinical education and evidence-based practice**. |
|
1232 |
+ - **First empirical study to connect false racial beliefs with medical decision-making**. |
|
1233 |
+ - Utilizes a **large sample of medical students and residents** from diverse institutions. |
1306 |
1306 |
|
1307 |
1307 |
2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1308 |
|
- - Fails to examine **bias affecting White patients**, including under-treatment of opioid dependence or mental health. |
1309 |
|
- - Only focuses on one direction of disparity, treating **White patients as a control** rather than a population worthy of study. |
1310 |
|
- - **Overemphasizes "racial bias"** narrative despite the findings being more about **ignorance than intent**. |
|
1236 |
+ - The study focuses on **Black vs. white disparities**, leaving other racial/ethnic groups unexplored. |
|
1237 |
+ - Participants' responses were based on **hypothetical medical cases, not real-world treatment decisions**. |
1311 |
1311 |
|
1312 |
1312 |
3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1313 |
|
- - Include **comparison groups for all races**, not just a binary Black–White framework. |
1314 |
|
- - Investigate **systemic neglect of poor rural White populations**, especially in Appalachia and the Midwest. |
1315 |
|
- - Clarify the **distinction between false belief and racial animus**, which the study conflates under CRT framing. |
|
1240 |
+ - Future research should examine **how these biases manifest in real clinical settings**. |
|
1241 |
+ - Investigate **whether medical training can correct these biases over time**. |
1316 |
1316 |
{{/expandable}} |
1317 |
1317 |
|
1318 |
1318 |
{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}} |
1319 |
|
-- Shows how **DEI-aligned narratives exploit limited findings** to vilify White professionals. |
1320 |
|
-- Provides an example of a **legitimate medical education issue being repackaged as “racial bias.”** |
1321 |
|
-- Highlights the **lack of reciprocal scrutiny** of how minorities may receive **preferential narrative framing** or **programmatic support**. |
|
1245 |
+- Highlights **racial disparities in healthcare**, specifically in pain assessment and treatment. |
|
1246 |
+- Supports **research on implicit bias and its impact on medical outcomes**. |
|
1247 |
+- Provides evidence for **the need to address racial bias in medical education**. |
1322 |
1322 |
{{/expandable}} |
1323 |
1323 |
|
1324 |
1324 |
{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}} |
1325 |
|
-1. Study whether **DEI training reduces false beliefs** or simply **induces White guilt**. |
1326 |
|
-2. Investigate **biases against White rural patients**, especially regarding **opioid or pain management stigma**. |
1327 |
|
-3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**. |
|
1251 |
+1. Investigate **interventions to reduce racial bias in medical decision-making**. |
|
1252 |
+2. Explore **how implicit bias training impacts pain treatment recommendations**. |
|
1253 |
+3. Conduct **real-world observational studies on racial disparities in healthcare settings**. |
1328 |
1328 |
{{/expandable}} |
1329 |
1329 |
|
1330 |
1330 |
{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}} |
... |
... |
@@ -1332,7 +1332,6 @@ |
1332 |
1332 |
{{/expandable}} |
1333 |
1333 |
{{/expandable}} |
1334 |
1334 |
|
1335 |
|
- |
1336 |
1336 |
{{expandable summary="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}} |
1337 |
1337 |
**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)* |
1338 |
1338 |
**Date of Publication:** *2015* |
... |
... |
@@ -1401,75 +1401,71 @@ |
1401 |
1401 |
{{/expandable}} |
1402 |
1402 |
|
1403 |
1403 |
{{expandable summary="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}} |
1404 |
|
-**Source:** *Urban Studies* |
1405 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2023* |
1406 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Nina Glick Schiller, Jens Schneider, Ayşe Çağlar* |
1407 |
|
-**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"* |
1408 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1177/00420980231170057](https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231170057) |
1409 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Urban Diversity, Migration, Identity Politics* |
|
1329 |
+**Source:** *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies* |
|
1330 |
+**Date of Publication:** *2023* |
|
1331 |
+**Author(s):** *Maurice Crul, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, Ismintha Waldring* |
|
1332 |
+**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"* |
|
1333 |
+**DOI:** [10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548](https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548) |
|
1334 |
+**Subject Matter:** *Urban Sociology, Migration Studies, Integration* |
1410 |
1410 |
|
1411 |
1411 |
{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}} |
1412 |
1412 |
1. **General Observations:** |
1413 |
|
- - Based on interviews with **White European residents** in three major European cities. |
1414 |
|
- - Focused on how **"non-migrants" (code for native Whites)** perceive and adapt to so-called “superdiversity”. |
|
1338 |
+ - Study examines the role of **people without migration background** in majority-minority cities. |
|
1339 |
+ - Analyzes **over 3,000 survey responses and 150 in-depth interviews** from six North-Western European cities. |
1415 |
1415 |
|
1416 |
1416 |
2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1417 |
|
- - Interviewees were **overwhelmingly framed as obstacles** to multicultural harmony. |
1418 |
|
- - Researchers **pathologized attachment to local culture or ethnic identity** as “resistance to change”. |
|
1342 |
+ - Explores differences in **integration, social interactions, and perceptions of diversity**. |
|
1343 |
+ - Studies how **class, education, and neighborhood composition** affect adaptation to urban diversity. |
1419 |
1419 |
|
1420 |
1420 |
3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1421 |
|
- - Claims that even positive civic participation by Whites may **“reinforce white privilege.”** |
1422 |
|
- - Provides **no quantitative data** on actual neighborhood changes or crime statistics. |
|
1346 |
+ - The study introduces the **Becoming a Minority (BaM) project**, a large-scale investigation of urban demographic shifts. |
|
1347 |
+ - **People without migration background perceive diversity differently**, with some embracing and others resisting change. |
1423 |
1423 |
{{/expandable}} |
1424 |
1424 |
|
1425 |
1425 |
{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}} |
1426 |
1426 |
1. **Primary Observations:** |
1427 |
|
- - Argues that White natives, by simply existing and having a historical presence, **“shape urban inequality.”** |
1428 |
|
- - Positions White cultural norms as inherently oppressive or exclusionary. |
|
1352 |
+ - The study **challenges traditional integration theories**, arguing that non-migrant groups also undergo adaptation processes. |
|
1353 |
+ - Some residents **struggle with demographic changes**, while others see diversity as an asset. |
1429 |
1429 |
|
1430 |
1430 |
2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1431 |
|
- - Critiques White residents for seeking **cultural familiarity or demographic continuity.** |
1432 |
|
- - Presents **White neighborhood cohesion** as a form of “invisible boundary-making.” |
|
1356 |
+ - Young, educated individuals in urban areas **are more open to cultural diversity**. |
|
1357 |
+ - Older and less mobile residents **report feelings of displacement and social isolation**. |
1433 |
1433 |
|
1434 |
1434 |
3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1435 |
|
- - Interviews frame **normal concerns about safety, schooling, or housing** as coded “racism.” |
1436 |
|
- - Treats **multicultural disruption** as inherently positive, and **resistance as bigotry.** |
|
1360 |
+ - Examines how **people without migration background navigate majority-minority settings** in cities like Amsterdam and Vienna. |
|
1361 |
+ - Analyzes **whether former ethnic majority groups now perceive themselves as minorities**. |
1437 |
1437 |
{{/expandable}} |
1438 |
1438 |
|
1439 |
1439 |
{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}} |
1440 |
1440 |
1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1441 |
|
- - Reveals how **social scientists increasingly treat Whiteness itself as a problem.** |
1442 |
|
- - Offers an **unintentional case study in academic anti-White framing.** |
|
1366 |
+ - **Innovative approach** by examining the impact of migration on native populations. |
|
1367 |
+ - Uses **both qualitative and quantitative data** for robust analysis. |
1443 |
1443 |
|
1444 |
1444 |
2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1445 |
|
- - **Completely ignores migrant-driven displacement** of working-class Whites. |
1446 |
|
- - Makes **no attempt to understand White residents sympathetically**, only as barriers. |
1447 |
|
- - Lacks analysis of **economic factors, crime, housing scarcity, or policy failures** contributing to discontent. |
|
1370 |
+ - Limited to **Western European urban settings**, missing perspectives from other global regions. |
|
1371 |
+ - Does not fully explore **policy interventions for fostering social cohesion**. |
1448 |
1448 |
|
1449 |
1449 |
3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1450 |
|
- - Include **White perspectives without presuming guilt or fragility.** |
1451 |
|
- - Disaggregate “White” by **class, locality, or experience** — not treat as a monolith. |
1452 |
|
- - Balance cultural analysis with **hard demographic and economic data.** |
|
1374 |
+ - Expand research to **other geographical contexts** to understand migration effects globally. |
|
1375 |
+ - Investigate **long-term trends in urban adaptation and community building**. |
1453 |
1453 |
{{/expandable}} |
1454 |
1454 |
|
1455 |
1455 |
{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}} |
1456 |
|
-- Demonstrates how **academic literature increasingly stigmatizes White presence** in urban life. |
1457 |
|
-- Shows how **“diversity” is defined as the absence or silence of native populations.** |
1458 |
|
-- Useful for exposing how **CRT and superdiversity discourse erase White communities' legitimacy.** |
|
1379 |
+- Provides a **new perspective on urban integration**, shifting focus from migrants to native-born populations. |
|
1380 |
+- Highlights the **role of social and economic power in shaping urban diversity outcomes**. |
|
1381 |
+- Challenges existing **assimilation theories by showing bidirectional adaptation in diverse cities**. |
1459 |
1459 |
{{/expandable}} |
1460 |
1460 |
|
1461 |
1461 |
{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}} |
1462 |
|
-1. Study the **psychological impact of demographic displacement** on native European populations. |
1463 |
|
-2. Examine **rising crime and social fragmentation** in “superdiverse” zones. |
1464 |
|
-3. Analyze how **housing, schooling, and local economies** are impacted by mass migration. |
|
1385 |
+1. Study how **local policies shape attitudes toward urban diversity**. |
|
1386 |
+2. Investigate **the role of economic and housing policies in shaping demographic changes**. |
|
1387 |
+3. Explore **how social networks influence perceptions of migration and diversity**. |
1465 |
1465 |
{{/expandable}} |
1466 |
1466 |
|
1467 |
1467 |
{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}} |
1468 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1177_00420980231170057.pdf]] |
|
1391 |
+[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]] |
1469 |
1469 |
{{/expandable}} |
1470 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1471 |
1471 |
|
1472 |
|
- |
1473 |
1473 |
= Media = |
1474 |
1474 |
|
1475 |
1475 |
{{expandable summary="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic"}} |
... |
... |
@@ -1672,237 +1672,4 @@ |
1672 |
1672 |
[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]] |
1673 |
1673 |
{{/expandable}} |
1674 |
1674 |
{{/expandable}} |
1675 |
|
- |
1676 |
|
-{{expandable summary="Study: White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years"}} |
1677 |
|
-Source: Journal of Advertising Research |
1678 |
|
-Date of Publication: 2022 |
1679 |
|
-Author(s): Peter M. Lenk, Eric T. Bradlow, Randolph E. Bucklin, Sungeun (Clara) Kim |
1680 |
|
-Title: "White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years: A Meta-Analysis" |
1681 |
|
-DOI: 10.2501/JAR-2022-028 |
1682 |
|
-Subject Matter: Advertising Trends, Racial Representation, Cultural Shifts |
1683 |
|
- |
1684 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}} |
1685 |
|
- |
1686 |
|
-**General Observations:** |
1687 |
|
- |
1688 |
|
-Meta-analysis of 74 studies conducted between 1955 and 2020 on racial representation in advertising. |
1689 |
|
- |
1690 |
|
-Sample included mostly White U.S. participants, with consistent tracking of their preferences. |
1691 |
|
- |
1692 |
|
-**Subgroup Analysis:** |
1693 |
|
- |
1694 |
|
-Found a steady increase in positive responses toward Black models/actors in ads by White viewers. |
1695 |
|
- |
1696 |
|
-Recent decades show equal or greater preference for Black faces compared to White ones. |
1697 |
|
- |
1698 |
|
-**Other Significant Data Points:** |
1699 |
|
- |
1700 |
|
-Study frames this shift as a positive move toward diversity, ignoring implications for displaced White cultural representation. |
1701 |
|
- |
1702 |
|
-No equivalent data was collected on Black or Hispanic attitudes toward White representation. |
1703 |
1703 |
{{/expandable}} |
1704 |
|
- |
1705 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}} |
1706 |
|
- |
1707 |
|
-**Primary Observations:** |
1708 |
|
- |
1709 |
|
-White Americans have become increasingly receptive or favorable toward Black figures in advertising, even over timeframes of widespread cultural change. |
1710 |
|
- |
1711 |
|
-These preferences held across product types, media formats, and ad genres. |
1712 |
|
- |
1713 |
|
-**Subgroup Trends:** |
1714 |
|
- |
1715 |
|
-Studies from the 1960s–1980s showed preference for in-group racial representation, which has dropped sharply for Whites in recent decades. |
1716 |
|
- |
1717 |
|
-The largest positive attitudinal shift occurred between 1995–2020, coinciding with major DEI and cultural programming trends. |
1718 |
|
- |
1719 |
|
-**Specific Case Analysis:** |
1720 |
|
- |
1721 |
|
-The authors position this as “progress,” but offer no critical reflection on the effects of displacing White imagery from national advertising narratives. |
1722 |
|
- |
1723 |
|
-Completely omits consumer preference studies in countries outside the U.S., especially in more homogeneous nations. |
1724 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1725 |
|
- |
1726 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}} |
1727 |
|
- |
1728 |
|
-**Strengths of the Study:** |
1729 |
|
- |
1730 |
|
-Large-scale dataset across decades provides a clear empirical view of long-term trends. |
1731 |
|
- |
1732 |
|
-Useful as a benchmark of how White American preferences have evolved under sociocultural pressure. |
1733 |
|
- |
1734 |
|
-**Limitations of the Study:** |
1735 |
|
- |
1736 |
|
-Fails to ask whether increasing diversity is consumer-driven or culturally imposed. |
1737 |
|
- |
1738 |
|
-Ignores the potential alienation or displacement of White cultural identity from mainstream advertising. |
1739 |
|
- |
1740 |
|
-Assumes “diverse equals better” without testing economic or emotional impact of those shifts. |
1741 |
|
- |
1742 |
|
-**Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1743 |
|
- |
1744 |
|
-Include non-White viewer reactions to all-White or traditional American imagery for balance. |
1745 |
|
- |
1746 |
|
-Test whether consumers notice racial proportions or experience fatigue from overcorrection. |
1747 |
|
- |
1748 |
|
-Explore regional or class-based variance among White viewers, not just aggregate averages. |
1749 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1750 |
|
- |
1751 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}} |
1752 |
|
- |
1753 |
|
-Demonstrates how White cultural imagery has been steadily replaced or downplayed in the public sphere. |
1754 |
|
- |
1755 |
|
-Useful for showing how marketing professionals and researchers frame White displacement as “progress.” |
1756 |
|
- |
1757 |
|
-Empirically supports the decline of White in-group preference — possibly due to reeducation, guilt framing, or media saturation. |
1758 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1759 |
|
- |
1760 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}} |
1761 |
|
- |
1762 |
|
-Study how overrepresentation of minorities in advertising compares to actual demographics. |
1763 |
|
- |
1764 |
|
-Examine whether consumers feel represented or alienated by identity-based marketing. |
1765 |
|
- |
1766 |
|
-Investigate the psychological and cultural impact of long-term demographic displacement in national advertising. |
1767 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1768 |
|
- |
1769 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}} |
1770 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.2501_JAR-2022-028.pdf]] |
1771 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1772 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1773 |
|
- |
1774 |
|
-{{expandable summary="Study: Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"}} |
1775 |
|
-**Source:** *Journal of Communication* |
1776 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2020* |
1777 |
|
-**Author(s):** *John A. Banas, Lauren L. Miller, David A. Braddock, Sun Kyong Lee* |
1778 |
|
-**Title:** *"Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"* |
1779 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqz032](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz032) |
1780 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Media Psychology, Prejudice Reduction, Intergroup Relations* |
1781 |
|
- |
1782 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}} |
1783 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1784 |
|
- - Aggregated **71 studies involving 27,000+ participants**. |
1785 |
|
- - Focused on how **media portrayals of out-groups (primarily minorities)** affect attitudes among dominant in-groups (i.e., Whites). |
1786 |
|
- |
1787 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1788 |
|
- - **Fictional entertainment** had stronger effects than news. |
1789 |
|
- - **Positive portrayals of minorities** correlated with significant reductions in “prejudice”. |
1790 |
|
- |
1791 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1792 |
|
- - Effects were stronger when minority characters were portrayed as **warm, competent, and morally relatable**. |
1793 |
|
- - Contact was more effective when it mimicked **face-to-face friendship narratives**. |
1794 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1795 |
|
- |
1796 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}} |
1797 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1798 |
|
- - Media is a **powerful tool for shaping racial attitudes**, capable of reducing “prejudice” without real-world contact. |
1799 |
|
- - **Repeated exposure** to positive portrayals of minorities led to increased acceptance and reduced negative bias. |
1800 |
|
- |
1801 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1802 |
|
- - **White participants** were the primary targets of reconditioning. |
1803 |
|
- - Minority participants were not studied in terms of **prejudice against Whites**. |
1804 |
|
- |
1805 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1806 |
|
- - “Parasocial” relationships with minority characters (TV/movie exposure) had comparable psychological effects to actual friendships. |
1807 |
|
- - Media framing functioned as a **top-down mechanism for social engineering**, not just passive reflection of society. |
1808 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1809 |
|
- |
1810 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}} |
1811 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1812 |
|
- - High-quality quantitative meta-analysis with clear design and robust statistical handling. |
1813 |
|
- - Acknowledges **media’s ability to alter long-held social beliefs** without physical contact. |
1814 |
|
- |
1815 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1816 |
|
- - Only defines “prejudice” as **negative attitudes from Whites toward minorities** — no exploration of anti-White media narratives or bias. |
1817 |
|
- - Ignores the effects of **overexposure to minority portrayals** on cultural alienation or backlash. |
1818 |
|
- - Assumes **assimilation into DEI norms is inherently positive**, and any reluctance to accept them is “prejudice”. |
1819 |
|
- |
1820 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1821 |
|
- - Study reciprocal dynamics — how **minority media portrayals impact attitudes toward Whites**. |
1822 |
|
- - Investigate whether constant valorization of minorities leads to **resentment, guilt, or political disengagement** among White viewers. |
1823 |
|
- - Analyze **media saturation effects**, especially in multicultural propaganda and corporate DEI messaging. |
1824 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1825 |
|
- |
1826 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}} |
1827 |
|
-- Provides **direct evidence** that media is being used to **reshape racial attitudes** through emotional, parasocial contact. |
1828 |
|
-- Reinforces concern that **“tolerance” is engineered via asymmetric emotional exposure**, not organic consensus. |
1829 |
|
-- Useful for documenting how **Whiteness is often treated as a bias to be corrected**, not a culture to be respected. |
1830 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1831 |
|
- |
1832 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}} |
1833 |
|
-1. Investigate **reverse parasocial effects** — how negative portrayals of White men affect self-perception and mental health. |
1834 |
|
-2. Study how **mass entertainment normalizes demographic shifts** and silences native concerns. |
1835 |
|
-3. Compare effects of **Western vs. non-Western media systems** in promoting diversity narratives. |
1836 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1837 |
|
- |
1838 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}} |
1839 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf]] |
1840 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1841 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1842 |
|
- |
1843 |
|
- |
1844 |
|
-{{expandable summary="Study: Cultural Voyeurism – A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Interaction"}} |
1845 |
|
-**Source:** *Journal of Communication* |
1846 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2018* |
1847 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Osei Appiah* |
1848 |
|
-**Title:** *"Cultural Voyeurism: A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Interaction"* |
1849 |
|
-**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021) |
1850 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Intergroup contact, racial stereotypes, media, identity formation* |
1851 |
|
- |
1852 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}} |
1853 |
|
-1. **No empirical dataset** — this is a theoretical framework paper, not a quantitative study. |
1854 |
|
-2. **Heavily cites prior empirical work**, including: |
1855 |
|
- - Czopp & Monteith (2006) on “complimentary stereotypes” |
1856 |
|
- - Armstrong et al. (1992), Entman & Rojecki (2000) on media distortion of race |
1857 |
|
- - Pettigrew et al. (2011) on intergroup contact |
1858 |
|
- |
1859 |
|
-3. **Statistical implications:** Repeatedly emphasizes the role of media in shaping racial beliefs when direct interracial contact is absent. |
1860 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1861 |
|
- |
1862 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}} |
1863 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1864 |
|
- - Defines *cultural voyeurism* as the process of using media to observe and learn about other racial/ethnic groups. |
1865 |
|
- - Claims it can both reinforce stereotypes and reduce prejudice depending on context. |
1866 |
|
- - Suggests that Whites’ fascination with Black culture (e.g., hip-hop, athleticism) is a driver of empathy and improved race relations. |
1867 |
|
- |
1868 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1869 |
|
- - White youth are singled out as cultural voyeurs increasingly emulating Black identity for social cachet (“coolness”). |
1870 |
|
- - Positive media portrayals of Blacks (e.g., in entertainment) said to reduce racial bias. |
1871 |
|
- |
1872 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1873 |
|
- - No case study provided, but mentions “Duck Dynasty” and “hip-hop culture” as stereotyped White/Black identity constructs respectively. |
1874 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1875 |
|
- |
1876 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}} |
1877 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1878 |
|
- - Recognizes media’s dual role in shaping intergroup perception. |
1879 |
|
- - Accurately captures the obsession with racial “coolness” as a social phenomenon. |
1880 |
|
- |
1881 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1882 |
|
- - Frames White identification with Black culture as inherently progressive, ignoring issues of **anti-White displacement**. |
1883 |
|
- - Treats *positive stereotypes of minorities* (e.g., athleticism, musicality) as meaningful substitutes for structural reality. |
1884 |
|
- - Lacks any meaningful inquiry into *reverse cultural voyeurism* (i.e., non-Whites voyeuristically consuming and appropriating White identity or values). |
1885 |
|
- |
1886 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1887 |
|
- - Should confront whether “cultural voyeurism” ultimately erodes group boundaries and majority cultural integrity. |
1888 |
|
- - Needs empirical validation of claims. |
1889 |
|
- - Avoids uncomfortable realities about how White identity is increasingly stigmatized in media — which undermines genuine empathy or parity. |
1890 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1891 |
|
- |
1892 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}} |
1893 |
|
-- Helps explain how **media conditioning** primes young Whites to *admire, emulate, and eventually submit* to Black cultural dominance. |
1894 |
|
-- Directly supports the narrative that **pro-White identity is systematically delegitimized**, while pro-Black identity is commodified and glamorized — then sold back to White youth. |
1895 |
|
-- Useful in chapters/sections covering cultural appropriation *in reverse* — not by Whites, but **of Whiteness** by outsiders for critique and exploitation. |
1896 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1897 |
|
- |
1898 |
|
-{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}} |
1899 |
|
-1. Are there longitudinal studies showing cultural voyeurism weakening in-group preference among Whites? |
1900 |
|
-2. Does this phenomenon correspond to decreased fertility, civic participation, or political alignment with group interest? |
1901 |
|
-3. How do non-Western societies handle voyeuristic consumption of majority culture — do they permit or punish it? |
1902 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1903 |
|
- |
1904 |
|
-{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}} |
1905 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:Cultural Voyeurism A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Intera.pdf]] |
1906 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1907 |
|
-{{/expandable}} |
1908 |
|
- |