0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From version 69.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 03:28
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

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -Main.Studies.WebHome
1 +Main Categories.Science & Research.WebHome
Content
... ... @@ -1,149 +1,661 @@
1 +{{toc/}}
2 +
3 +
1 1  = Research at a Glance =
2 2  
3 -== Introduction ==
4 4  
5 -Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various fields such as **social psychology, public policy, behavioral economics, and more**. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout.
6 6  
7 -=== How to Use This Repository ===
8 + Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various important Racial themes. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout. I wanted to make this for a couple of reasons. Number one is organization. There are a ton of useful studies out there that expose the truth, sometimes inadvertently. You'll notice that in this initial draft the summaries are often woke and reflect the bias of the AI writing them as well as the researchers politically correct conclusion in most cases. That's because I haven't gotten to going through and pointing out the reasons I put all of them in here.
8 8  
10 +
11 + There is often an underlying hypocrisy or double standard, saying the quiet part out loud, or conclusions that are so much of an antithesis to what the data shows that made me want to include it. At least, thats the idea for once its polished. I have about 150 more studies to upload, so it will be a few weeks before I get through it all. Until such time, feel free to search for them yourself and edit in what you find, or add your own studies. If you like you can do it manually, or if you'd rather go the route I did, just rename the study to its doi number and feed the study into an AI and tell them to summarize the study using the following format:
12 +
13 +
14 +
9 9  - Click on a **category** in the **Table of Contents** to browse studies related to that topic.
10 10  - Click on a **study title** to expand its details, including **key findings, critique, and relevance**.
11 11  - Use the **search function** (Ctrl + F or XWiki's built-in search) to quickly find specific topics or authors.
12 12  - If needed, you can export this page as **PDF or print-friendly format**, and all studies will automatically expand for readability.
19 +- You'll also find a download link to the original full study in pdf form at the bottom of the collapsible block.
13 13  
14 -{{toc/}}
15 15  
16 -== Research Studies Repository ==
17 17  
23 += Genetics =
18 18  
19 -= Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding =
20 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Click here to expand details"}}
21 -**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
22 -**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
23 -**Author(s):** Smith et al.
24 -**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
25 -**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
26 -**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science
25 +{{expandable summary="
27 27  
28 -**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
27 +Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
28 +**Source:** *Nature*
29 +**Date of Publication:** *2009*
30 +**Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
31 +**Title:** *"Reconstructing Indian Population History"*
32 +**DOI:** [10.1038/nature08365](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08365)
33 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Population History, South Asian Ancestry* 
29 29  
30 -=== **Key Statistics** ===
35 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
36 +1. **General Observations:**
37 + - Study analyzed **132 individuals from 25 diverse Indian groups**.
38 + - Identified two major ancestral populations: **Ancestral North Indians (ANI)** and **Ancestral South Indians (ASI)**.
31 31  
40 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
41 + - ANI ancestry is closely related to **Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans**.
42 + - ASI ancestry is **genetically distinct from ANI and East Asians**.
43 +
44 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
45 + - ANI ancestry ranges from **39% to 71%** across Indian groups.
46 + - **Caste and linguistic differences** strongly correlate with genetic variation.
47 +{{/expandable}}
48 +
49 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
50 +1. **Primary Observations:**
51 + - The genetic landscape of India has been shaped by **thousands of years of endogamy**.
52 + - Groups with **only ASI ancestry no longer exist** in mainland India.
53 +
54 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
55 + - **Higher ANI ancestry in upper-caste and Indo-European-speaking groups**.
56 + - **Andaman Islanders** are unique in having **ASI ancestry without ANI influence**.
57 +
58 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
59 + - **Founder effects** have maintained allele frequency differences among Indian groups.
60 + - Predicts **higher incidence of recessive diseases** due to historical genetic isolation.
61 +{{/expandable}}
62 +
63 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
64 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
65 + - **First large-scale genetic analysis** of Indian population history.
66 + - Introduces **new methods for ancestry estimation without direct ancestral reference groups**.
67 +
68 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
69 + - Limited **sample size relative to India's population diversity**.
70 + - Does not include **recent admixture events** post-colonial era.
71 +
72 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
73 + - Future research should **expand sampling across more Indian tribal groups**.
74 + - Use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer resolution of ancestry.
75 +{{/expandable}}
76 +
77 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
78 +- Provides a **genetic basis for caste and linguistic diversity** in India.
79 +- Highlights **founder effects and genetic drift** shaping South Asian populations.
80 +- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.
81 +{{/expandable}}
82 +
83 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
84 +1. Examine **genetic markers linked to disease susceptibility** in Indian subpopulations.
85 +2. Investigate the impact of **recent migration patterns on ANI-ASI ancestry distribution**.
86 +3. Study **gene flow between Indian populations and other global groups**.
87 +{{/expandable}}
88 +
89 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
90 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature08365.pdf]]
91 +{{/expandable}}
92 +{{/expandable}}
93 +
94 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
95 +**Source:** *Nature*
96 +**Date of Publication:** *2016*
97 +**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
98 +**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
99 +**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
100 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics*
101 +
102 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
32 32  1. **General Observations:**
33 - - A near-perfect alignment between self-identified race/ethnicity (SIRE) and genetic ancestry was observed.
34 - - Misclassification rate: **0.14%**.
104 + - Analyzed **high-coverage genome sequences of 300 individuals from 142 populations**.
105 + - Included **many underrepresented and indigenous groups** from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.
35 35  
36 36  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
37 - - Four groups analyzed: **White, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic**.
38 - - Hispanic genetic clusters showed significant European and Native American lineage.
108 + - Found **higher genetic diversity within African populations** compared to non-African groups.
109 + - Showed **Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry in non-African populations**, particularly in Oceania.
39 39  
40 -=== **Findings** ===
111 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
112 + - Identified **5.8 million base pairs absent from the human reference genome**.
113 + - Estimated that **mutations have accumulated 5% faster in non-Africans than in Africans**.
114 +{{/expandable}}
41 41  
42 -- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
43 -- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
116 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
117 +1. **Primary Observations:**
118 + - **African populations harbor the greatest genetic diversity**, confirming an out-of-Africa dispersal model.
119 + - Indigenous Australians and New Guineans **share a common ancestral population with other non-Africans**.
44 44  
45 -=== **Relevance to Subproject** ===
121 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
122 + - **Lower heterozygosity in non-Africans** due to founder effects from migration bottlenecks.
123 + - **Denisovan ancestry in South Asians is higher than previously thought**.
46 46  
47 -- Reinforces the reliability of **self-reported racial identity** in genetic research.
48 -- Highlights **policy considerations** in biomedical studies.
49 -{{/expand}}
125 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
126 + - **Neanderthal ancestry is higher in East Asians than in Europeans**.
127 + - African hunter-gatherer groups show **deep population splits over 100,000 years ago**.
128 +{{/expandable}}
50 50  
51 -{{expand title="Study: [Study Title] (Click to Expand)" expanded="false"}}
52 -**Source:** [Journal/Institution Name]
53 -**Date of Publication:** [Publication Date]
54 -**Author(s):** [Author(s) Name(s)]
55 -**Title:** "[Study Title]"
56 -**DOI:** [DOI or Link]
57 -**Subject Matter:** [Broad Research Area, e.g., Social Psychology, Public Policy, Behavioral Economics]
130 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
131 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
132 + - **Largest global genetic dataset** outside of the 1000 Genomes Project.
133 + - High sequencing depth allows **more accurate identification of genetic variants**.
58 58  
59 ----
135 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
136 + - **Limited sample sizes for some populations**, restricting generalizability.
137 + - Lacks ancient DNA comparisons, making it difficult to reconstruct deep ancestry fully.
60 60  
61 -## **Key Statistics**
139 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
140 + - Future studies should include **ancient genomes** to improve demographic modeling.
141 + - Expand research into **how genetic variation affects health outcomes** across populations.
142 +{{/expandable}}
143 +
144 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
145 +- Provides **comprehensive data on human genetic diversity**, useful for **evolutionary studies**.
146 +- Supports research on **Neanderthal and Denisovan introgression** in modern human populations.
147 +- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.
148 +{{/expandable}}
149 +
150 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
151 +1. Investigate **functional consequences of genetic variation in underrepresented populations**.
152 +2. Study **how selection pressures shaped genetic diversity across different environments**.
153 +3. Explore **medical applications of population-specific genetic markers**.
154 +{{/expandable}}
155 +
156 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
157 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]
158 +{{/expandable}}
159 +{{/expandable}}
160 +
161 +{{expandable summary="
162 +
163 +Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
164 +**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
165 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
166 +**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
167 +**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
168 +**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
169 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science*
170 +
171 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
62 62  1. **General Observations:**
63 - - [Statistical finding or observation]
64 - - [Statistical finding or observation]
173 + - Analyzed **17,804 traits from 2,748 twin studies** published between **1958 and 2012**.
174 + - Included data from **14,558,903 twin pairs**, making it the largest meta-analysis on human heritability.
65 65  
66 66  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
67 - - [Breakdown of findings by gender, race, or other subgroups]
177 + - Found **49% average heritability** across all traits.
178 + - **69% of traits follow a simple additive genetic model**, meaning most variance is due to genes, not environment.
68 68  
69 69  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
70 - - [Any additional findings or significant statistics]
181 + - **Neurological, metabolic, and psychiatric traits** showed the highest heritability estimates.
182 + - Traits related to **social values and environmental interactions** had lower heritability estimates.
183 +{{/expandable}}
71 71  
72 ----
185 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
186 +1. **Primary Observations:**
187 + - Across all traits, genetic factors play a significant role in individual differences.
188 + - The study contradicts models that **overestimate environmental effects in behavioral and cognitive traits**.
73 73  
74 -## **Findings**
190 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
191 + - **Eye and brain-related traits showed the highest heritability (70-80%)**.
192 + - **Shared environmental effects were negligible (<10%) for most traits**.
193 +
194 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
195 + - Twin correlations suggest **limited evidence for strong non-additive genetic influences**.
196 + - The study highlights **missing heritability in complex traits**, which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have yet to fully explain.
197 +{{/expandable}}
198 +
199 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
200 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
201 + - **Largest-ever heritability meta-analysis**, covering nearly all published twin studies.
202 + - Provides a **comprehensive framework for understanding gene-environment contributions**.
203 +
204 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
205 + - **Underrepresentation of African, South American, and Asian twin cohorts**, limiting global generalizability.
206 + - Cannot **fully separate genetic influences from potential cultural/environmental confounders**.
207 +
208 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
209 + - Future research should use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer-grained heritability estimates.
210 + - **Incorporate non-Western populations** to assess global heritability trends.
211 +{{/expandable}}
212 +
213 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
214 +- Establishes a **quantitative benchmark for heritability across human traits**.
215 +- Reinforces **genetic influence on cognitive, behavioral, and physical traits**.
216 +- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.
217 +{{/expandable}}
218 +
219 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
220 +1. Investigate how **heritability estimates compare across different socioeconomic backgrounds**.
221 +2. Examine **gene-environment interactions in cognitive and psychiatric traits**.
222 +3. Explore **non-additive genetic effects on human traits using newer statistical models**.
223 +{{/expandable}}
224 +
225 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
226 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]
227 +{{/expandable}}
228 +{{/expandable}}
229 +
230 +{{expandable summary="
231 +
232 +Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
233 +**Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
234 +**Date of Publication:** *2002*
235 +**Author(s):** *Sarah A. Tishkoff, Scott M. Williams*
236 +**Title:** *"Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"*
237 +**DOI:** [10.1038/nrg865](https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg865)
238 +**Subject Matter:** *Population Genetics, Human Evolution, Complex Diseases* 
239 +
240 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
241 +1. **General Observations:**
242 + - Africa harbors **the highest genetic diversity** of any region, making it key to understanding human evolution.
243 + - The study analyzes **genetic variation and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in African populations**.
244 +
245 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
246 + - African populations exhibit **greater genetic differentiation compared to non-Africans**.
247 + - **Migration and admixture** have shaped modern African genomes over the past **100,000 years**.
248 +
249 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
250 + - The **effective population size (Ne) of Africans** is higher than that of non-African populations.
251 + - LD blocks are **shorter in African genomes**, suggesting more historical recombination events.
252 +{{/expandable}}
253 +
254 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
75 75  1. **Primary Observations:**
76 - - [High-level findings or trends in the study]
256 + - African populations are the **most genetically diverse**, supporting the *Recent African Origin* hypothesis.
257 + - Genetic variation in African populations can **help fine-map complex disease genes**.
77 77  
78 78  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
79 - - [Disparities or differences highlighted in the study]
260 + - **West Africans exhibit higher genetic diversity** than East Africans due to differing migration patterns.
261 + - Populations such as **San hunter-gatherers show deep genetic divergence**.
80 80  
81 81  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
82 - - [Detailed explanation of any notable specific findings]
264 + - Admixture in African Americans includes **West African and European genetic contributions**.
265 + - SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) diversity in African genomes **exceeds that of non-African groups**.
266 +{{/expandable}}
83 83  
84 ----
268 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
269 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
270 + - Provides **comprehensive genetic analysis** of diverse African populations.
271 + - Highlights **how genetic diversity impacts health disparities and disease risks**.
85 85  
86 -## **Critique and Observations**
273 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
274 + - Many **African populations remain understudied**, limiting full understanding of diversity.
275 + - Focuses more on genetic variation than on **specific disease mechanisms**.
276 +
277 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
278 + - Expand research into **underrepresented African populations**.
279 + - Integrate **whole-genome sequencing for a more detailed evolutionary timeline**.
280 +{{/expandable}}
281 +
282 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
283 +- Supports **genetic models of human evolution** and the **out-of-Africa hypothesis**.
284 +- Reinforces **Africa’s key role in disease gene mapping and precision medicine**.
285 +- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.
286 +{{/expandable}}
287 +
288 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
289 +1. Investigate **genetic adaptations to local environments within Africa**.
290 +2. Study **the role of African genetic diversity in disease resistance**.
291 +3. Expand research on **how ancient migration patterns shaped modern genetic structure**.
292 +{{/expandable}}
293 +
294 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
295 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]
296 +{{/expandable}}
297 +{{/expandable}}
298 +
299 +{{expandable summary="
300 +
301 +Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
302 +**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
303 +**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
304 +**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
305 +**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
306 +**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
307 +**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection*
308 +
309 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
310 +1. **General Observations:**
311 + - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
312 + - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
313 +
314 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
315 + - Examines **West Eurasian populations** and their genetic evolution.
316 + - Tracks **changes in allele frequencies over millennia**.
317 +
318 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
319 + - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
320 + - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
321 +{{/expandable}}
322 +
323 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
324 +1. **Primary Observations:**
325 + - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
326 + - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
327 +
328 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
329 + - Selection pressure on **energy storage genes** supports the **Thrifty Gene Hypothesis**.
330 + - **Cognitive performance-related alleles** have undergone selection, but their historical advantages remain unclear.
331 +
332 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
333 + - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
334 + - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
335 + - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
336 +{{/expandable}}
337 +
338 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
87 87  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
88 - - [Examples: strong methodology, large dataset, etc.]
340 + - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
341 + - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
89 89  
90 90  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
91 - - [Examples: data gaps, lack of upstream analysis, etc.]
344 + - Findings **may not translate directly** to modern populations.
345 + - **Unclear whether observed selection pressures persist today**.
92 92  
93 93  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
94 - - [Ideas for further research or addressing limitations]
348 + - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
349 + - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
350 +{{/expandable}}
95 95  
96 ----
352 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
353 +- Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
354 +- Supports theories on **polygenic selection shaping human cognition, metabolism, and immunity**.
355 +- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.
356 +{{/expandable}}
97 97  
98 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
99 -- [Explanation of how this study contributes to your subproject goals.]
100 -- [Any key arguments or findings that support or challenge your views.]
358 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
359 +1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
360 +2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
361 +3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
362 +{{/expandable}}
101 101  
102 ----
364 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
365 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]
366 +{{/expandable}}
367 +{{/expandable}}
103 103  
104 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
105 -1. [Research questions or areas to investigate further.]
106 -2. [Potential studies or sources to complement this analysis.]
369 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
370 +**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
371 +**Date of Publication:** *2013*
372 +**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
373 +**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
374 +**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
375 +**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology*
107 107  
108 ----
377 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
378 +1. **General Observations:**
379 + - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
380 + - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
109 109  
110 -## **Summary of Research Study**
111 -This study examines **[core research question or focus]**, providing insights into **[main subject area]**. The research utilized **[sample size and methodology]** to assess **[key variables or measured outcomes]**.
382 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
383 + - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
384 + - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
112 112  
113 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
386 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
387 + - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
388 + - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
389 +{{/expandable}}
114 114  
115 ----
391 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
392 +1. **Primary Observations:**
393 + - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
394 + - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
116 116  
117 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
118 -{{velocity}}
119 -#set($doi = "[Insert DOI Here]")
120 -#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf")
121 -#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename"))
122 -[[Download>>attach:$filename]]
123 -#else
124 -{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
125 -#end
126 -{{/velocity}}
396 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
397 + - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
398 + - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
127 127  
128 -{{/expand}}
400 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
401 + - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
402 + - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
403 +{{/expandable}}
129 129  
130 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
405 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
406 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
407 + - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
408 + - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
131 131  
410 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
411 + - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
412 + - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
132 132  
414 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
415 + - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
416 + - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
417 +{{/expandable}}
133 133  
134 ----
419 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
420 +- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
421 +- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
422 +- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.
423 +{{/expandable}}
135 135  
136 -{{expand title="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018" expanded="false"}}
425 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
426 +1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
427 +2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
428 +3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
429 +{{/expandable}}
430 +
431 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
432 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
433 +{{/expandable}}
434 +{{/expandable}}
435 +
436 +{{expandable summary="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
437 +**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
438 +**Date of Publication:** *2010*
439 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
440 +**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
441 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
442 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology*
443 +
444 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
445 +1. **General Observations:**
446 + - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
447 + - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
448 +
449 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
450 + - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
451 + - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
452 +
453 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
454 + - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
455 + - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
456 +{{/expandable}}
457 +
458 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
459 +1. **Primary Observations:**
460 + - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
461 + - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
462 +
463 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
464 + - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
465 + - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
466 +
467 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
468 + - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
469 + - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
470 +{{/expandable}}
471 +
472 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
473 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
474 + - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
475 + - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
476 +
477 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
478 + - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
479 + - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
480 +
481 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
482 + - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
483 + - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
484 +{{/expandable}}
485 +
486 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
487 +- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
488 +- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
489 +- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.
490 +{{/expandable}}
491 +
492 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
493 +1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
494 +2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
495 +3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
496 +{{/expandable}}
497 +
498 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
499 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
500 +{{/expandable}}
501 +{{/expandable}}
502 +
503 += IQ =
504 +
505 +{{expandable summary="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
506 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
507 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
508 +**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
509 +**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
510 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
511 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis*
512 +
513 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
514 +1. **General Observations:**
515 + - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
516 + - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
517 +
518 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
519 + - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
520 + - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
521 +
522 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
523 + - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
524 + - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
525 +{{/expandable}}
526 +
527 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
528 +1. **Primary Observations:**
529 + - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
530 + - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
531 +
532 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
533 + - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
534 + - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
535 +
536 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
537 + - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
538 + - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
539 +{{/expandable}}
540 +
541 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
542 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
543 + - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
544 + - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
545 +
546 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
547 + - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
548 + - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
549 +
550 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
551 + - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
552 + - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
553 +{{/expandable}}
554 +
555 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
556 +- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
557 +- Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
558 +- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.
559 +{{/expandable}}
560 +
561 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
562 +1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
563 +2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
564 +3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
565 +{{/expandable}}
566 +
567 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
568 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
569 +{{/expandable}}
570 +{{/expandable}}
571 +
572 +{{expandable summary="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
573 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
574 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
575 +**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
576 +**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
577 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
578 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences*
579 +
580 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
581 +1. **General Observations:**
582 + - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
583 + - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
584 +
585 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
586 + - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
587 + - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
588 +
589 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
590 + - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
591 + - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
592 +{{/expandable}}
593 +
594 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
595 +1. **Primary Observations:**
596 + - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
597 + - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
598 +
599 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
600 + - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
601 + - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
602 +
603 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
604 + - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
605 + - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
606 +{{/expandable}}
607 +
608 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
609 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
610 + - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
611 + - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
612 +
613 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
614 + - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
615 + - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
616 +
617 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
618 + - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
619 + - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
620 +{{/expandable}}
621 +
622 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
623 +- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
624 +- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
625 +- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.
626 +{{/expandable}}
627 +
628 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
629 +1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
630 +2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
631 +3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
632 +{{/expandable}}
633 +
634 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
635 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
636 +{{/expandable}}
637 +{{/expandable}}
638 +
639 +{{expandable summary="Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding"}}
640 +**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
641 +**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
642 +**Author(s):** Smith et al.
643 +**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
644 +**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
645 +**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science
646 +{{/expandable}}
647 +
648 += Dating =
649 +
650 +{{expandable summary="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"}}
137 137  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
138 138  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
139 139  **Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.*
140 140  **Title:** *"Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"*
141 141  **DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833)
142 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography*
656 +**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography* 
143 143  
144 ----
145 -
146 -## **Key Statistics**
658 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
147 147  1. **General Observations:**
148 148   - Study analyzed **General Social Survey (2000-2018)** data.
149 149   - Found **declining trends in sexual activity** among young adults.
... ... @@ -155,10 +155,9 @@
155 155  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
156 156   - Frequency of sexual activity decreased by **8-10%** over the studied period.
157 157   - Number of sexual partners remained **relatively stable** despite declining activity rates.
670 +{{/expandable}}
158 158  
159 ----
160 -
161 -## **Findings**
672 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
162 162  1. **Primary Observations:**
163 163   - A significant decline in sexual frequency, especially among **younger men**.
164 164   - Shifts in relationship dynamics and economic stressors may contribute to the trend.
... ... @@ -170,10 +170,9 @@
170 170  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
171 171   - **Mental health and employment status** were correlated with decreased activity.
172 172   - Social factors such as **screen time and digital entertainment consumption** are potential contributors.
684 +{{/expandable}}
173 173  
174 ----
175 -
176 -## **Critique and Observations**
686 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
177 177  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
178 178   - **Large sample size** from a nationally representative dataset.
179 179   - **Longitudinal design** enables trend analysis over time.
... ... @@ -185,55 +185,101 @@
185 185  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
186 186   - Further studies should incorporate **qualitative data** on behavioral shifts.
187 187   - Additional factors such as **economic shifts and social media usage** need exploration.
698 +{{/expandable}}
188 188  
189 ----
190 -
191 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
700 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
192 192  - Provides evidence on **changing demographic behaviors** in relation to relationships and social interactions.
193 193  - Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.
703 +{{/expandable}}
194 194  
195 ----
196 -
197 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
705 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
198 198  1. Investigate the **impact of digital media consumption** on relationship dynamics.
199 199  2. Examine **regional and cultural differences** in sexual activity trends.
708 +{{/expandable}}
200 200  
201 ----
710 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
711 +
712 +{{/expandable}}
713 +{{/expandable}}
202 202  
203 -## **Summary of Research Study**
204 -This study examines **trends in sexual frequency and number of partners among U.S. adults (2000-2018)**, highlighting significant **declines in sexual activity, particularly among young men**. The research utilized **General Social Survey data** to analyze the impact of **sociodemographic factors, employment status, and mental well-being** on sexual behavior.
715 +{{expandable summary="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
716 +**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
717 +**Date of Publication:** *2012*
718 +**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
719 +**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
720 +**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
721 +**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities*
205 205  
206 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
723 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
724 +1. **General Observations:**
725 + - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
726 + - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
207 207  
208 ----
728 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
729 + - **Maternal race had a stronger influence than paternal race** on birth outcomes.
730 + - **Black mother–White father (BMWF) couples** had a higher risk than **White mother–Black father (WMBF) couples**.
209 209  
210 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
211 -{{velocity}}
212 -#set($doi = "10.1001_jamanetworkopen.2020.3833")
213 -#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf")
214 -#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename"))
215 -[[Download>>attach:$filename]]
216 -#else
217 -{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
218 -#end
219 -{{/velocity}}
732 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
733 + - **Adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) for key outcomes:**
734 + - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
735 + - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
736 + - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
737 +{{/expandable}}
220 220  
221 -{{/expand}}
739 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
740 +1. **Primary Observations:**
741 + - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
742 + - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
222 222  
223 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
744 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
745 + - **Black mothers (regardless of paternal race) had the highest risk of LBW and PTB**.
746 + - **White mothers with Black fathers had a lower risk** than Black mothers with White fathers.
224 224  
748 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
749 + - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
750 + - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
751 +{{/expandable}}
225 225  
226 -{{expand title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness" expanded="false"}}
227 -**Source:** *Current Psychology*
228 -**Date of Publication:** *2024*
229 -**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
230 -**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
231 -**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
232 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
753 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
754 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
755 + - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
756 + - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
233 233  
234 ----
758 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
759 + - Data limited to **Black-White biracial couples**, excluding other racial groups.
760 + - **Socioeconomic and healthcare access factors** not fully explored.
235 235  
236 -## **Key Statistics**
762 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
763 + - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
764 + - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
765 +{{/expandable}}
766 +
767 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
768 +- Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
769 +- Supports **research on genetic and environmental influences on neonatal health**.
770 +- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.
771 +{{/expandable}}
772 +
773 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
774 +1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
775 +2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
776 +3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
777 +{{/expandable}}
778 +
779 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
780 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]
781 +{{/expandable}}
782 +{{/expandable}}
783 +
784 +{{expandable summary="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
785 +**Source:** *Current Psychology*
786 +**Date of Publication:** *2024*
787 +**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
788 +**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
789 +**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
790 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
791 +
792 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
237 237  1. **General Observations:**
238 238   - Study analyzed **67 self-identified incels** and **103 non-incel men**.
239 239   - Incels reported **higher loneliness and lower social support** compared to non-incels.
... ... @@ -245,10 +245,9 @@
245 245  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
246 246   - 95% of incels in the study reported **having depression**, with 38% receiving a formal diagnosis.
247 247   - **Higher externalization of blame** was linked to stronger incel identification.
804 +{{/expandable}}
248 248  
249 ----
250 -
251 -## **Findings**
806 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
252 252  1. **Primary Observations:**
253 253   - Incels experience **heightened rejection sensitivity and loneliness**.
254 254   - Lack of social support correlates with **worse mental health outcomes**.
... ... @@ -260,10 +260,9 @@
260 260  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
261 261   - Incels **engaged in fewer positive coping mechanisms** such as emotional support or positive reframing.
262 262   - Instead, they relied on **solitary coping strategies**, worsening their isolation.
818 +{{/expandable}}
263 263  
264 ----
265 -
266 -## **Critique and Observations**
820 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
267 267  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
268 268   - **First quantitative study** on incels’ social isolation and mental health.
269 269   - **Robust sample size** and validated psychological measures.
... ... @@ -275,115 +275,240 @@
275 275  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
276 276   - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**.
277 277   - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration.
832 +{{/expandable}}
278 278  
279 ----
280 -
281 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
834 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
282 282  - Highlights **mental health vulnerabilities** within the incel community.
283 283  - Supports research on **loneliness, attachment styles, and social dominance orientation**.
284 284  - Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.
838 +{{/expandable}}
285 285  
286 ----
287 -
288 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
840 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
289 289  1. Explore how **online community participation** affects incel mental health.
290 290  2. Investigate **cognitive biases** influencing self-perceived rejection among incels.
291 291  3. Assess **therapeutic interventions** to address incel social isolation.
844 +{{/expandable}}
292 292  
293 ----
846 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
847 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
848 +{{/expandable}}
849 +{{/expandable}}
294 294  
295 -## **Summary of Research Study**
296 -This study examines the **psychological characteristics of self-identified incels**, comparing them with non-incel men in terms of **mental health, loneliness, and coping strategies**. The research found **higher depression, anxiety, and avoidant attachment styles among incels**, as well as **greater reliance on solitary coping mechanisms**. It suggests that **lack of social support plays a critical role in exacerbating incel identity and related mental health concerns**.
851 += Crime and Substance Abuse =
297 297  
298 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
853 +{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
854 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
855 +**Date of Publication:** *2002*
856 +**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
857 +**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
858 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
859 +**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
299 299  
300 ----
861 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
862 +1. **General Observations:**
863 + - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
864 + - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
301 301  
302 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
303 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
866 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
867 + - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
868 + - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
304 304  
305 -{{/expand}}
870 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
871 + - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
872 + - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
873 +{{/expandable}}
306 306  
307 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
875 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
876 +1. **Primary Observations:**
877 + - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
878 + - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
308 308  
309 -{{expand title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults" expanded="false"}} Source: Addictive Behaviors
310 -Date of Publication: 2016
311 -Author(s): Andrea Hussong, Christy Capron, Gregory T. Smith, Jennifer L. Maggs
312 -Title: "Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"
313 -DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.02.030
314 -Subject Matter: Substance Use, Mental Health, Adolescent Development
880 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
881 + - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
882 + - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
315 315  
316 -Key Statistics
317 -General Observations:
884 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
885 + - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
886 + - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
887 +{{/expandable}}
318 318  
319 -Study examined cannabis use trends in young adults over time.
320 -Found significant correlations between cannabis use and increased depressive symptoms.
321 -Subgroup Analysis:
889 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
890 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
891 + - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
892 + - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
322 322  
323 -Males exhibited higher rates of cannabis use, but females reported stronger mental health impacts.
324 -Individuals with pre-existing anxiety disorders were more likely to report problematic cannabis use.
325 -Other Significant Data Points:
894 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
895 + - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
896 + - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
326 326  
327 -Frequent cannabis users showed a 23% higher likelihood of developing anxiety symptoms.
328 -Co-occurring substance use (e.g., alcohol) exacerbated negative psychological effects.
329 -Findings
330 -Primary Observations:
898 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
899 + - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
900 + - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
901 +{{/expandable}}
331 331  
332 -Cannabis use was linked to higher depressive and anxiety symptoms, particularly in frequent users.
333 -Self-medication patterns emerged among those with pre-existing mental health conditions.
334 -Subgroup Trends:
903 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
904 +- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
905 +- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
906 +- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
907 +{{/expandable}}
335 335  
336 -Early cannabis initiation (before age 16) was associated with greater mental health risks.
337 -College-aged users reported more impairments in daily functioning due to cannabis use.
338 -Specific Case Analysis:
909 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
910 +1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
911 +2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
912 +3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
913 +{{/expandable}}
339 339  
340 -Participants with a history of childhood trauma were twice as likely to develop problematic cannabis use.
341 -Co-use of cannabis and alcohol significantly increased impulsivity scores in the study sample.
342 -Critique and Observations
343 -Strengths of the Study:
915 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
916 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
917 +{{/expandable}}
918 +{{/expandable}}
344 344  
345 -Large, longitudinal dataset with a diverse sample of young adults.
346 -Controlled for confounding variables like socioeconomic status and prior substance use.
347 -Limitations of the Study:
920 +{{expandable summary="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
921 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
922 +**Date of Publication:** *2003*
923 +**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
924 +**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
925 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
926 +**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research*
348 348  
349 -Self-reported cannabis use may introduce bias in reported frequency and effects.
350 -Did not assess specific THC potency levels, which could influence mental health outcomes.
351 -Suggestions for Improvement:
928 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
929 +1. **General Observations:**
930 + - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
931 + - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
352 352  
353 -Future research should investigate dose-dependent effects of cannabis on mental health.
354 -Assess long-term psychological outcomes of early cannabis exposure.
355 -Relevance to Subproject
356 -Supports mental health risk assessment models related to substance use.
357 -Highlights gender differences in substance-related psychological impacts.
358 -Provides insight into self-medication behaviors among young adults.
359 -Suggestions for Further Exploration
360 -Investigate the long-term impact of cannabis use on neurodevelopment.
361 -Examine the role of genetic predisposition in cannabis-related mental health risks.
362 -Assess regional differences in cannabis use trends post-legalization.
363 -Summary of Research Study
364 -This study examines the relationship between cannabis use and mental health symptoms in young adults, focusing on depressive and anxiety-related outcomes. Using a longitudinal dataset, the researchers found higher risks of anxiety and depression in frequent cannabis users, particularly among those with pre-existing mental health conditions or early cannabis initiation.
933 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
934 + - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents.
935 + - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy.
365 365  
366 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
937 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
938 + - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
939 + - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
940 +{{/expandable}}
367 367  
368 -📄 Download Full Study
369 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.addbeh.2016.02.030.pdf]]
942 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
943 +1. **Primary Observations:**
944 + - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
945 + - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
370 370  
371 -{{/expand}}
947 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
948 + - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
949 + - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
372 372  
373 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
951 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
952 + - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
953 + - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
954 +{{/expandable}}
374 374  
375 -{{expand title="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?" expanded="false"}}
376 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
377 -**Date of Publication:** *2014*
378 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
379 -**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
380 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
381 -**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
956 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
957 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
958 + - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
959 + - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
382 382  
383 ----
961 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
962 + - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
963 + - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
384 384  
385 -## **Key Statistics**
965 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
966 + - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
967 + - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
968 +{{/expandable}}
969 +
970 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
971 +- Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
972 +- Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
973 +- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.
974 +{{/expandable}}
975 +
976 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
977 +1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
978 +2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
979 +3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
980 +{{/expandable}}
981 +
982 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
983 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]
984 +{{/expandable}}
985 +{{/expandable}}
986 +
987 +{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
988 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
989 +**Date of Publication:** *2002*
990 +**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
991 +**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
992 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
993 +**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
994 +
995 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
386 386  1. **General Observations:**
997 + - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
998 + - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
999 +
1000 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1001 + - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
1002 + - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
1003 +
1004 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1005 + - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1006 + - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1007 +{{/expandable}}
1008 +
1009 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1010 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1011 + - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1012 + - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
1013 +
1014 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1015 + - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
1016 + - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
1017 +
1018 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1019 + - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1020 + - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1021 +{{/expandable}}
1022 +
1023 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1024 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1025 + - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1026 + - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
1027 +
1028 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1029 + - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
1030 + - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
1031 +
1032 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1033 + - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1034 + - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1035 +{{/expandable}}
1036 +
1037 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1038 +- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1039 +- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1040 +- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
1041 +{{/expandable}}
1042 +
1043 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1044 +1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1045 +2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1046 +3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1047 +{{/expandable}}
1048 +
1049 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1050 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
1051 +{{/expandable}}
1052 +{{/expandable}}
1053 +
1054 +{{expandable summary="
1055 +
1056 +Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
1057 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1058 +**Date of Publication:** *2014*
1059 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1060 +**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1061 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
1062 +**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
1063 +
1064 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1065 +1. **General Observations:**
387 387   - The study examines reaction time data from **13 age-matched studies** spanning **1884–2004**.
388 388   - Results suggest an estimated **decline of 13.35 IQ points** over this period.
389 389  
... ... @@ -394,10 +394,9 @@
394 394  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
395 395   - The estimated **dysgenic rate is 1.21 IQ points lost per decade**.
396 396   - Meta-regression analysis confirmed a **steady secular trend in slowing reaction time**.
1076 +{{/expandable}}
397 397  
398 ----
399 -
400 -## **Findings**
1078 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
401 401  1. **Primary Observations:**
402 402   - Supports the hypothesis of **intelligence decline due to genetic and environmental factors**.
403 403   - Reaction time, a **biomarker for cognitive ability**, has slowed significantly over time.
... ... @@ -409,10 +409,9 @@
409 409  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
410 410   - Cross-national comparisons indicate a **global trend in slower reaction times**.
411 411   - Factors like **modern neurotoxin exposure** and **reduced selective pressure for intelligence** may contribute.
1090 +{{/expandable}}
412 412  
413 ----
414 -
415 -## **Critique and Observations**
1092 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
416 416  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
417 417   - **Comprehensive meta-analysis** covering over a century of reaction time data.
418 418   - **Robust statistical corrections** for measurement variance between historical and modern studies.
... ... @@ -424,365 +424,672 @@
424 424  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
425 425   - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
426 426   - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
1104 +{{/expandable}}
427 427  
428 ----
429 -
430 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1106 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
431 431  - Provides evidence for **long-term intelligence trends**, contributing to research on **cognitive evolution**.
432 432  - Aligns with broader discussions on **dysgenics, neurophysiology, and cognitive load**.
433 433  - Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
1110 +{{/expandable}}
434 434  
435 ----
436 -
437 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
1112 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
438 438  1. Investigate **genetic markers associated with reaction time** and intelligence decline.
439 439  2. Examine **regional variations in reaction time trends**.
440 440  3. Explore **cognitive resilience factors that counteract the decline**.
1116 +{{/expandable}}
441 441  
442 ----
443 -
444 -## **Summary of Research Study**
445 -This study examines **historical reaction time data** as a measure of **cognitive ability and intelligence decline**, analyzing data from **Western populations between 1884 and 2004**. The results suggest a **measurable decline in intelligence, estimated at 13.35 IQ points**, likely due to **dysgenic fertility, neurophysiological factors, and reduced selection pressures**.
446 -
447 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
448 -
449 ----
450 -
451 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1118 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
452 452  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]
1120 +{{/expandable}}
1121 +{{/expandable}}
453 453  
454 -{{/expand}}
1123 += Whiteness & White Guilt =
455 455  
456 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1125 +{{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1126 +**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
1127 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
1128 +**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
1129 +**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
1130 +**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
1131 +**Subject Matter:** *Critical Race Theory, Sports Sociology, Anti-White Institutional Framing*
457 457  
458 -{{expand title="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation" expanded="false"}}
459 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
460 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
461 -**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
462 -**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
463 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
464 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences*
465 -
466 ----
467 -
468 -## **Key Statistics**
1133 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
469 469  1. **General Observations:**
470 - - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
471 - - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
1135 + - Based on **47 athlete interviews**, cherry-picked from non-revenue Division I sports.
1136 + - The study claims **segregation”**, but presents no evidence of actual exclusion or policy bias — just demographic imbalance.
472 472  
473 473  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
474 - - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
475 - - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
1139 + - Attributes **White participation** in certain sports to "systemic racism", ignoring **self-selection, geography, and cultural affinity**.
1140 + - Claims White athletes are “protected” from race discussions but never engages with **Black overrepresentation in revenue sports**.
476 476  
477 477  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
478 - - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
479 - - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
1143 + - White athletes are portrayed as **ignorant of their privilege**, a claim drawn entirely from CRT frameworks rather than behavior or outcome.
1144 + - **No empirical data** is offered on policy, scholarship distribution, or team selection criteria.
1145 +{{/expandable}}
480 480  
481 ----
482 -
483 -## **Findings**
1147 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
484 484  1. **Primary Observations:**
485 - - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
486 - - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
1149 + - Frames **normal demographic patterns** (e.g., majority-White rosters in tennis or rowing) as "institutional whiteness".
1150 + - **Ignores the structural dominance** of Black athletes in high-profile revenue sports like football and basketball.
487 487  
488 488  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
489 - - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
490 - - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
1153 + - White athletes are criticized for **lacking racial awareness**, reinforcing the moral framing of **Whiteness as inherently problematic**.
1154 + - **Cultural preference, individual merit, and athletic subculture** are all excluded from consideration.
491 491  
492 492  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
493 - - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
494 - - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
1157 + - Argues that college sports **reinforce racial hierarchy** without ever showing how White athletes benefit more than Black athletes.
1158 + - Offers **no comparative analysis** of scholarships, graduation rates, or media portrayal by race.
1159 +{{/expandable}}
495 495  
496 ----
497 -
498 -## **Critique and Observations**
1161 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
499 499  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
500 - - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
501 - - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
1163 + - Useful as a clear example of **how CRT ideologues weaponize demography** to frame White majority spaces as inherently suspect.
1164 + - Shows how **academic literature systematically avoids symmetrical analysis** when outcomes favor White participants.
502 502  
503 503  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
504 - - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
505 - - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
1167 + - **Excludes revenue sports**, where Black athletes dominate by numbers, prestige, and compensation.
1168 + - **Fails to explain** how team composition emerges from voluntary participation, geography, or subcultural identity.
1169 + - Treats **racial imbalance as proof of racism**, bypassing merit, interest, or socioeconomic context.
506 506  
507 507  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
508 - - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
509 - - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
1172 + - Include **White athlete perspectives** without pre-framing them as racially naive or complicit.
1173 + - **Compare all sports**, including those where Black athletes thrive and lead.
1174 + - Remove CRT framing and **evaluate outcomes empirically**, not ideologically.
1175 +{{/expandable}}
510 510  
511 ----
1177 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1178 +- Demonstrates how **DEI-aligned research reframes benign patterns** as oppressive when White majorities are involved.
1179 +- Illustrates **anti-White academic framing** in environments where no institutional barrier exists.
1180 +- Provides a concrete example of how **CRT avoids acknowledging Black dominance in elite spaces** (revenue athletics).
1181 +{{/expandable}}
512 512  
513 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
514 -- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
515 -- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
516 -- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.
1183 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1184 +1. Investigate **racial self-sorting and cultural affiliation** in athletic participation.
1185 +2. Compare **media framing of White-majority vs. Black-majority sports**.
1186 +3. Study **how CRT narratives distort athletic merit and demographic outcomes**.
1187 +{{/expandable}}
517 517  
518 ----
1189 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1190 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]
1191 +{{/expandable}}
1192 +{{/expandable}}
519 519  
520 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
521 -1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
522 -2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
523 -3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
524 524  
525 ----
1195 +{{expandable summary="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1196 +**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1197 +**Date of Publication:** *2016*
1198 +**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axt, M. Norman Oliver*
1199 +**Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
1200 +**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
1201 +**Subject Matter:** *Medical Ethics, Race in Medicine, Implicit Bias*
526 526  
527 -## **Summary of Research Study**
528 -This study reviews **genome-wide association study (GWAS) findings on intelligence**, demonstrating a **strong correlation between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**. The research highlights how **genetic selection may explain population-level cognitive differences beyond genetic drift effects**. Intelligence-linked alleles showed **higher variability across populations than height-related alleles**, suggesting stronger selection pressures.
1203 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1204 +1. **General Observations:**
1205 + - Analyzed responses from **222 white medical students and residents**.
1206 + - Investigated belief in **false biological differences between Black and White people**.
1207 + - Measured how those beliefs affected **pain ratings and treatment recommendations**.
529 529  
530 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1209 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1210 + - **50% of participants endorsed at least one false belief** (e.g., Black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings).
1211 + - Those who endorsed false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients' pain**.
531 531  
532 ----
1213 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1214 + - Bias was **most prominent among first-year students**, diminishing slightly with experience.
1215 + - Study used **hypothetical case vignettes**, not real patient data.
1216 +{{/expandable}}
533 533  
534 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
535 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
1218 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1219 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1220 + - False biological beliefs were **strongly correlated with racial disparity** in pain assessment.
1221 + - Endorsement of such beliefs led to **less appropriate treatment for Black patients** in fictional cases.
536 536  
537 -{{/expand}}
1223 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1224 + - Medical students with **no false beliefs showed no treatment bias**.
1225 + - No evidence was presented of **active discrimination** — bias appeared linked to **misinformation, not malice**.
538 538  
539 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1227 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1228 + - Fictional vignettes demonstrated that **misinformation about biology**, not systemic malice, led to unequal care.
1229 + - The study **did not show bias against White patients**, nor explore disparities affecting them.
1230 +{{/expandable}}
540 540  
541 -{{expand title="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media" expanded="false"}}
542 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
543 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
544 -**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
545 -**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
546 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
547 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis*
1232 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1233 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1234 + - Provides valuable insight into **how medical myths can affect judgment**.
1235 + - Demonstrates the importance of **clinical education and evidence-based practice**.
548 548  
549 ----
1237 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1238 + - Fails to examine **bias affecting White patients**, including under-treatment of opioid dependence or mental health.
1239 + - Only focuses on one direction of disparity, treating **White patients as a control** rather than a population worthy of study.
1240 + - **Overemphasizes "racial bias"** narrative despite the findings being more about **ignorance than intent**.
550 550  
551 -## **Key Statistics**
1242 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1243 + - Include **comparison groups for all races**, not just a binary Black–White framework.
1244 + - Investigate **systemic neglect of poor rural White populations**, especially in Appalachia and the Midwest.
1245 + - Clarify the **distinction between false belief and racial animus**, which the study conflates under CRT framing.
1246 +{{/expandable}}
1247 +
1248 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1249 +- Shows how **DEI-aligned narratives exploit limited findings** to vilify White professionals.
1250 +- Provides an example of a **legitimate medical education issue being repackaged as “racial bias.”**
1251 +- Highlights the **lack of reciprocal scrutiny** of how minorities may receive **preferential narrative framing** or **programmatic support**.
1252 +{{/expandable}}
1253 +
1254 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1255 +1. Study whether **DEI training reduces false beliefs** or simply **induces White guilt**.
1256 +2. Investigate **biases against White rural patients**, especially regarding **opioid or pain management stigma**.
1257 +3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**.
1258 +{{/expandable}}
1259 +
1260 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1261 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]
1262 +{{/expandable}}
1263 +{{/expandable}}
1264 +
1265 +
1266 +{{expandable summary="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1267 +**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1268 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
1269 +**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
1270 +**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
1271 +**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
1272 +**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors*
1273 +
1274 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
552 552  1. **General Observations:**
553 - - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
554 - - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
1276 + - Mortality rates among **middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans (ages 45–54)** increased from 1999 to 2013.
1277 + - This reversal in mortality trends is unique to the U.S.; **no other wealthy country experienced a similar rise**.
555 555  
556 556  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
557 - - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
558 - - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
1280 + - The increase was **most pronounced among those with a high school education or less**.
1281 + - Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic mortality continued to decline over the same period.
559 559  
560 560  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
561 - - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
562 - - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
1284 + - Rising mortality was driven primarily by **suicide, drug and alcohol poisoning, and chronic liver disease**.
1285 + - Midlife morbidity increased as well, with more reports of **poor health, pain, and mental distress**.
1286 +{{/expandable}}
563 563  
564 ----
565 -
566 -## **Findings**
1288 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
567 567  1. **Primary Observations:**
568 - - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
569 - - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
1290 + - The rise in mortality is attributed to **substance abuse, economic distress, and deteriorating mental health**.
1291 + - The increase in **suicides and opioid overdoses parallels broader socioeconomic decline**.
570 570  
571 571  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
572 - - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
573 - - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
1294 + - The **largest mortality increases** occurred among **whites without a college degree**.
1295 + - Chronic pain, functional limitations, and self-reported mental distress **rose significantly in affected groups**.
574 574  
575 575  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
576 - - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
577 - - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
1298 + - **Educational attainment was a major predictor of mortality trends**, with better-educated individuals experiencing lower mortality rates.
1299 + - Mortality among **white Americans with a college degree continued to decline**, resembling trends in other wealthy nations.
1300 +{{/expandable}}
578 578  
579 ----
580 -
581 -## **Critique and Observations**
1302 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
582 582  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
583 - - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
584 - - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
1304 + - **First major study to highlight rising midlife mortality among U.S. whites**.
1305 + - Uses **CDC and Census mortality data spanning over a decade**.
585 585  
586 586  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
587 - - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
588 - - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
1308 + - Does not establish **causality** between economic decline and increased mortality.
1309 + - Lacks **granular data on opioid prescribing patterns and regional differences**.
589 589  
590 590  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
591 - - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
592 - - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
1312 + - Future studies should explore **how economic shifts, healthcare access, and mental health treatment contribute to these trends**.
1313 + - Further research on **racial and socioeconomic disparities in mortality trends** is needed.
1314 +{{/expandable}}
593 593  
594 ----
1316 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1317 +- Highlights **socioeconomic and racial disparities** in health outcomes.
1318 +- Supports research on **substance abuse and mental health crises in the U.S.**.
1319 +- Provides evidence for **the role of economic instability in public health trends**.
1320 +{{/expandable}}
595 595  
596 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
597 -- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
598 -- Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
599 -- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.
1322 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1323 +1. Investigate **regional differences in rising midlife mortality**.
1324 +2. Examine the **impact of the opioid crisis on long-term health trends**.
1325 +3. Study **policy interventions aimed at reversing rising mortality rates**.
1326 +{{/expandable}}
600 600  
601 ----
1328 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1329 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]
1330 +{{/expandable}}
1331 +{{/expandable}}
602 602  
603 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
604 -1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
605 -2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
606 -3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
1333 +{{expandable summary="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
1334 +**Source:** *Urban Studies*
1335 +**Date of Publication:** *2023*
1336 +**Author(s):** *Nina Glick Schiller, Jens Schneider, Ayşe Çağlar*
1337 +**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
1338 +**DOI:** [10.1177/00420980231170057](https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231170057)
1339 +**Subject Matter:** *Urban Diversity, Migration, Identity Politics*
607 607  
608 ----
1341 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1342 +1. **General Observations:**
1343 + - Based on interviews with **White European residents** in three major European cities.
1344 + - Focused on how **"non-migrants" (code for native Whites)** perceive and adapt to so-called “superdiversity”.
609 609  
610 -## **Summary of Research Study**
611 -This study surveys **expert opinions on intelligence research**, analyzing **how backgrounds, political ideologies, and media representation influence perspectives on intelligence**. The findings highlight **divisions in scientific consensus**, particularly on **genetic vs. environmental causes of IQ disparities**. Additionally, the research uncovers **widespread dissatisfaction with media portrayals of intelligence research**, pointing to **the impact of ideological biases on public discourse**.
1346 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1347 + - Interviewees were **overwhelmingly framed as obstacles** to multicultural harmony.
1348 + - Researchers **pathologized attachment to local culture or ethnic identity** as “resistance to change”.
612 612  
613 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1350 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1351 + - Claims that even positive civic participation by Whites may **“reinforce white privilege.”**
1352 + - Provides **no quantitative data** on actual neighborhood changes or crime statistics.
1353 +{{/expandable}}
614 614  
615 ----
1355 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1356 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1357 + - Argues that White natives, by simply existing and having a historical presence, **“shape urban inequality.”**
1358 + - Positions White cultural norms as inherently oppressive or exclusionary.
616 616  
617 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
618 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
1360 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1361 + - Critiques White residents for seeking **cultural familiarity or demographic continuity.**
1362 + - Presents **White neighborhood cohesion** as a form of “invisible boundary-making.”
619 619  
620 -{{/expand}}
1364 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1365 + - Interviews frame **normal concerns about safety, schooling, or housing** as coded “racism.”
1366 + - Treats **multicultural disruption** as inherently positive, and **resistance as bigotry.**
1367 +{{/expandable}}
621 621  
622 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1369 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1370 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1371 + - Reveals how **social scientists increasingly treat Whiteness itself as a problem.**
1372 + - Offers an **unintentional case study in academic anti-White framing.**
623 623  
624 -{{expand title="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications" expanded="false"}}
625 -**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
626 -**Date of Publication:** *2010*
627 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
628 -**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
629 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
630 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology*
1374 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1375 + - **Completely ignores migrant-driven displacement** of working-class Whites.
1376 + - Makes **no attempt to understand White residents sympathetically**, only as barriers.
1377 + - Lacks analysis of **economic factors, crime, housing scarcity, or policy failures** contributing to discontent.
631 631  
632 ----
1379 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1380 + - Include **White perspectives without presuming guilt or fragility.**
1381 + - Disaggregate “White” by **class, locality, or experience** — not treat as a monolith.
1382 + - Balance cultural analysis with **hard demographic and economic data.**
1383 +{{/expandable}}
633 633  
634 -## **Key Statistics**
1385 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1386 +- Demonstrates how **academic literature increasingly stigmatizes White presence** in urban life.
1387 +- Shows how **“diversity” is defined as the absence or silence of native populations.**
1388 +- Useful for exposing how **CRT and superdiversity discourse erase White communities' legitimacy.**
1389 +{{/expandable}}
1390 +
1391 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1392 +1. Study the **psychological impact of demographic displacement** on native European populations.
1393 +2. Examine **rising crime and social fragmentation** in “superdiverse” zones.
1394 +3. Analyze how **housing, schooling, and local economies** are impacted by mass migration.
1395 +{{/expandable}}
1396 +
1397 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1398 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1177_00420980231170057.pdf]]
1399 +{{/expandable}}
1400 +{{/expandable}}
1401 +
1402 +
1403 += Media =
1404 +
1405 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic"}}
1406 +**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
1407 +**Date of Publication:** *2021*
1408 +**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
1409 +**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
1410 +**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
1411 +**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies*
1412 +
1413 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
635 635  1. **General Observations:**
636 - - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
637 - - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
1415 + - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
1416 + - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
638 638  
639 639  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
640 - - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
641 - - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
1419 + - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility.
1420 + - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**.
642 642  
643 643  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
644 - - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
645 - - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
1423 + - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
1424 + - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
1425 +{{/expandable}}
646 646  
647 ----
648 -
649 -## **Findings**
1427 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
650 650  1. **Primary Observations:**
651 - - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
652 - - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
1429 + - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
1430 + - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
653 653  
654 654  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
655 - - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
656 - - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
1433 + - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views.
1434 + - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions.
657 657  
658 658  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
659 - - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
660 - - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
1437 + - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
1438 + - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
1439 +{{/expandable}}
661 661  
662 ----
663 -
664 -## **Critique and Observations**
1441 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
665 665  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
666 - - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
667 - - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
1443 + - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
1444 + - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
668 668  
669 669  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
670 - - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
671 - - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
1447 + - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**.
1448 + - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives.
672 672  
673 673  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
674 - - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
675 - - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
1451 + - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
1452 + - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
1453 +{{/expandable}}
676 676  
677 ----
1455 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1456 +- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
1457 +- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
1458 +- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.
1459 +{{/expandable}}
678 678  
679 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
680 -- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
681 -- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
682 -- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.
1461 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1462 +1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
1463 +2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
1464 +3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
1465 +{{/expandable}}
683 683  
684 ----
1467 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1468 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]
1469 +{{/expandable}}
1470 +{{/expandable}}
685 685  
686 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
687 -1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
688 -2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
689 -3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
1472 +{{expandable summary="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
1473 +**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
1474 +**Date of Publication:** *2007*
1475 +**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
1476 +**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
1477 +**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
1478 +**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence*
690 690  
691 ----
1480 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1481 +1. **General Observations:**
1482 + - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
1483 + - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
692 692  
693 -## **Summary of Research Study**
694 -This study evaluates **whether Homo sapiens should be classified as a polytypic species**, analyzing **genetic diversity, evolutionary lineage, and morphological variation**. Using comparative analysis with other primates and mammals, the research suggests that **human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**, with implications for **evolutionary biology, anthropology, and medicine**.
1485 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1486 + - **Equality-based framing decreases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
1487 + - **Morality-based framing increases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
695 695  
696 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1489 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1490 + - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
1491 + - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
1492 +{{/expandable}}
697 697  
698 ----
1494 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1495 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1496 + - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
1497 + - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
699 699  
700 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
701 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
1499 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1500 + - **Religious and conservative audiences** respond more to morality-based framing.
1501 + - **Younger and progressive audiences** respond more to equality-based framing.
702 702  
703 -{{/expand}}
1503 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1504 + - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
1505 + - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
1506 +{{/expandable}}
704 704  
705 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1508 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1509 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1510 + - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
1511 + - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
706 706  
707 -{{expand title="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age" expanded="false"}}
708 -**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
709 -**Date of Publication:** *2013*
710 -**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
711 -**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
712 -**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
713 -**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology*
1513 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1514 + - Focuses **only on U.S. media coverage**, limiting global applicability.
1515 + - Does not account for **social media's growing influence** on public opinion.
714 714  
715 ----
1517 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1518 + - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
1519 + - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
1520 +{{/expandable}}
716 716  
717 -## **Key Statistics**
1522 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1523 +- Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
1524 +- Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
1525 +- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.
1526 +{{/expandable}}
1527 +
1528 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1529 +1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
1530 +2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
1531 +3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
1532 +{{/expandable}}
1533 +
1534 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1535 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]
1536 +{{/expandable}}
1537 +{{/expandable}}
1538 +
1539 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
1540 +**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1541 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
1542 +**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
1543 +**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
1544 +**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
1545 +**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion*
1546 +
1547 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
718 718  1. **General Observations:**
719 - - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
720 - - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
1549 + - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
1550 + - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
721 721  
722 722  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
723 - - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
724 - - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
1553 + - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content.
1554 + - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**.
725 725  
726 726  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
727 - - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
728 - - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
1557 + - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
1558 + - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
1559 +{{/expandable}}
729 729  
730 ----
731 -
732 -## **Findings**
1561 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
733 733  1. **Primary Observations:**
734 - - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
735 - - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
1563 + - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
1564 + - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
736 736  
737 737  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
738 - - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
739 - - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
1567 + - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites.
1568 + - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**.
740 740  
741 741  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
742 - - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
743 - - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
1571 + - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
1572 + - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
1573 +{{/expandable}}
744 744  
745 ----
746 -
747 -## **Critique and Observations**
1575 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
748 748  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
749 - - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
750 - - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
1577 + - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
1578 + - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
751 751  
752 752  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
753 - - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
754 - - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
1581 + - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up.
1582 + - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**.
755 755  
756 756  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
757 - - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
758 - - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
1585 + - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
1586 + - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
1587 +{{/expandable}}
759 759  
760 ----
1589 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1590 +- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
1591 +- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
1592 +- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.
1593 +{{/expandable}}
761 761  
762 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
763 -- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
764 -- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
765 -- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.
1595 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1596 +1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
1597 +2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
1598 +3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
1599 +{{/expandable}}
766 766  
767 ----
1601 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1602 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]
1603 +{{/expandable}}
1604 +{{/expandable}}
768 768  
769 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
770 -1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
771 -2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
772 -3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
1606 +{{expandable summary="Study: White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years"}}
1607 +Source: Journal of Advertising Research
1608 +Date of Publication: 2022
1609 +Author(s): Peter M. Lenk, Eric T. Bradlow, Randolph E. Bucklin, Sungeun (Clara) Kim
1610 +Title: "White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years: A Meta-Analysis"
1611 +DOI: 10.2501/JAR-2022-028
1612 +Subject Matter: Advertising Trends, Racial Representation, Cultural Shifts
773 773  
774 ----
1614 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
775 775  
776 -## **Summary of Research Study**
777 -This study documents **The Wilson Effect**, demonstrating how the **heritability of IQ increases throughout development**, reaching a plateau of **0.80 by adulthood**. The findings indicate that **shared environmental effects diminish with age**, while **genetic influences on intelligence strengthen**. Using **longitudinal twin and adoption data**, the research provides **strong empirical support for the increasing role of genetics in cognitive ability over time**.
1616 +**General Observations:**
778 778  
779 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1618 +Meta-analysis of 74 studies conducted between 1955 and 2020 on racial representation in advertising.
780 780  
781 ----
1620 +Sample included mostly White U.S. participants, with consistent tracking of their preferences.
782 782  
783 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
784 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
1622 +**Subgroup Analysis:**
785 785  
786 -{{/expand}}
1624 +Found a steady increase in positive responses toward Black models/actors in ads by White viewers.
787 787  
788 -{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1626 +Recent decades show equal or greater preference for Black faces compared to White ones.
1627 +
1628 +**Other Significant Data Points:**
1629 +
1630 +Study frames this shift as a positive move toward diversity, ignoring implications for displaced White cultural representation.
1631 +
1632 +No equivalent data was collected on Black or Hispanic attitudes toward White representation.
1633 +{{/expandable}}
1634 +
1635 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1636 +
1637 +**Primary Observations:**
1638 +
1639 +White Americans have become increasingly receptive or favorable toward Black figures in advertising, even over timeframes of widespread cultural change.
1640 +
1641 +These preferences held across product types, media formats, and ad genres.
1642 +
1643 +**Subgroup Trends:**
1644 +
1645 +Studies from the 1960s–1980s showed preference for in-group racial representation, which has dropped sharply for Whites in recent decades.
1646 +
1647 +The largest positive attitudinal shift occurred between 1995–2020, coinciding with major DEI and cultural programming trends.
1648 +
1649 +**Specific Case Analysis:**
1650 +
1651 +The authors position this as “progress,” but offer no critical reflection on the effects of displacing White imagery from national advertising narratives.
1652 +
1653 +Completely omits consumer preference studies in countries outside the U.S., especially in more homogeneous nations.
1654 +{{/expandable}}
1655 +
1656 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1657 +
1658 +**Strengths of the Study:**
1659 +
1660 +Large-scale dataset across decades provides a clear empirical view of long-term trends.
1661 +
1662 +Useful as a benchmark of how White American preferences have evolved under sociocultural pressure.
1663 +
1664 +**Limitations of the Study:**
1665 +
1666 +Fails to ask whether increasing diversity is consumer-driven or culturally imposed.
1667 +
1668 +Ignores the potential alienation or displacement of White cultural identity from mainstream advertising.
1669 +
1670 +Assumes “diverse equals better” without testing economic or emotional impact of those shifts.
1671 +
1672 +**Suggestions for Improvement:**
1673 +
1674 +Include non-White viewer reactions to all-White or traditional American imagery for balance.
1675 +
1676 +Test whether consumers notice racial proportions or experience fatigue from overcorrection.
1677 +
1678 +Explore regional or class-based variance among White viewers, not just aggregate averages.
1679 +{{/expandable}}
1680 +
1681 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1682 +
1683 +Demonstrates how White cultural imagery has been steadily replaced or downplayed in the public sphere.
1684 +
1685 +Useful for showing how marketing professionals and researchers frame White displacement as “progress.”
1686 +
1687 +Empirically supports the decline of White in-group preference — possibly due to reeducation, guilt framing, or media saturation.
1688 +{{/expandable}}
1689 +
1690 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1691 +
1692 +Study how overrepresentation of minorities in advertising compares to actual demographics.
1693 +
1694 +Examine whether consumers feel represented or alienated by identity-based marketing.
1695 +
1696 +Investigate the psychological and cultural impact of long-term demographic displacement in national advertising.
1697 +{{/expandable}}
1698 +
1699 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1700 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.2501_JAR-2022-028.pdf]]
1701 +{{/expandable}}
1702 +{{/expandable}}
1703 +
1704 +{{expandable summary="Study: Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"}}
1705 +**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1706 +**Date of Publication:** *2020*
1707 +**Author(s):** *John A. Banas, Lauren L. Miller, David A. Braddock, Sun Kyong Lee*
1708 +**Title:** *"Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"*
1709 +**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqz032](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz032)
1710 +**Subject Matter:** *Media Psychology, Prejudice Reduction, Intergroup Relations*
1711 +
1712 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1713 +1. **General Observations:**
1714 + - Aggregated **71 studies involving 27,000+ participants**.
1715 + - Focused on how **media portrayals of out-groups (primarily minorities)** affect attitudes among dominant in-groups (i.e., Whites).
1716 +
1717 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1718 + - **Fictional entertainment** had stronger effects than news.
1719 + - **Positive portrayals of minorities** correlated with significant reductions in “prejudice”.
1720 +
1721 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1722 + - Effects were stronger when minority characters were portrayed as **warm, competent, and morally relatable**.
1723 + - Contact was more effective when it mimicked **face-to-face friendship narratives**.
1724 +{{/expandable}}
1725 +
1726 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1727 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1728 + - Media is a **powerful tool for shaping racial attitudes**, capable of reducing “prejudice” without real-world contact.
1729 + - **Repeated exposure** to positive portrayals of minorities led to increased acceptance and reduced negative bias.
1730 +
1731 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1732 + - **White participants** were the primary targets of reconditioning.
1733 + - Minority participants were not studied in terms of **prejudice against Whites**.
1734 +
1735 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1736 + - “Parasocial” relationships with minority characters (TV/movie exposure) had comparable psychological effects to actual friendships.
1737 + - Media framing functioned as a **top-down mechanism for social engineering**, not just passive reflection of society.
1738 +{{/expandable}}
1739 +
1740 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1741 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1742 + - High-quality quantitative meta-analysis with clear design and robust statistical handling.
1743 + - Acknowledges **media’s ability to alter long-held social beliefs** without physical contact.
1744 +
1745 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1746 + - Only defines “prejudice” as **negative attitudes from Whites toward minorities** — no exploration of anti-White media narratives or bias.
1747 + - Ignores the effects of **overexposure to minority portrayals** on cultural alienation or backlash.
1748 + - Assumes **assimilation into DEI norms is inherently positive**, and any reluctance to accept them is “prejudice”.
1749 +
1750 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1751 + - Study reciprocal dynamics — how **minority media portrayals impact attitudes toward Whites**.
1752 + - Investigate whether constant valorization of minorities leads to **resentment, guilt, or political disengagement** among White viewers.
1753 + - Analyze **media saturation effects**, especially in multicultural propaganda and corporate DEI messaging.
1754 +{{/expandable}}
1755 +
1756 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1757 +- Provides **direct evidence** that media is being used to **reshape racial attitudes** through emotional, parasocial contact.
1758 +- Reinforces concern that **“tolerance” is engineered via asymmetric emotional exposure**, not organic consensus.
1759 +- Useful for documenting how **Whiteness is often treated as a bias to be corrected**, not a culture to be respected.
1760 +{{/expandable}}
1761 +
1762 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1763 +1. Investigate **reverse parasocial effects** — how negative portrayals of White men affect self-perception and mental health.
1764 +2. Study how **mass entertainment normalizes demographic shifts** and silences native concerns.
1765 +3. Compare effects of **Western vs. non-Western media systems** in promoting diversity narratives.
1766 +{{/expandable}}
1767 +
1768 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1769 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf]]
1770 +{{/expandable}}
1771 +{{/expandable}}
1772 +
Cultural Voyeurism A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Intera.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +103.1 KB
Content
lenk-et-al-white-americans-preference-for-black-people-in-advertising-has-increased-in-the-past-66-years-a-meta-analysis.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2.1 MB
Content