0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From 114.1 to 113.1 From 125.3 to 125.2

From version

125.2

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/21 05:25

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

114.1

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 03:54

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
Attachments (0 modified, 2 added, 2 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

@@ -19,7 +19,1754 @@
  - You'll also find a download link to the original full study in pdf form at the bottom of the collapsible block.
--This page was getting too full, therefore I have created sub pages for each category. This makes it much easier to add new studies.
++= Genetics =
++{{expandable summary="
++
++Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
++**Source:** *Nature*
++**Date of Publication:** *2009*
++**Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
++**Title:** *"Reconstructing Indian Population History"*
++**DOI:** [10.1038/nature08365](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08365)
++**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Population History, South Asian Ancestry*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study analyzed **132 individuals from 25 diverse Indian groups**.
++   - Identified two major ancestral populations: **Ancestral North Indians (ANI)** and **Ancestral South Indians (ASI)**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - ANI ancestry is closely related to **Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans**.
++   - ASI ancestry is **genetically distinct from ANI and East Asians**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - ANI ancestry ranges from **39% to 71%** across Indian groups.
++   - **Caste and linguistic differences** strongly correlate with genetic variation.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - The genetic landscape of India has been shaped by **thousands of years of endogamy**.
++   - Groups with **only ASI ancestry no longer exist** in mainland India.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Higher ANI ancestry in upper-caste and Indo-European-speaking groups**.
++   - **Andaman Islanders** are unique in having **ASI ancestry without ANI influence**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Founder effects** have maintained allele frequency differences among Indian groups.
++   - Predicts **higher incidence of recessive diseases** due to historical genetic isolation.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **First large-scale genetic analysis** of Indian population history.
++   - Introduces **new methods for ancestry estimation without direct ancestral reference groups**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Limited **sample size relative to India's population diversity**.
++   - Does not include **recent admixture events** post-colonial era.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future research should **expand sampling across more Indian tribal groups**.
++   - Use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer resolution of ancestry.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides a **genetic basis for caste and linguistic diversity** in India.
++- Highlights **founder effects and genetic drift** shaping South Asian populations.
++- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Examine **genetic markers linked to disease susceptibility** in Indian subpopulations.
++2. Investigate the impact of **recent migration patterns on ANI-ASI ancestry distribution**.
++3. Study **gene flow between Indian populations and other global groups**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature08365.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
++**Source:** *Nature*
++**Date of Publication:** *2016*
++**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
++**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
++**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
++**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Analyzed **high-coverage genome sequences of 300 individuals from 142 populations**.
++   - Included **many underrepresented and indigenous groups** from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Found **higher genetic diversity within African populations** compared to non-African groups.
++   - Showed **Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry in non-African populations**, particularly in Oceania.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Identified **5.8 million base pairs absent from the human reference genome**.
++   - Estimated that **mutations have accumulated 5% faster in non-Africans than in Africans**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **African populations harbor the greatest genetic diversity**, confirming an out-of-Africa dispersal model.
++   - Indigenous Australians and New Guineans **share a common ancestral population with other non-Africans**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Lower heterozygosity in non-Africans** due to founder effects from migration bottlenecks.
++   - **Denisovan ancestry in South Asians is higher than previously thought**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Neanderthal ancestry is higher in East Asians than in Europeans**.
++   - African hunter-gatherer groups show **deep population splits over 100,000 years ago**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest global genetic dataset** outside of the 1000 Genomes Project.
++   - High sequencing depth allows **more accurate identification of genetic variants**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **Limited sample sizes for some populations**, restricting generalizability.
++   - Lacks ancient DNA comparisons, making it difficult to reconstruct deep ancestry fully.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should include **ancient genomes** to improve demographic modeling.
++   - Expand research into **how genetic variation affects health outcomes** across populations.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides **comprehensive data on human genetic diversity**, useful for **evolutionary studies**.
++- Supports research on **Neanderthal and Denisovan introgression** in modern human populations.
++- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **functional consequences of genetic variation in underrepresented populations**.
++2. Study **how selection pressures shaped genetic diversity across different environments**.
++3. Explore **medical applications of population-specific genetic markers**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="
++
++Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
++**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
++**Date of Publication:** *2015*
++**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
++**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
++**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
++**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Analyzed **17,804 traits from 2,748 twin studies** published between **1958 and 2012**.
++   - Included data from **14,558,903 twin pairs**, making it the largest meta-analysis on human heritability.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Found **49% average heritability** across all traits.
++   - **69% of traits follow a simple additive genetic model**, meaning most variance is due to genes, not environment.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Neurological, metabolic, and psychiatric traits** showed the highest heritability estimates.
++   - Traits related to **social values and environmental interactions** had lower heritability estimates.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Across all traits, genetic factors play a significant role in individual differences.
++   - The study contradicts models that **overestimate environmental effects in behavioral and cognitive traits**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Eye and brain-related traits showed the highest heritability (70-80%)**.
++   - **Shared environmental effects were negligible (<10%) for most traits**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Twin correlations suggest **limited evidence for strong non-additive genetic influences**.
++   - The study highlights **missing heritability in complex traits**, which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have yet to fully explain.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest-ever heritability meta-analysis**, covering nearly all published twin studies.
++   - Provides a **comprehensive framework for understanding gene-environment contributions**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **Underrepresentation of African, South American, and Asian twin cohorts**, limiting global generalizability.
++   - Cannot **fully separate genetic influences from potential cultural/environmental confounders**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future research should use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer-grained heritability estimates.
++   - **Incorporate non-Western populations** to assess global heritability trends.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Establishes a **quantitative benchmark for heritability across human traits**.
++- Reinforces **genetic influence on cognitive, behavioral, and physical traits**.
++- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate how **heritability estimates compare across different socioeconomic backgrounds**.
++2. Examine **gene-environment interactions in cognitive and psychiatric traits**.
++3. Explore **non-additive genetic effects on human traits using newer statistical models**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="
++
++Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
++**Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
++**Date of Publication:** *2002*
++**Author(s):** *Sarah A. Tishkoff, Scott M. Williams*
++**Title:** *"Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"*
++**DOI:** [10.1038/nrg865](https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg865)
++**Subject Matter:** *Population Genetics, Human Evolution, Complex Diseases*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Africa harbors **the highest genetic diversity** of any region, making it key to understanding human evolution.
++   - The study analyzes **genetic variation and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in African populations**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - African populations exhibit **greater genetic differentiation compared to non-Africans**.
++   - **Migration and admixture** have shaped modern African genomes over the past **100,000 years**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - The **effective population size (Ne) of Africans** is higher than that of non-African populations.
++   - LD blocks are **shorter in African genomes**, suggesting more historical recombination events.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - African populations are the **most genetically diverse**, supporting the *Recent African Origin* hypothesis.
++   - Genetic variation in African populations can **help fine-map complex disease genes**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **West Africans exhibit higher genetic diversity** than East Africans due to differing migration patterns.
++   - Populations such as **San hunter-gatherers show deep genetic divergence**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Admixture in African Americans includes **West African and European genetic contributions**.
++   - SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) diversity in African genomes **exceeds that of non-African groups**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Provides **comprehensive genetic analysis** of diverse African populations.
++   - Highlights **how genetic diversity impacts health disparities and disease risks**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Many **African populations remain understudied**, limiting full understanding of diversity.
++   - Focuses more on genetic variation than on **specific disease mechanisms**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Expand research into **underrepresented African populations**.
++   - Integrate **whole-genome sequencing for a more detailed evolutionary timeline**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Supports **genetic models of human evolution** and the **out-of-Africa hypothesis**.
++- Reinforces **Africa’s key role in disease gene mapping and precision medicine**.
++- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **genetic adaptations to local environments within Africa**.
++2. Study **the role of African genetic diversity in disease resistance**.
++3. Expand research on **how ancient migration patterns shaped modern genetic structure**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="
++
++Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
++**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
++**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
++**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
++**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
++**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
++**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
++   - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Examines **West Eurasian populations** and their genetic evolution.
++   - Tracks **changes in allele frequencies over millennia**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
++   - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
++   - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Selection pressure on **energy storage genes** supports the **Thrifty Gene Hypothesis**.
++   - **Cognitive performance-related alleles** have undergone selection, but their historical advantages remain unclear.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
++   - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
++   - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
++   - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Findings **may not translate directly** to modern populations.
++   - **Unclear whether observed selection pressures persist today**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
++   - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
++- Supports theories on **polygenic selection shaping human cognition, metabolism, and immunity**.
++- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
++2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
++3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
++**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2013*
++**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
++**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
++**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
++**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
++   - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
++   - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
++   - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
++   - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
++   - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
++   - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
++   - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
++   - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
++   - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
++- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
++- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
++2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
++3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
++**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2010*
++**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
++**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
++**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
++**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
++   - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
++   - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
++   - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
++   - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
++   - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
++   - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
++   - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
++   - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
++   - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
++- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
++- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
++2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
++3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++= IQ =
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
++**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2019*
++**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
++**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
++**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
++**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
++   - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
++   - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
++   - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
++   - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
++   - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
++   - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
++   - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
++   - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
++   - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
++- Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
++- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
++2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
++3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
++**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2015*
++**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
++**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
++**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
++**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
++   - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
++   - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
++   - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
++   - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
++   - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
++   - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
++   - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
++   - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
++   - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
++- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
++- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
++2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
++3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding"}}
++**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
++**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
++**Author(s):** Smith et al.
++**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
++**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
++**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science
++{{/expandable}}
++
++= Dating =
++
++{{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"}}
++**Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
++**Date of Publication:** *2020*
++**Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.*
++**Title:** *"Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"*
++**DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833)
++**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study analyzed **General Social Survey (2000-2018)** data.
++   - Found **declining trends in sexual activity** among young adults.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Decreases in sexual activity were most prominent among **men aged 18-34**.
++   - Factors like **marital status, employment, and psychological well-being** were associated with changes in sexual frequency.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Frequency of sexual activity decreased by **8-10%** over the studied period.
++   - Number of sexual partners remained **relatively stable** despite declining activity rates.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - A significant decline in sexual frequency, especially among **younger men**.
++   - Shifts in relationship dynamics and economic stressors may contribute to the trend.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - More pronounced decline among **unmarried individuals**.
++   - No major change observed for **married adults** over time.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Mental health and employment status** were correlated with decreased activity.
++   - Social factors such as **screen time and digital entertainment consumption** are potential contributors.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Large sample size** from a nationally representative dataset.
++   - **Longitudinal design** enables trend analysis over time.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Self-reported data may introduce **response bias**.
++   - No direct causal mechanisms tested for the decline in sexual activity.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Further studies should incorporate **qualitative data** on behavioral shifts.
++   - Additional factors such as **economic shifts and social media usage** need exploration.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides evidence on **changing demographic behaviors** in relation to relationships and social interactions.
++- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate the **impact of digital media consumption** on relationship dynamics.
++2. Examine **regional and cultural differences** in sexual activity trends.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
++**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
++**Date of Publication:** *2012*
++**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
++**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
++**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
++**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
++   - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Maternal race had a stronger influence than paternal race** on birth outcomes.
++   - **Black mother–White father (BMWF) couples** had a higher risk than **White mother–Black father (WMBF) couples**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) for key outcomes:**
++     - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
++     - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
++     - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
++   - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Black mothers (regardless of paternal race) had the highest risk of LBW and PTB**.
++   - **White mothers with Black fathers had a lower risk** than Black mothers with White fathers.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
++   - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
++   - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Data limited to **Black-White biracial couples**, excluding other racial groups.
++   - **Socioeconomic and healthcare access factors** not fully explored.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
++   - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
++- Supports **research on genetic and environmental influences on neonatal health**.
++- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
++2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
++3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
++**Source:** *Current Psychology*
++**Date of Publication:** *2024*
++**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
++**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
++**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
++**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study analyzed **67 self-identified incels** and **103 non-incel men**.
++   - Incels reported **higher loneliness and lower social support** compared to non-incels.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Incels exhibited **higher levels of depression, anxiety, and self-critical rumination**.
++   - **Social isolation was a key factor** differentiating incels from non-incels.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - 95% of incels in the study reported **having depression**, with 38% receiving a formal diagnosis.
++   - **Higher externalization of blame** was linked to stronger incel identification.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Incels experience **heightened rejection sensitivity and loneliness**.
++   - Lack of social support correlates with **worse mental health outcomes**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Avoidant attachment styles** were a strong predictor of incel identity.
++   - **Mate value perceptions** significantly differed between incels and non-incels.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Incels **engaged in fewer positive coping mechanisms** such as emotional support or positive reframing.
++   - Instead, they relied on **solitary coping strategies**, worsening their isolation.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **First quantitative study** on incels’ social isolation and mental health.
++   - **Robust sample size** and validated psychological measures.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Sample drawn from **Reddit communities**, which may not represent all incels.
++   - **No causal conclusions**—correlations between isolation and inceldom need further research.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**.
++   - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Highlights **mental health vulnerabilities** within the incel community.
++- Supports research on **loneliness, attachment styles, and social dominance orientation**.
++- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Explore how **online community participation** affects incel mental health.
++2. Investigate **cognitive biases** influencing self-perceived rejection among incels.
++3. Assess **therapeutic interventions** to address incel social isolation.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++= Crime and Substance Abuse =
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
++**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
++**Date of Publication:** *2002*
++**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
++**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
++**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
++**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
++   - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
++   - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
++   - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
++   - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
++   - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
++   - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
++   - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
++   - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
++   - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
++- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
++- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
++2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
++3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
++**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
++**Date of Publication:** *2003*
++**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
++**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
++**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
++**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
++   - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents.
++   - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
++   - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
++   - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
++   - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
++   - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
++   - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
++   - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
++   - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
++- Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
++- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
++2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
++3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
++**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
++**Date of Publication:** *2002*
++**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
++**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
++**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
++**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
++   - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
++   - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
++   - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
++   - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
++   - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
++   - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
++   - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
++   - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
++   - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
++- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
++- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
++2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
++3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="
++
++Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
++**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2014*
++**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
++**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
++**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
++**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - The study examines reaction time data from **13 age-matched studies** spanning **1884–2004**.
++   - Results suggest an estimated **decline of 13.35 IQ points** over this period.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - The study found **slower reaction times in modern populations** compared to Victorian-era individuals.
++   - Data from **Western countries (US, UK, Canada, Australia, Finland)** were analyzed.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - The estimated **dysgenic rate is 1.21 IQ points lost per decade**.
++   - Meta-regression analysis confirmed a **steady secular trend in slowing reaction time**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Supports the hypothesis of **intelligence decline due to genetic and environmental factors**.
++   - Reaction time, a **biomarker for cognitive ability**, has slowed significantly over time.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - A stronger **correlation between slower reaction time and lower general intelligence (g)**.
++   - Flynn effect (IQ gains) does not contradict this finding, as reaction time is a **biological, not environmental, measure**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Cross-national comparisons indicate a **global trend in slower reaction times**.
++   - Factors like **modern neurotoxin exposure** and **reduced selective pressure for intelligence** may contribute.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Comprehensive meta-analysis** covering over a century of reaction time data.
++   - **Robust statistical corrections** for measurement variance between historical and modern studies.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Some historical data sources **lack methodological consistency**.
++   - **Reaction time measurements vary by study**, requiring adjustments for equipment differences.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
++   - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides evidence for **long-term intelligence trends**, contributing to research on **cognitive evolution**.
++- Aligns with broader discussions on **dysgenics, neurophysiology, and cognitive load**.
++- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **genetic markers associated with reaction time** and intelligence decline.
++2. Examine **regional variations in reaction time trends**.
++3. Explore **cognitive resilience factors that counteract the decline**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++= Whiteness & White Guilt =
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
++**Date of Publication:** *2019*
++**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
++**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
++**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
++**Subject Matter:** *Critical Race Theory, Sports Sociology, Anti-White Institutional Framing*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Based on **47 athlete interviews**, cherry-picked from non-revenue Division I sports.
++   - The study claims **“segregation”**, but presents no evidence of actual exclusion or policy bias — just demographic imbalance.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Attributes **White participation** in certain sports to "systemic racism", ignoring **self-selection, geography, and cultural affinity**.
++   - Claims White athletes are “protected” from race discussions — but never engages with **Black overrepresentation in revenue sports**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - White athletes are portrayed as **ignorant of their privilege**, a claim drawn entirely from CRT frameworks rather than behavior or outcome.
++   - **No empirical data** is offered on policy, scholarship distribution, or team selection criteria.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Frames **normal demographic patterns** (e.g., majority-White rosters in tennis or rowing) as "institutional whiteness".
++   - **Ignores the structural dominance** of Black athletes in high-profile revenue sports like football and basketball.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - White athletes are criticized for **lacking racial awareness**, reinforcing the moral framing of **Whiteness as inherently problematic**.
++   - **Cultural preference, individual merit, and athletic subculture** are all excluded from consideration.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Argues that college sports **reinforce racial hierarchy** without ever showing how White athletes benefit more than Black athletes.
++   - Offers **no comparative analysis** of scholarships, graduation rates, or media portrayal by race.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Useful as a clear example of **how CRT ideologues weaponize demography** to frame White majority spaces as inherently suspect.
++   - Shows how **academic literature systematically avoids symmetrical analysis** when outcomes favor White participants.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **Excludes revenue sports**, where Black athletes dominate by numbers, prestige, and compensation.
++   - **Fails to explain** how team composition emerges from voluntary participation, geography, or subcultural identity.
++   - Treats **racial imbalance as proof of racism**, bypassing merit, interest, or socioeconomic context.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Include **White athlete perspectives** without pre-framing them as racially naive or complicit.
++   - **Compare all sports**, including those where Black athletes thrive and lead.
++   - Remove CRT framing and **evaluate outcomes empirically**, not ideologically.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Demonstrates how **DEI-aligned research reframes benign patterns** as oppressive when White majorities are involved.
++- Illustrates **anti-White academic framing** in environments where no institutional barrier exists.
++- Provides a concrete example of how **CRT avoids acknowledging Black dominance in elite spaces** (revenue athletics).
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **racial self-sorting and cultural affiliation** in athletic participation.
++2. Compare **media framing of White-majority vs. Black-majority sports**.
++3. Study **how CRT narratives distort athletic merit and demographic outcomes**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
++**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2016*
++**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axt, M. Norman Oliver*
++**Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
++**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
++**Subject Matter:** *Medical Ethics, Race in Medicine, Implicit Bias*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Analyzed responses from **222 white medical students and residents**.
++   - Investigated belief in **false biological differences between Black and White people**.
++   - Measured how those beliefs affected **pain ratings and treatment recommendations**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **50% of participants endorsed at least one false belief** (e.g., Black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings).
++   - Those who endorsed false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients' pain**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Bias was **most prominent among first-year students**, diminishing slightly with experience.
++   - Study used **hypothetical case vignettes**, not real patient data.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - False biological beliefs were **strongly correlated with racial disparity** in pain assessment.
++   - Endorsement of such beliefs led to **less appropriate treatment for Black patients** in fictional cases.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Medical students with **no false beliefs showed no treatment bias**.
++   - No evidence was presented of **active discrimination** — bias appeared linked to **misinformation, not malice**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Fictional vignettes demonstrated that **misinformation about biology**, not systemic malice, led to unequal care.
++   - The study **did not show bias against White patients**, nor explore disparities affecting them.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Provides valuable insight into **how medical myths can affect judgment**.
++   - Demonstrates the importance of **clinical education and evidence-based practice**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Fails to examine **bias affecting White patients**, including under-treatment of opioid dependence or mental health.
++   - Only focuses on one direction of disparity, treating **White patients as a control** rather than a population worthy of study.
++   - **Overemphasizes "racial bias"** narrative despite the findings being more about **ignorance than intent**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Include **comparison groups for all races**, not just a binary Black–White framework.
++   - Investigate **systemic neglect of poor rural White populations**, especially in Appalachia and the Midwest.
++   - Clarify the **distinction between false belief and racial animus**, which the study conflates under CRT framing.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Shows how **DEI-aligned narratives exploit limited findings** to vilify White professionals.
++- Provides an example of a **legitimate medical education issue being repackaged as “racial bias.”**
++- Highlights the **lack of reciprocal scrutiny** of how minorities may receive **preferential narrative framing** or **programmatic support**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Study whether **DEI training reduces false beliefs** or simply **induces White guilt**.
++2. Investigate **biases against White rural patients**, especially regarding **opioid or pain management stigma**.
++3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
++**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2015*
++**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
++**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
++**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
++**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Mortality rates among **middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans (ages 45–54)** increased from 1999 to 2013.
++   - This reversal in mortality trends is unique to the U.S.; **no other wealthy country experienced a similar rise**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - The increase was **most pronounced among those with a high school education or less**.
++   - Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic mortality continued to decline over the same period.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Rising mortality was driven primarily by **suicide, drug and alcohol poisoning, and chronic liver disease**.
++   - Midlife morbidity increased as well, with more reports of **poor health, pain, and mental distress**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - The rise in mortality is attributed to **substance abuse, economic distress, and deteriorating mental health**.
++   - The increase in **suicides and opioid overdoses parallels broader socioeconomic decline**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - The **largest mortality increases** occurred among **whites without a college degree**.
++   - Chronic pain, functional limitations, and self-reported mental distress **rose significantly in affected groups**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Educational attainment was a major predictor of mortality trends**, with better-educated individuals experiencing lower mortality rates.
++   - Mortality among **white Americans with a college degree continued to decline**, resembling trends in other wealthy nations.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **First major study to highlight rising midlife mortality among U.S. whites**.
++   - Uses **CDC and Census mortality data spanning over a decade**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Does not establish **causality** between economic decline and increased mortality.
++   - Lacks **granular data on opioid prescribing patterns and regional differences**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should explore **how economic shifts, healthcare access, and mental health treatment contribute to these trends**.
++   - Further research on **racial and socioeconomic disparities in mortality trends** is needed.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Highlights **socioeconomic and racial disparities** in health outcomes.
++- Supports research on **substance abuse and mental health crises in the U.S.**.
++- Provides evidence for **the role of economic instability in public health trends**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **regional differences in rising midlife mortality**.
++2. Examine the **impact of the opioid crisis on long-term health trends**.
++3. Study **policy interventions aimed at reversing rising mortality rates**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
++**Source:** *Urban Studies*
++**Date of Publication:** *2023*
++**Author(s):** *Nina Glick Schiller, Jens Schneider, Ayşe Çağlar*
++**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
++**DOI:** [10.1177/00420980231170057](https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231170057)
++**Subject Matter:** *Urban Diversity, Migration, Identity Politics*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Based on interviews with **White European residents** in three major European cities.
++   - Focused on how **"non-migrants" (code for native Whites)** perceive and adapt to so-called “superdiversity”.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Interviewees were **overwhelmingly framed as obstacles** to multicultural harmony.
++   - Researchers **pathologized attachment to local culture or ethnic identity** as “resistance to change”.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Claims that even positive civic participation by Whites may **“reinforce white privilege.”**
++   - Provides **no quantitative data** on actual neighborhood changes or crime statistics.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Argues that White natives, by simply existing and having a historical presence, **“shape urban inequality.”**
++   - Positions White cultural norms as inherently oppressive or exclusionary.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Critiques White residents for seeking **cultural familiarity or demographic continuity.**
++   - Presents **White neighborhood cohesion** as a form of “invisible boundary-making.”
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - Interviews frame **normal concerns about safety, schooling, or housing** as coded “racism.”
++   - Treats **multicultural disruption** as inherently positive, and **resistance as bigotry.**
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Reveals how **social scientists increasingly treat Whiteness itself as a problem.**
++   - Offers an **unintentional case study in academic anti-White framing.**
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - **Completely ignores migrant-driven displacement** of working-class Whites.
++   - Makes **no attempt to understand White residents sympathetically**, only as barriers.
++   - Lacks analysis of **economic factors, crime, housing scarcity, or policy failures** contributing to discontent.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Include **White perspectives without presuming guilt or fragility.**
++   - Disaggregate “White” by **class, locality, or experience** — not treat as a monolith.
++   - Balance cultural analysis with **hard demographic and economic data.**
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Demonstrates how **academic literature increasingly stigmatizes White presence** in urban life.
++- Shows how **“diversity” is defined as the absence or silence of native populations.**
++- Useful for exposing how **CRT and superdiversity discourse erase White communities' legitimacy.**
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Study the **psychological impact of demographic displacement** on native European populations.
++2. Examine **rising crime and social fragmentation** in “superdiverse” zones.
++3. Analyze how **housing, schooling, and local economies** are impacted by mass migration.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1177_00420980231170057.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
++= Media =
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2021*
++**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
++**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
++**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
++   - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility.
++   - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
++   - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
++   - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views.
++   - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
++   - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
++   - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**.
++   - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
++   - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
++- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
++- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
++2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
++3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
++**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
++**Date of Publication:** *2007*
++**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
++**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
++**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
++**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
++   - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Equality-based framing decreases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
++   - **Morality-based framing increases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
++   - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
++   - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Religious and conservative audiences** respond more to morality-based framing.
++   - **Younger and progressive audiences** respond more to equality-based framing.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
++   - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
++   - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Focuses **only on U.S. media coverage**, limiting global applicability.
++   - Does not account for **social media's growing influence** on public opinion.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
++   - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
++- Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
++- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
++2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
++3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2019*
++**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
++**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
++**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
++   - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content.
++   - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
++   - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
++   - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites.
++   - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
++   - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
++   - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up.
++   - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
++   - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
++- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
++- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
++2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
++3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years"}}
++Source: Journal of Advertising Research
++Date of Publication: 2022
++Author(s): Peter M. Lenk, Eric T. Bradlow, Randolph E. Bucklin, Sungeun (Clara) Kim
++Title: "White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years: A Meta-Analysis"
++DOI: 10.2501/JAR-2022-028
++Subject Matter: Advertising Trends, Racial Representation, Cultural Shifts
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++
++**General Observations:**
++
++Meta-analysis of 74 studies conducted between 1955 and 2020 on racial representation in advertising.
++
++Sample included mostly White U.S. participants, with consistent tracking of their preferences.
++
++**Subgroup Analysis:**
++
++Found a steady increase in positive responses toward Black models/actors in ads by White viewers.
++
++Recent decades show equal or greater preference for Black faces compared to White ones.
++
++**Other Significant Data Points:**
++
++Study frames this shift as a positive move toward diversity, ignoring implications for displaced White cultural representation.
++
++No equivalent data was collected on Black or Hispanic attitudes toward White representation.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++
++**Primary Observations:**
++
++White Americans have become increasingly receptive or favorable toward Black figures in advertising, even over timeframes of widespread cultural change.
++
++These preferences held across product types, media formats, and ad genres.
++
++**Subgroup Trends:**
++
++Studies from the 1960s–1980s showed preference for in-group racial representation, which has dropped sharply for Whites in recent decades.
++
++The largest positive attitudinal shift occurred between 1995–2020, coinciding with major DEI and cultural programming trends.
++
++**Specific Case Analysis:**
++
++The authors position this as “progress,” but offer no critical reflection on the effects of displacing White imagery from national advertising narratives.
++
++Completely omits consumer preference studies in countries outside the U.S., especially in more homogeneous nations.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++
++**Strengths of the Study:**
++
++Large-scale dataset across decades provides a clear empirical view of long-term trends.
++
++Useful as a benchmark of how White American preferences have evolved under sociocultural pressure.
++
++**Limitations of the Study:**
++
++Fails to ask whether increasing diversity is consumer-driven or culturally imposed.
++
++Ignores the potential alienation or displacement of White cultural identity from mainstream advertising.
++
++Assumes “diverse equals better” without testing economic or emotional impact of those shifts.
++
++**Suggestions for Improvement:**
++
++Include non-White viewer reactions to all-White or traditional American imagery for balance.
++
++Test whether consumers notice racial proportions or experience fatigue from overcorrection.
++
++Explore regional or class-based variance among White viewers, not just aggregate averages.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++
++Demonstrates how White cultural imagery has been steadily replaced or downplayed in the public sphere.
++
++Useful for showing how marketing professionals and researchers frame White displacement as “progress.”
++
++Empirically supports the decline of White in-group preference — possibly due to reeducation, guilt framing, or media saturation.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++
++Study how overrepresentation of minorities in advertising compares to actual demographics.
++
++Examine whether consumers feel represented or alienated by identity-based marketing.
++
++Investigate the psychological and cultural impact of long-term demographic displacement in national advertising.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.2501_JAR-2022-028.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="Study: Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2020*
++**Author(s):** *John A. Banas, Lauren L. Miller, David A. Braddock, Sun Kyong Lee*
++**Title:** *"Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqz032](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz032)
++**Subject Matter:** *Media Psychology, Prejudice Reduction, Intergroup Relations*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Aggregated **71 studies involving 27,000+ participants**.
++   - Focused on how **media portrayals of out-groups (primarily minorities)** affect attitudes among dominant in-groups (i.e., Whites).
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Fictional entertainment** had stronger effects than news.
++   - **Positive portrayals of minorities** correlated with significant reductions in “prejudice”.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Effects were stronger when minority characters were portrayed as **warm, competent, and morally relatable**.
++   - Contact was more effective when it mimicked **face-to-face friendship narratives**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Media is a **powerful tool for shaping racial attitudes**, capable of reducing “prejudice” without real-world contact.
++   - **Repeated exposure** to positive portrayals of minorities led to increased acceptance and reduced negative bias.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **White participants** were the primary targets of reconditioning.
++   - Minority participants were not studied in terms of **prejudice against Whites**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - “Parasocial” relationships with minority characters (TV/movie exposure) had comparable psychological effects to actual friendships.
++   - Media framing functioned as a **top-down mechanism for social engineering**, not just passive reflection of society.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - High-quality quantitative meta-analysis with clear design and robust statistical handling.
++   - Acknowledges **media’s ability to alter long-held social beliefs** without physical contact.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Only defines “prejudice” as **negative attitudes from Whites toward minorities** — no exploration of anti-White media narratives or bias.
++   - Ignores the effects of **overexposure to minority portrayals** on cultural alienation or backlash.
++   - Assumes **assimilation into DEI norms is inherently positive**, and any reluctance to accept them is “prejudice”.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Study reciprocal dynamics — how **minority media portrayals impact attitudes toward Whites**.
++   - Investigate whether constant valorization of minorities leads to **resentment, guilt, or political disengagement** among White viewers.
++   - Analyze **media saturation effects**, especially in multicultural propaganda and corporate DEI messaging.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides **direct evidence** that media is being used to **reshape racial attitudes** through emotional, parasocial contact.
++- Reinforces concern that **“tolerance” is engineered via asymmetric emotional exposure**, not organic consensus.
++- Useful for documenting how **Whiteness is often treated as a bias to be corrected**, not a culture to be respected.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **reverse parasocial effects** — how negative portrayals of White men affect self-perception and mental health.
++2. Study how **mass entertainment normalizes demographic shifts** and silences native concerns.
++3. Compare effects of **Western vs. non-Western media systems** in promoting diversity narratives.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++

Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf

Author

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-XWiki.AdminAngriff

Size

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-472.9 KB

Content

lai2014.pdf

Author

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-XWiki.AdminAngriff

Size

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-15.4 MB

Content

10.1891_1946.pdf

Author

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+XWiki.AdminAngriff

Size

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+523.1 KB

Content

10.3109_10826087709027235.pdf

Author

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+XWiki.AdminAngriff

Size

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+698.4 KB

Content

Changes for page Research at a Glance

Summary

Details

Quick Links

Categories