Skip to Content

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

0.0
1
2
3
4
5

0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From 72.1 to 73.1 From 76.1 to 77.1

From version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 05:19

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 05:33

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

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

Details

Page properties

Content

@@ -11,8 +11,8 @@
  - Use the **search function** (Ctrl + F or XWiki's built-in search) to quickly find specific topics or authors.
  - If needed, you can export this page as **PDF or print-friendly format**, and all studies will automatically expand for readability.
--{{toc/}}
++
  == Research Studies Repository ==
@@ -1788,124 +1788,412 @@
  {{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
--Study 1: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict
--Source: Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
--Date of Publication: 2021
--Author(s): Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick
--Title: "The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"
--DOI: 10.1093/jcmc/zmab003
--Subject Matter: Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies
++{{expand title="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict" expanded="false"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2021*
++**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
++**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
++**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies*
--Key Statistics
--General Observations:
++---
--Analyzed over 500,000 social media interactions related to intergroup conflict.
--Found that computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization.
--Subgroup Analysis:
++## **Key Statistics**
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
++   - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
--Anonymity and reduced social cues in CMC increased hostility.
--Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments.
--Other Significant Data Points:
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility.
++   - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**.
--Misinformation spread 3x faster in polarized online discussions.
--Users exposed to conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse.
--Findings
--Primary Observations:
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
++   - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
--Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
--Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation.
--Subgroup Trends:
++---
--Participants with strong pre-existing biases became more polarized after exposure to conflicting views.
--Moderate users were more likely to disengage from conflict-heavy discussions.
--Specific Case Analysis:
++## **Findings**
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
++   - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
--CMC increased political tribalism in digital spaces.
--Emotional language spread more widely than factual content.
--Critique and Observations
--Strengths of the Study:
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views.
++   - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions.
--Largest dataset to date analyzing CMC and intergroup conflict.
--Uses longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time.
--Limitations of the Study:
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
++   - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
--Lacks qualitative analysis of user motivations.
--Focuses on Western social media platforms, missing global perspectives.
--Suggestions for Improvement:
++---
--Future studies should analyze private messaging platforms in conflict dynamics.
--Investigate interventions that reduce online polarization.
--Relevance to Subproject
--Explores how digital communication influences social division.
--Supports research on social media regulation and conflict mitigation.
--Provides data on misinformation and online radicalization trends.
--Suggestions for Further Exploration
--Investigate how online anonymity affects real-world aggression.
--Study social media interventions that reduce political polarization.
--Explore cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility.
--Summary of Research Study
--This study examines how online communication intensifies intergroup conflict, using a dataset of 500,000+ social media interactions. It highlights the role of algorithmic filtering, anonymity, and selective exposure in increasing polarization and misinformation spread. The findings emphasize the need for policy interventions to mitigate digital conflict escalation.
++## **Critique and Observations**
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
++   - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
--📄 Download Full Study
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**.
++   - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
++   - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
++
++---
++
++## **Relevance to Subproject**
++- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
++- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
++- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.
++
++---
++
++## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
++1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
++2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
++3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
++
++---
++
++## **Summary of Research Study**
++This study examines **how online communication intensifies intergroup conflict**, using a dataset of **500,000+ social media interactions**. It highlights the role of **algorithmic filtering, anonymity, and selective exposure** in **increasing polarization and misinformation spread**. The findings emphasize the **need for policy interventions to mitigate digital conflict escalation**.
++
++---
++
++## **📄 Download Full Study**
  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]
--Study 2: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion
--Source: Journal of Communication
--Date of Publication: 2019
--Author(s): Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor
--Title: "The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"
--DOI: 10.1093/joc/jqx021
--Subject Matter: Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion
++{{/expand}}
--Key Statistics
--General Observations:
++{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
--Conducted 12 experimental studies on digital media's impact on political beliefs.
--58% of participants showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
--Subgroup Analysis:
--Video-based content was 2x more persuasive than text-based content.
--Participants under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts.
--Other Significant Data Points:
++{{expand title="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion" expanded="false"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2019*
++**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
++**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
++**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion*
--Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement.
--Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias by 14% on average.
--Findings
--Primary Observations:
++---
--Digital media significantly influences political opinions, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
--Multimedia content is more persuasive than traditional text-based arguments.
--Subgroup Trends:
++## **Key Statistics**
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
++   - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
--Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects than news websites.
--Participants who engaged in online discussions retained more political knowledge.
--Specific Case Analysis:
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content.
++   - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**.
--Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views, even when exposed to opposing content.
--Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions.
--Critique and Observations
--Strengths of the Study:
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
++   - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
--Large-scale experimental design allows for controlled comparisons.
--Covers multiple digital platforms, ensuring robust findings.
--Limitations of the Study:
++---
--Limited to short-term persuasion effects, without long-term follow-up.
--Does not explore the role of misinformation in political persuasion.
--Suggestions for Improvement:
++## **Findings**
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
++   - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
--Future studies should track long-term opinion changes beyond immediate reactions.
--Investigate the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion.
--Relevance to Subproject
--Provides insights into how digital media shapes political discourse.
--Highlights which platforms and content types are most influential.
--Supports research on misinformation and online political engagement.
--Suggestions for Further Exploration
--Study how fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects.
--Investigate the role of political influencers in shaping opinions.
--Explore long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs.
--Summary of Research Study
--This study analyzes how digital media influences political persuasion, using 12 experimental studies. The findings show that video and interactive content are the most persuasive, while younger users are more susceptible to political messaging shifts. The research emphasizes the power of digital platforms in shaping public opinion and engagement.
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites.
++   - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**.
--📄 Download Full Study
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
++   - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
++
++---
++
++## **Critique and Observations**
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
++   - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up.
++   - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
++   - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
++
++---
++
++## **Relevance to Subproject**
++- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
++- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
++- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.
++
++---
++
++## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
++1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
++2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
++3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
++
++---
++
++## **Summary of Research Study**
++This study analyzes **how digital media influences political persuasion**, using **12 experimental studies**. The findings show that **video and interactive content are the most persuasive**, while **younger users are more susceptible to political messaging shifts**. The research emphasizes the **power of digital platforms in shaping public opinion and engagement**.
++
++---
++
++## **📄 Download Full Study**
  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]
++
++{{/expand}}
++
++{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
++
++{{expand title="Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA" expanded="false"}}
++**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
++**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
++**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
++**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
++**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
++**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection*
++
++---
++
++## **Key Statistics**
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
++   - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Examines **West Eurasian populations** and their genetic evolution.
++   - Tracks **changes in allele frequencies over millennia**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
++   - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
++
++---
++
++## **Findings**
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
++   - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - Selection pressure on **energy storage genes** supports the **Thrifty Gene Hypothesis**.
++   - **Cognitive performance-related alleles** have undergone selection, but their historical advantages remain unclear.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
++   - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
++   - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
++
++---
++
++## **Critique and Observations**
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
++   - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Findings **may not translate directly** to modern populations.
++   - **Unclear whether observed selection pressures persist today**.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
++   - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
++
++---
++
++## **Relevance to Subproject**
++- Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
++- Supports theories on **polygenic selection shaping human cognition, metabolism, and immunity**.
++- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.
++
++---
++
++## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
++1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
++2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
++3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
++
++---
++
++## **Summary of Research Study**
++This study examines **how human genetic adaptation has unfolded over 14,000 years**, using a **large dataset of ancient DNA**. It highlights **strong selection on immune function, metabolism, and cognitive traits**, revealing **hundreds of loci affected by directional selection**. The findings emphasize **the power of ancient DNA in tracking human evolution and adaptation**.
++
++---
++
++## **📄 Download Full Study**
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]
++
++{{/expand}}
++
++{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
++
++{{expand title="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" expanded="false"}}
++**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
++**Date of Publication:** *2012*
++**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
++**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
++**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
++**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities*
++
++---
++
++## **Key Statistics**
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
++   - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Maternal race had a stronger influence than paternal race** on birth outcomes.
++   - **Black mother–White father (BMWF) couples** had a higher risk than **White mother–Black father (WMBF) couples**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - **Adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) for key outcomes:**
++     - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
++     - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
++     - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
++
++---
++
++## **Findings**
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
++   - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Black mothers (regardless of paternal race) had the highest risk of LBW and PTB**.
++   - **White mothers with Black fathers had a lower risk** than Black mothers with White fathers.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
++   - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
++
++---
++
++## **Critique and Observations**
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
++   - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Data limited to **Black-White biracial couples**, excluding other racial groups.
++   - **Socioeconomic and healthcare access factors** not fully explored.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
++   - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
++
++---
++
++## **Relevance to Subproject**
++- Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
++- Supports **research on genetic and environmental influences on neonatal health**.
++- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.
++
++---
++
++## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
++1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
++2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
++3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
++
++---
++
++## **Summary of Research Study**
++This meta-analysis examines **the impact of biracial parentage on birth outcomes**, showing that **biracial couples face a higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes than White couples but lower than Black couples**. The findings emphasize **maternal race as a key factor in birth risks**, with **Black mothers having the highest rates of preterm birth and low birthweight, regardless of paternal race**.
++
++---
++
++## **📄 Download Full Study**
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]
++
++{{/expand}}
++
++{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
++
++{{expand title="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions" expanded="false"}}
++**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
++**Date of Publication:** *2007*
++**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
++**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
++**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
++**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence*
++
++---
++
++## **Key Statistics**
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
++   - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Equality-based framing decreases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
++   - **Morality-based framing increases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
++   - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
++
++---
++
++## **Findings**
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
++   - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **Religious and conservative audiences** respond more to morality-based framing.
++   - **Younger and progressive audiences** respond more to equality-based framing.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
++   - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
++
++---
++
++## **Critique and Observations**
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
++   - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Focuses **only on U.S. media coverage**, limiting global applicability.
++   - Does not account for **social media's growing influence** on public opinion.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
++   - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
++
++---
++
++## **Relevance to Subproject**
++- Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
++- Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
++- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.
++
++---
++
++## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
++1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
++2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
++3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
++
++---
++
++## **Summary of Research Study**
++This study examines **how media framing influences public attitudes on same-sex marriage and civil unions**, analyzing **news coverage from 2004 to 2011**. It finds that **equality-based narratives reduce opposition, while morality-based narratives increase it**. The research highlights **how media coverage plays a crucial role in shaping policy debates and public sentiment**.
++
++---
++
++## **📄 Download Full Study**
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]
++
++{{/expand}}
++
++{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
++