0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From version 79.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 06:48
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 69.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 03:28
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -11,849 +11,139 @@
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.
13 13  
14 +{{toc/}}
14 14  
15 -
16 16  == Research Studies Repository ==
17 17  
18 18  
19 -= Genetics =
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
20 20  
28 +**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
21 21  
22 -== Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History ==
30 +=== **Key Statistics** ===
23 23  
24 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
25 -**Source:** *Nature*
26 -**Date of Publication:** *2009*
27 -**Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
28 -**Title:** *"Reconstructing Indian Population History"*
29 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nature08365](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08365)
30 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Population History, South Asian Ancestry* 
31 -
32 ------
33 -
34 -## **Key Statistics**##
35 -
36 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)**.
33 + - A near-perfect alignment between self-identified race/ethnicity (SIRE) and genetic ancestry was observed.
34 + - Misclassification rate: **0.14%**.
39 39  
40 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**.
37 + - Four groups analyzed: **White, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic**.
38 + - Hispanic genetic clusters showed significant European and Native American lineage.
43 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.
40 +=== **Findings** ===
47 47  
48 ------
42 +- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
43 +- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
49 49  
50 -## **Findings**##
45 +=== **Relevance to Subproject** ===
51 51  
52 -1. **Primary Observations:**
53 - - The genetic landscape of India has been shaped by **thousands of years of endogamy**.
54 - - Groups with **only ASI ancestry no longer exist** in mainland India.
55 -
56 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
57 - - **Higher ANI ancestry in upper-caste and Indo-European-speaking groups**.
58 - - **Andaman Islanders** are unique in having **ASI ancestry without ANI influence**.
59 -
60 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
61 - - **Founder effects** have maintained allele frequency differences among Indian groups.
62 - - Predicts **higher incidence of recessive diseases** due to historical genetic isolation.
63 -
64 ------
65 -
66 -## **Critique and Observations**##
67 -
68 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
69 - - **First large-scale genetic analysis** of Indian population history.
70 - - Introduces **new methods for ancestry estimation without direct ancestral reference groups**.
71 -
72 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
73 - - Limited **sample size relative to India's population diversity**.
74 - - Does not include **recent admixture events** post-colonial era.
75 -
76 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
77 - - Future research should **expand sampling across more Indian tribal groups**.
78 - - Use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer resolution of ancestry.
79 -
80 ------
81 -
82 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
83 -- Provides a **genetic basis for caste and linguistic diversity** in India.
84 -- Highlights **founder effects and genetic drift** shaping South Asian populations.
85 -- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.##
86 -
87 ------
88 -
89 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
90 -
91 -1. Examine **genetic markers linked to disease susceptibility** in Indian subpopulations.
92 -2. Investigate the impact of **recent migration patterns on ANI-ASI ancestry distribution**.
93 -3. Study **gene flow between Indian populations and other global groups**.
94 -
95 ------
96 -
97 -## **Summary of Research Study**
98 -This study reconstructs **the genetic history of India**, revealing two ancestral populations—**ANI (related to West Eurasians) and ASI (distinctly South Asian)**. By analyzing **25 diverse Indian groups**, the researchers demonstrate how **historical endogamy and founder effects** have maintained genetic differentiation. The findings have **implications for medical genetics, population history, and the study of South Asian ancestry**.##
99 -
100 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
101 -
102 ------
103 -
104 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
105 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature08365.pdf]]##
47 +- Reinforces the reliability of **self-reported racial identity** in genetic research.
48 +- Highlights **policy considerations** in biomedical studies.
106 106  {{/expand}}
107 107  
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]
108 108  
109 -== Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations ==
59 +---
110 110  
111 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
112 -**Source:** *Nature*
113 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
114 -**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
115 -**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
116 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
117 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics* 
118 -
119 ------
120 -
121 -## **Key Statistics**##
122 -
61 +## **Key Statistics**
123 123  1. **General Observations:**
124 - - Analyzed **high-coverage genome sequences of 300 individuals from 142 populations**.
125 - - Included **many underrepresented and indigenous groups** from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.
63 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
64 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
126 126  
127 127  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
128 - - Found **higher genetic diversity within African populations** compared to non-African groups.
129 - - Showed **Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry in non-African populations**, particularly in Oceania.
67 + - [Breakdown of findings by gender, race, or other subgroups]
130 130  
131 131  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
132 - - Identified **5.8 million base pairs absent from the human reference genome**.
133 - - Estimated that **mutations have accumulated 5% faster in non-Africans than in Africans**.
70 + - [Any additional findings or significant statistics]
134 134  
135 ------
72 +---
136 136  
137 -## **Findings**##
138 -
74 +## **Findings**
139 139  1. **Primary Observations:**
140 - - **African populations harbor the greatest genetic diversity**, confirming an out-of-Africa dispersal model.
141 - - Indigenous Australians and New Guineans **share a common ancestral population with other non-Africans**.
76 + - [High-level findings or trends in the study]
142 142  
143 143  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
144 - - **Lower heterozygosity in non-Africans** due to founder effects from migration bottlenecks.
145 - - **Denisovan ancestry in South Asians is higher than previously thought**.
79 + - [Disparities or differences highlighted in the study]
146 146  
147 147  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
148 - - **Neanderthal ancestry is higher in East Asians than in Europeans**.
149 - - African hunter-gatherer groups show **deep population splits over 100,000 years ago**.
82 + - [Detailed explanation of any notable specific findings]
150 150  
151 ------
84 +---
152 152  
153 -## **Critique and Observations**##
154 -
86 +## **Critique and Observations**
155 155  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
156 - - **Largest global genetic dataset** outside of the 1000 Genomes Project.
157 - - High sequencing depth allows **more accurate identification of genetic variants**.
88 + - [Examples: strong methodology, large dataset, etc.]
158 158  
159 159  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
160 - - **Limited sample sizes for some populations**, restricting generalizability.
161 - - Lacks ancient DNA comparisons, making it difficult to reconstruct deep ancestry fully.
91 + - [Examples: data gaps, lack of upstream analysis, etc.]
162 162  
163 163  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
164 - - Future studies should include **ancient genomes** to improve demographic modeling.
165 - - Expand research into **how genetic variation affects health outcomes** across populations.
94 + - [Ideas for further research or addressing limitations]
166 166  
167 ------
96 +---
168 168  
169 169  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
170 -- Provides **comprehensive data on human genetic diversity**, useful for **evolutionary studies**.
171 -- Supports research on **Neanderthal and Denisovan introgression** in modern human populations.
172 -- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.##
99 +- [Explanation of how this study contributes to your subproject goals.]
100 +- [Any key arguments or findings that support or challenge your views.]
173 173  
174 ------
102 +---
175 175  
176 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
104 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
105 +1. [Research questions or areas to investigate further.]
106 +2. [Potential studies or sources to complement this analysis.]
177 177  
178 -1. Investigate **functional consequences of genetic variation in underrepresented populations**.
179 -2. Study **how selection pressures shaped genetic diversity across different environments**.
180 -3. Explore **medical applications of population-specific genetic markers**.
108 +---
181 181  
182 ------
183 -
184 184  ## **Summary of Research Study**
185 -This study presents **high-coverage genome sequences from 300 individuals across 142 populations**, offering **new insights into global genetic diversity and human evolution**. The findings highlight **deep African population splits, widespread archaic ancestry in non-Africans, and unique variants absent from the human reference genome**. The research enhances our understanding of **migration patterns, adaptation, and evolutionary history**.##
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]**.
186 186  
187 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the studys contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
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.
188 188  
189 ------
115 +---
190 190  
191 191  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
192 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]##
193 -{{/expand}}
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}}
194 194  
195 -
196 -== Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies ==
197 -
198 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
199 -**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
200 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
201 -**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
202 -**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
203 -**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
204 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science* 
205 -
206 ------
207 -
208 -## **Key Statistics**##
209 -
210 -1. **General Observations:**
211 - - Analyzed **17,804 traits from 2,748 twin studies** published between **1958 and 2012**.
212 - - Included data from **14,558,903 twin pairs**, making it the largest meta-analysis on human heritability.
213 -
214 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
215 - - Found **49% average heritability** across all traits.
216 - - **69% of traits follow a simple additive genetic model**, meaning most variance is due to genes, not environment.
217 -
218 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
219 - - **Neurological, metabolic, and psychiatric traits** showed the highest heritability estimates.
220 - - Traits related to **social values and environmental interactions** had lower heritability estimates.
221 -
222 ------
223 -
224 -## **Findings**##
225 -
226 -1. **Primary Observations:**
227 - - Across all traits, genetic factors play a significant role in individual differences.
228 - - The study contradicts models that **overestimate environmental effects in behavioral and cognitive traits**.
229 -
230 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
231 - - **Eye and brain-related traits showed the highest heritability (70-80%)**.
232 - - **Shared environmental effects were negligible (<10%) for most traits**.
233 -
234 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
235 - - Twin correlations suggest **limited evidence for strong non-additive genetic influences**.
236 - - The study highlights **missing heritability in complex traits**, which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have yet to fully explain.
237 -
238 ------
239 -
240 -## **Critique and Observations**##
241 -
242 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
243 - - **Largest-ever heritability meta-analysis**, covering nearly all published twin studies.
244 - - Provides a **comprehensive framework for understanding gene-environment contributions**.
245 -
246 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
247 - - **Underrepresentation of African, South American, and Asian twin cohorts**, limiting global generalizability.
248 - - Cannot **fully separate genetic influences from potential cultural/environmental confounders**.
249 -
250 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
251 - - Future research should use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer-grained heritability estimates.
252 - - **Incorporate non-Western populations** to assess global heritability trends.
253 -
254 ------
255 -
256 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
257 -- Establishes a **quantitative benchmark for heritability across human traits**.
258 -- Reinforces **genetic influence on cognitive, behavioral, and physical traits**.
259 -- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.##
260 -
261 ------
262 -
263 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
264 -
265 -1. Investigate how **heritability estimates compare across different socioeconomic backgrounds**.
266 -2. Examine **gene-environment interactions in cognitive and psychiatric traits**.
267 -3. Explore **non-additive genetic effects on human traits using newer statistical models**.
268 -
269 ------
270 -
271 -## **Summary of Research Study**
272 -This study presents a **comprehensive meta-analysis of human trait heritability**, covering **over 50 years of twin research**. The findings confirm **genes play a predominant role in shaping human traits**, with an **average heritability of 49%** across all measured characteristics. The research offers **valuable insights into genetic and environmental influences**, guiding future gene-mapping efforts and behavioral genetics studies.##
273 -
274 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
275 -
276 ------
277 -
278 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
279 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]##
280 280  {{/expand}}
281 281  
130 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
282 282  
283 -== Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease ==
284 284  
285 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
286 -**Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
287 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
288 -**Author(s):** *Sarah A. Tishkoff, Scott M. Williams*
289 -**Title:** *"Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"*
290 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nrg865](https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg865)
291 -**Subject Matter:** *Population Genetics, Human Evolution, Complex Diseases* 
292 292  
293 ------
134 +---
294 294  
295 -## **Key Statistics**##
296 -
297 -1. **General Observations:**
298 - - Africa harbors **the highest genetic diversity** of any region, making it key to understanding human evolution.
299 - - The study analyzes **genetic variation and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in African populations**.
300 -
301 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
302 - - African populations exhibit **greater genetic differentiation compared to non-Africans**.
303 - - **Migration and admixture** have shaped modern African genomes over the past **100,000 years**.
304 -
305 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
306 - - The **effective population size (Ne) of Africans** is higher than that of non-African populations.
307 - - LD blocks are **shorter in African genomes**, suggesting more historical recombination events.
308 -
309 ------
310 -
311 -## **Findings**##
312 -
313 -1. **Primary Observations:**
314 - - African populations are the **most genetically diverse**, supporting the *Recent African Origin* hypothesis.
315 - - Genetic variation in African populations can **help fine-map complex disease genes**.
316 -
317 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
318 - - **West Africans exhibit higher genetic diversity** than East Africans due to differing migration patterns.
319 - - Populations such as **San hunter-gatherers show deep genetic divergence**.
320 -
321 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
322 - - Admixture in African Americans includes **West African and European genetic contributions**.
323 - - SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) diversity in African genomes **exceeds that of non-African groups**.
324 -
325 ------
326 -
327 -## **Critique and Observations**##
328 -
329 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
330 - - Provides **comprehensive genetic analysis** of diverse African populations.
331 - - Highlights **how genetic diversity impacts health disparities and disease risks**.
332 -
333 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
334 - - Many **African populations remain understudied**, limiting full understanding of diversity.
335 - - Focuses more on genetic variation than on **specific disease mechanisms**.
336 -
337 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
338 - - Expand research into **underrepresented African populations**.
339 - - Integrate **whole-genome sequencing for a more detailed evolutionary timeline**.
340 -
341 ------
342 -
343 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
344 -- Supports **genetic models of human evolution** and the **out-of-Africa hypothesis**.
345 -- Reinforces **Africa’s key role in disease gene mapping and precision medicine**.
346 -- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.##
347 -
348 ------
349 -
350 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
351 -
352 -1. Investigate **genetic adaptations to local environments within Africa**.
353 -2. Study **the role of African genetic diversity in disease resistance**.
354 -3. Expand research on **how ancient migration patterns shaped modern genetic structure**.
355 -
356 ------
357 -
358 -## **Summary of Research Study**
359 -This study explores the **genetic diversity of African populations**, analyzing their role in **human evolution and complex disease research**. The findings highlight **Africa’s unique genetic landscape**, confirming it as the most genetically diverse continent. The research provides valuable insights into **how genetic variation influences disease susceptibility, evolution, and population structure**.##
360 -
361 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
362 -
363 ------
364 -
365 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
366 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]##
367 -{{/expand}}
368 -
369 -
370 -== Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA ==
371 -
372 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
373 -**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
374 -**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
375 -**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
376 -**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
377 -**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
378 -**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection* 
379 -
380 ------
381 -
382 -## **Key Statistics**##
383 -
384 -1. **General Observations:**
385 - - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
386 - - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
387 -
388 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
389 - - Examines **West Eurasian populations** and their genetic evolution.
390 - - Tracks **changes in allele frequencies over millennia**.
391 -
392 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
393 - - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
394 - - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
395 -
396 ------
397 -
398 -## **Findings**##
399 -
400 -1. **Primary Observations:**
401 - - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
402 - - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
403 -
404 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
405 - - Selection pressure on **energy storage genes** supports the **Thrifty Gene Hypothesis**.
406 - - **Cognitive performance-related alleles** have undergone selection, but their historical advantages remain unclear.
407 -
408 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
409 - - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
410 - - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
411 - - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
412 -
413 ------
414 -
415 -## **Critique and Observations**##
416 -
417 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
418 - - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
419 - - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
420 -
421 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
422 - - Findings **may not translate directly** to modern populations.
423 - - **Unclear whether observed selection pressures persist today**.
424 -
425 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
426 - - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
427 - - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
428 -
429 ------
430 -
431 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
432 -- Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
433 -- Supports theories on **polygenic selection shaping human cognition, metabolism, and immunity**.
434 -- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.##
435 -
436 ------
437 -
438 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
439 -
440 -1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
441 -2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
442 -3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
443 -
444 ------
445 -
446 -## **Summary of Research Study**
447 -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**.##
448 -
449 ------
450 -
451 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
452 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]##
453 -{{/expand}}
454 -
455 -
456 -== Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age ==
457 -
458 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
459 -**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
460 -**Date of Publication:** *2013*
461 -**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
462 -**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
463 -**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
464 -**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology* 
465 -
466 ------
467 -
468 -## **Key Statistics**##
469 -
470 -1. **General Observations:**
471 - - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
472 - - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
473 -
474 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
475 - - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
476 - - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
477 -
478 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
479 - - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
480 - - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
481 -
482 ------
483 -
484 -## **Findings**##
485 -
486 -1. **Primary Observations:**
487 - - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
488 - - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
489 -
490 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
491 - - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
492 - - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
493 -
494 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
495 - - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
496 - - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
497 -
498 ------
499 -
500 -## **Critique and Observations**##
501 -
502 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
503 - - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
504 - - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
505 -
506 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
507 - - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
508 - - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
509 -
510 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
511 - - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
512 - - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
513 -
514 ------
515 -
516 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
517 -- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
518 -- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
519 -- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.##
520 -
521 ------
522 -
523 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
524 -
525 -1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
526 -2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
527 -3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
528 -
529 ------
530 -
531 -## **Summary of Research Study**
532 -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**.##
533 -
534 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
535 -
536 ------
537 -
538 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
539 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]##
540 -{{/expand}}
541 -
542 -
543 -== Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications ==
544 -
545 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
546 -**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
547 -**Date of Publication:** *2010*
548 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
549 -**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
550 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
551 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology* 
552 -
553 ------
554 -
555 -## **Key Statistics**##
556 -
557 -1. **General Observations:**
558 - - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
559 - - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
560 -
561 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
562 - - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
563 - - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
564 -
565 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
566 - - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
567 - - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
568 -
569 ------
570 -
571 -## **Findings**##
572 -
573 -1. **Primary Observations:**
574 - - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
575 - - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
576 -
577 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
578 - - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
579 - - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
580 -
581 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
582 - - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
583 - - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
584 -
585 ------
586 -
587 -## **Critique and Observations**##
588 -
589 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
590 - - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
591 - - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
592 -
593 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
594 - - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
595 - - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
596 -
597 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
598 - - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
599 - - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
600 -
601 ------
602 -
603 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
604 -- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
605 -- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
606 -- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.##
607 -
608 ------
609 -
610 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
611 -
612 -1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
613 -2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
614 -3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
615 -
616 ------
617 -
618 -## **Summary of Research Study**
619 -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**.##
620 -
621 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
622 -
623 ------
624 -
625 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
626 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]##
627 -{{/expand}}
628 -
629 -
630 -== Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media ==
631 -
632 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
633 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
634 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
635 -**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
636 -**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
637 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
638 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis* 
639 -
640 ------
641 -
642 -## **Key Statistics**##
643 -
644 -1. **General Observations:**
645 - - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
646 - - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
647 -
648 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
649 - - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
650 - - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
651 -
652 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
653 - - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
654 - - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
655 -
656 ------
657 -
658 -## **Findings**##
659 -
660 -1. **Primary Observations:**
661 - - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
662 - - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
663 -
664 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
665 - - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
666 - - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
667 -
668 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
669 - - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
670 - - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
671 -
672 ------
673 -
674 -## **Critique and Observations**##
675 -
676 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
677 - - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
678 - - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
679 -
680 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
681 - - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
682 - - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
683 -
684 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
685 - - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
686 - - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
687 -
688 ------
689 -
690 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
691 -- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
692 -- Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
693 -- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.##
694 -
695 ------
696 -
697 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
698 -
699 -1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
700 -2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
701 -3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
702 -
703 ------
704 -
705 -## **Summary of Research Study**
706 -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**.##
707 -
708 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
709 -
710 ------
711 -
712 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
713 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]##
714 -{{/expand}}
715 -
716 -
717 -== Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation ==
718 -
719 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
720 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
721 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
722 -**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
723 -**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
724 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
725 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences* 
726 -
727 ------
728 -
729 -## **Key Statistics**##
730 -
731 -1. **General Observations:**
732 - - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
733 - - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
734 -
735 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
736 - - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
737 - - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
738 -
739 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
740 - - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
741 - - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
742 -
743 ------
744 -
745 -## **Findings**##
746 -
747 -1. **Primary Observations:**
748 - - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
749 - - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
750 -
751 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
752 - - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
753 - - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
754 -
755 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
756 - - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
757 - - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
758 -
759 ------
760 -
761 -## **Critique and Observations**##
762 -
763 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
764 - - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
765 - - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
766 -
767 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
768 - - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
769 - - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
770 -
771 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
772 - - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
773 - - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
774 -
775 ------
776 -
777 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
778 -- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
779 -- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
780 -- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.##
781 -
782 ------
783 -
784 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
785 -
786 -1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
787 -2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
788 -3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
789 -
790 ------
791 -
792 -## **Summary of Research Study**
793 -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.  ##
794 -
795 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
796 -
797 ------
798 -
799 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
800 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]##
801 -{{/expand}}
802 -
803 -
804 -== Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding ==
805 -
806 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Click here to expand details"}}
807 -**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
808 -**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
809 -**Author(s):** Smith et al.
810 -**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
811 -**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
812 -**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science 
813 -
814 -**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
815 -
816 -=== **Key Statistics** ===
817 -
818 -1. **General Observations:**
819 - - A near-perfect alignment between self-identified race/ethnicity (SIRE) and genetic ancestry was observed.
820 - - Misclassification rate: **0.14%**.
821 -
822 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
823 - - Four groups analyzed: **White, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic**.
824 - - Hispanic genetic clusters showed significant European and Native American lineage.
825 -
826 -=== **Findings** ===
827 -
828 -- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
829 -- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
830 -
831 -=== **Relevance to Subproject** ===
832 -
833 -- Reinforces the reliability of **self-reported racial identity** in genetic research.
834 -- Highlights **policy considerations** in biomedical studies.
835 -{{/expand}}
836 -
837 -
838 ------
839 -
840 -= Dating and Interpersonal Relationships =
841 -
842 -
843 -== Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018 ==
844 -
845 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"}}
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"}}
846 846  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
847 847  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
848 848  **Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.*
849 849  **Title:** *"Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"*
850 850  **DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833)
851 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography* 
142 +**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography*
852 852  
853 ------
144 +---
854 854  
855 -## **Key Statistics**##
856 -
146 +## **Key Statistics**
857 857  1. **General Observations:**
858 858   - Study analyzed **General Social Survey (2000-2018)** data.
859 859   - Found **declining trends in sexual activity** among young adults.
... ... @@ -866,10 +866,9 @@
866 866   - Frequency of sexual activity decreased by **8-10%** over the studied period.
867 867   - Number of sexual partners remained **relatively stable** despite declining activity rates.
868 868  
869 ------
159 +---
870 870  
871 -## **Findings**##
872 -
161 +## **Findings**
873 873  1. **Primary Observations:**
874 874   - A significant decline in sexual frequency, especially among **younger men**.
875 875   - Shifts in relationship dynamics and economic stressors may contribute to the trend.
... ... @@ -882,10 +882,9 @@
882 882   - **Mental health and employment status** were correlated with decreased activity.
883 883   - Social factors such as **screen time and digital entertainment consumption** are potential contributors.
884 884  
885 ------
174 +---
886 886  
887 -## **Critique and Observations**##
888 -
176 +## **Critique and Observations**
889 889  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
890 890   - **Large sample size** from a nationally representative dataset.
891 891   - **Longitudinal design** enables trend analysis over time.
... ... @@ -898,27 +898,26 @@
898 898   - Further studies should incorporate **qualitative data** on behavioral shifts.
899 899   - Additional factors such as **economic shifts and social media usage** need exploration.
900 900  
901 ------
189 +---
902 902  
903 903  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
904 904  - Provides evidence on **changing demographic behaviors** in relation to relationships and social interactions.
905 -- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.##
193 +- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.
906 906  
907 ------
195 +---
908 908  
909 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
910 -
197 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
911 911  1. Investigate the **impact of digital media consumption** on relationship dynamics.
912 912  2. Examine **regional and cultural differences** in sexual activity trends.
913 913  
914 ------
201 +---
915 915  
916 916  ## **Summary of Research Study**
917 -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.  ##
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.
918 918  
919 919  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
920 920  
921 ------
208 +---
922 922  
923 923  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
924 924  {{velocity}}
... ... @@ -928,111 +928,25 @@
928 928  [[Download>>attach:$filename]]
929 929  #else
930 930  {{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
931 -#end {{/velocity}}##
932 -{{/expand}}
218 +#end
219 +{{/velocity}}
933 933  
934 -
935 -== Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis ==
936 -
937 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
938 -**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
939 -**Date of Publication:** *2012*
940 -**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
941 -**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
942 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
943 -**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities* 
944 -
945 ------
946 -
947 -## **Key Statistics**##
948 -
949 -1. **General Observations:**
950 - - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
951 - - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
952 -
953 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
954 - - **Maternal race had a stronger influence than paternal race** on birth outcomes.
955 - - **Black mother–White father (BMWF) couples** had a higher risk than **White mother–Black father (WMBF) couples**.
956 -
957 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
958 - - **Adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) for key outcomes:**
959 - - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
960 - - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
961 - - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
962 -
963 ------
964 -
965 -## **Findings**##
966 -
967 -1. **Primary Observations:**
968 - - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
969 - - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
970 -
971 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
972 - - **Black mothers (regardless of paternal race) had the highest risk of LBW and PTB**.
973 - - **White mothers with Black fathers had a lower risk** than Black mothers with White fathers.
974 -
975 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
976 - - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
977 - - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
978 -
979 ------
980 -
981 -## **Critique and Observations**##
982 -
983 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
984 - - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
985 - - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
986 -
987 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
988 - - Data limited to **Black-White biracial couples**, excluding other racial groups.
989 - - **Socioeconomic and healthcare access factors** not fully explored.
990 -
991 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
992 - - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
993 - - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
994 -
995 ------
996 -
997 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
998 -- Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
999 -- Supports **research on genetic and environmental influences on neonatal health**.
1000 -- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.##
1001 -
1002 ------
1003 -
1004 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1005 -
1006 -1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
1007 -2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
1008 -3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
1009 -
1010 ------
1011 -
1012 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1013 -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**.##
1014 -
1015 ------
1016 -
1017 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1018 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]##
1019 1019  {{/expand}}
1020 1020  
223 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1021 1021  
1022 -== Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness ==
1023 1023  
1024 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
226 +{{expand title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness" expanded="false"}}
1025 1025  **Source:** *Current Psychology*
1026 1026  **Date of Publication:** *2024*
1027 1027  **Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
1028 1028  **Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
1029 1029  **DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
1030 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation* 
232 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
1031 1031  
1032 ------
234 +---
1033 1033  
1034 -## **Key Statistics**##
1035 -
236 +## **Key Statistics**
1036 1036  1. **General Observations:**
1037 1037   - Study analyzed **67 self-identified incels** and **103 non-incel men**.
1038 1038   - Incels reported **higher loneliness and lower social support** compared to non-incels.
... ... @@ -1045,10 +1045,9 @@
1045 1045   - 95% of incels in the study reported **having depression**, with 38% receiving a formal diagnosis.
1046 1046   - **Higher externalization of blame** was linked to stronger incel identification.
1047 1047  
1048 ------
249 +---
1049 1049  
1050 -## **Findings**##
1051 -
251 +## **Findings**
1052 1052  1. **Primary Observations:**
1053 1053   - Incels experience **heightened rejection sensitivity and loneliness**.
1054 1054   - Lack of social support correlates with **worse mental health outcomes**.
... ... @@ -1061,10 +1061,9 @@
1061 1061   - Incels **engaged in fewer positive coping mechanisms** such as emotional support or positive reframing.
1062 1062   - Instead, they relied on **solitary coping strategies**, worsening their isolation.
1063 1063  
1064 ------
264 +---
1065 1065  
1066 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1067 -
266 +## **Critique and Observations**
1068 1068  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1069 1069   - **First quantitative study** on incels’ social isolation and mental health.
1070 1070   - **Robust sample size** and validated psychological measures.
... ... @@ -1077,303 +1077,37 @@
1077 1077   - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**.
1078 1078   - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration.
1079 1079  
1080 ------
279 +---
1081 1081  
1082 1082  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1083 1083  - Highlights **mental health vulnerabilities** within the incel community.
1084 1084  - Supports research on **loneliness, attachment styles, and social dominance orientation**.
1085 -- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.##
284 +- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.
1086 1086  
1087 ------
286 +---
1088 1088  
1089 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1090 -
288 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
1091 1091  1. Explore how **online community participation** affects incel mental health.
1092 1092  2. Investigate **cognitive biases** influencing self-perceived rejection among incels.
1093 1093  3. Assess **therapeutic interventions** to address incel social isolation.
1094 1094  
1095 ------
293 +---
1096 1096  
1097 1097  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1098 -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**.##
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**.
1099 1099  
1100 1100  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1101 1101  
1102 ------
300 +---
1103 1103  
1104 1104  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1105 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]##
1106 -{{/expand}}
303 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
1107 1107  
1108 -
1109 -= Crime and Substance Abuse =
1110 -
1111 -
1112 -== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1113 -
1114 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1115 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1116 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1117 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1118 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1119 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1120 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1121 -
1122 ------
1123 -
1124 -## **Key Statistics**##
1125 -
1126 -1. **General Observations:**
1127 - - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1128 - - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
1129 -
1130 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1131 - - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
1132 - - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
1133 -
1134 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1135 - - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1136 - - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1137 -
1138 ------
1139 -
1140 -## **Findings**##
1141 -
1142 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1143 - - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1144 - - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
1145 -
1146 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1147 - - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
1148 - - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
1149 -
1150 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1151 - - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1152 - - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1153 -
1154 ------
1155 -
1156 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1157 -
1158 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1159 - - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1160 - - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
1161 -
1162 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1163 - - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
1164 - - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
1165 -
1166 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1167 - - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1168 - - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1169 -
1170 ------
1171 -
1172 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1173 -- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1174 -- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1175 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1176 -
1177 ------
1178 -
1179 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1180 -
1181 -1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1182 -2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1183 -3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1184 -
1185 ------
1186 -
1187 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1188 -This study examines **factors influencing the completion of drug treatment court programs**, identifying **employment, education, and race as key predictors**. The research underscores **systemic disparities in drug court outcomes**, emphasizing the need for **improved support systems for at-risk populations**.##
1189 -
1190 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1191 -
1192 ------
1193 -
1194 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1195 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1196 1196  {{/expand}}
1197 1197  
307 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1198 1198  
1199 -== Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys ==
1200 -
1201 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
1202 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1203 -**Date of Publication:** *2003*
1204 -**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
1205 -**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
1206 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
1207 -**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research* 
1208 -
1209 ------
1210 -
1211 -## **Key Statistics**##
1212 -
1213 -1. **General Observations:**
1214 - - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
1215 - - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
1216 -
1217 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1218 - - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents.
1219 - - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy.
1220 -
1221 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1222 - - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
1223 - - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
1224 -
1225 ------
1226 -
1227 -## **Findings**##
1228 -
1229 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1230 - - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
1231 - - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
1232 -
1233 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1234 - - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
1235 - - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
1236 -
1237 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1238 - - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
1239 - - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
1240 -
1241 ------
1242 -
1243 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1244 -
1245 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1246 - - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
1247 - - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
1248 -
1249 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1250 - - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
1251 - - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
1252 -
1253 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1254 - - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
1255 - - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
1256 -
1257 ------
1258 -
1259 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1260 -- Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
1261 -- Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
1262 -- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.##
1263 -
1264 ------
1265 -
1266 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1267 -
1268 -1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
1269 -2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
1270 -3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
1271 -
1272 ------
1273 -
1274 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1275 -This study examines **cross-cultural biases in self-reported substance use surveys**, showing that **racial/ethnic minorities are more likely to underreport drug use** due to **social stigma, research distrust, and survey administration methods**. The findings highlight **critical issues in public health data collection and the need for improved survey design**.##
1276 -
1277 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1278 -
1279 ------
1280 -
1281 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1282 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]##
1283 -{{/expand}}
1284 -
1285 -
1286 -== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1287 -
1288 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1289 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1290 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1291 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1292 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1293 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1294 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1295 -
1296 ------
1297 -
1298 -## **Key Statistics**##
1299 -
1300 -1. **General Observations:**
1301 - - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1302 - - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
1303 -
1304 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1305 - - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
1306 - - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
1307 -
1308 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1309 - - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1310 - - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1311 -
1312 ------
1313 -
1314 -## **Findings**##
1315 -
1316 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1317 - - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1318 - - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
1319 -
1320 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1321 - - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
1322 - - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
1323 -
1324 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1325 - - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1326 - - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1327 -
1328 ------
1329 -
1330 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1331 -
1332 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1333 - - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1334 - - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
1335 -
1336 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1337 - - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
1338 - - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
1339 -
1340 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1341 - - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1342 - - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1343 -
1344 ------
1345 -
1346 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1347 -- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1348 -- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1349 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1350 -
1351 ------
1352 -
1353 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1354 -
1355 -1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1356 -2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1357 -3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1358 -
1359 ------
1360 -
1361 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1362 -This study examines **factors influencing the completion of drug treatment court programs**, identifying **employment, education, and race as key predictors**. The research underscores **systemic disparities in drug court outcomes**, emphasizing the need for **improved support systems for at-risk populations**.##
1363 -
1364 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1365 -
1366 ------
1367 -
1368 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1369 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1370 -{{/expand}}
1371 -
1372 -
1373 -== Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults ==
1374 -
1375 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"}}
1376 - Source: Addictive Behaviors
309 +{{expand title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults" expanded="false"}} Source: Addictive Behaviors
1377 1377  Date of Publication: 2016
1378 1378  Author(s): Andrea Hussong, Christy Capron, Gregory T. Smith, Jennifer L. Maggs
1379 1379  Title: "Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"
... ... @@ -1434,23 +1434,22 @@
1434 1434  
1435 1435  📄 Download Full Study
1436 1436  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.addbeh.2016.02.030.pdf]]
370 +
1437 1437  {{/expand}}
1438 1438  
373 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1439 1439  
1440 -== Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time? ==
1441 -
1442 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
375 +{{expand title="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?" expanded="false"}}
1443 1443  **Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1444 1444  **Date of Publication:** *2014*
1445 1445  **Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1446 1446  **Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1447 1447  **DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
1448 -**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics* 
381 +**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
1449 1449  
1450 ------
383 +---
1451 1451  
1452 -## **Key Statistics**##
1453 -
385 +## **Key Statistics**
1454 1454  1. **General Observations:**
1455 1455   - The study examines reaction time data from **13 age-matched studies** spanning **1884–2004**.
1456 1456   - Results suggest an estimated **decline of 13.35 IQ points** over this period.
... ... @@ -1463,10 +1463,9 @@
1463 1463   - The estimated **dysgenic rate is 1.21 IQ points lost per decade**.
1464 1464   - Meta-regression analysis confirmed a **steady secular trend in slowing reaction time**.
1465 1465  
1466 ------
398 +---
1467 1467  
1468 -## **Findings**##
1469 -
400 +## **Findings**
1470 1470  1. **Primary Observations:**
1471 1471   - Supports the hypothesis of **intelligence decline due to genetic and environmental factors**.
1472 1472   - Reaction time, a **biomarker for cognitive ability**, has slowed significantly over time.
... ... @@ -1479,10 +1479,9 @@
1479 1479   - Cross-national comparisons indicate a **global trend in slower reaction times**.
1480 1480   - Factors like **modern neurotoxin exposure** and **reduced selective pressure for intelligence** may contribute.
1481 1481  
1482 ------
413 +---
1483 1483  
1484 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1485 -
415 +## **Critique and Observations**
1486 1486  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1487 1487   - **Comprehensive meta-analysis** covering over a century of reaction time data.
1488 1488   - **Robust statistical corrections** for measurement variance between historical and modern studies.
... ... @@ -1495,641 +1495,364 @@
1495 1495   - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
1496 1496   - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
1497 1497  
1498 ------
428 +---
1499 1499  
1500 1500  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1501 1501  - Provides evidence for **long-term intelligence trends**, contributing to research on **cognitive evolution**.
1502 1502  - Aligns with broader discussions on **dysgenics, neurophysiology, and cognitive load**.
1503 -- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.##
433 +- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
1504 1504  
1505 ------
435 +---
1506 1506  
1507 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1508 -
437 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
1509 1509  1. Investigate **genetic markers associated with reaction time** and intelligence decline.
1510 1510  2. Examine **regional variations in reaction time trends**.
1511 1511  3. Explore **cognitive resilience factors that counteract the decline**.
1512 1512  
1513 ------
442 +---
1514 1514  
1515 1515  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1516 -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**.  ##
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**.
1517 1517  
1518 1518  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1519 1519  
1520 ------
449 +---
1521 1521  
1522 1522  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1523 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]##
452 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]
453 +
1524 1524  {{/expand}}
1525 1525  
456 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1526 1526  
1527 -= Whiteness & White Guilt =
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*
1528 1528  
1529 -== Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports ==
466 +---
1530 1530  
1531 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1532 -**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
1533 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
1534 -**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
1535 -**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
1536 -**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
1537 -**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sports, Higher Education, Institutional Racism* 
1538 -
1539 ------
1540 -
1541 -## **Key Statistics**##
1542 -
468 +## **Key Statistics**
1543 1543  1. **General Observations:**
1544 - - Analyzed **47 college athlete narratives** to explore racial disparities in non-revenue sports.
1545 - - Found three interrelated themes: **racial segregation, racial innocence, and racial protection**.
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**.
1546 1546  
1547 1547  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1548 - - **Predominantly white sports programs** reinforce racial hierarchies in college athletics.
1549 - - **Recruitment policies favor white athletes** from affluent, suburban backgrounds.
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.
1550 1550  
1551 1551  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1552 - - White athletes are **socialized to remain unaware of racial privilege** in their athletic careers.
1553 - - Media and institutional narratives protect white athletes from discussions on race and systemic inequities.
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**.
1554 1554  
1555 ------
481 +---
1556 1556  
1557 -## **Findings**##
1558 -
483 +## **Findings**
1559 1559  1. **Primary Observations:**
1560 - - Colleges **actively recruit white athletes** from majority-white communities.
1561 - - Institutional policies **uphold whiteness** by failing to challenge racial biases in recruitment and team culture.
485 + - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
486 + - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
1562 1562  
1563 1563  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1564 - - **White athletes show limited awareness** of their racial advantage in sports.
1565 - - **Black athletes are overrepresented** in revenue-generating sports but underrepresented in non-revenue teams.
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.
1566 1566  
1567 1567  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1568 - - Examines **how sports serve as a mechanism for maintaining racial privilege** in higher education.
1569 - - Discusses the **role of athletics in reinforcing systemic segregation and exclusion**.
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.
1570 1570  
1571 ------
496 +---
1572 1572  
1573 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1574 -
498 +## **Critique and Observations**
1575 1575  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1576 - - **Comprehensive qualitative analysis** of race in college sports.
1577 - - Examines **institutional conditions** that sustain racial disparities in athletics.
500 + - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
501 + - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
1578 1578  
1579 1579  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1580 - - Focuses primarily on **Division I non-revenue sports**, limiting generalizability to other divisions.
1581 - - Lacks extensive **quantitative data on racial demographics** in college athletics.
504 + - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
505 + - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
1582 1582  
1583 1583  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1584 - - Future research should **compare recruitment policies across different sports and divisions**.
1585 - - Investigate **how athletic scholarships contribute to racial inequities in higher education**.
508 + - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
509 + - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
1586 1586  
1587 ------
511 +---
1588 1588  
1589 1589  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1590 -- Provides evidence of **systemic racial biases** in college sports recruitment.
1591 -- Highlights **how institutional policies protect whiteness** in non-revenue athletics.
1592 -- Supports research on **diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in sports and education**.##
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**.
1593 1593  
1594 ------
518 +---
1595 1595  
1596 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
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**.
1597 1597  
1598 -1. Investigate how **racial stereotypes influence college athlete recruitment**.
1599 -2. Examine **the role of media in shaping public perceptions of race in sports**.
1600 -3. Explore **policy reforms to increase racial diversity in non-revenue sports**.
525 +---
1601 1601  
1602 ------
1603 -
1604 1604  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1605 -This study explores how **racial segregation, innocence, and protection** sustain whiteness in college sports. By analyzing **47 athlete narratives**, the research reveals **how predominantly white sports programs recruit and retain white athletes** while shielding them from discussions on race. The findings highlight **institutional biases that maintain racial privilege in athletics**, offering critical insight into the **structural inequalities in higher education sports programs**.##
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.
1606 1606  
1607 1607  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1608 1608  
1609 ------
532 +---
1610 1610  
1611 1611  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1612 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]##
535 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
536 +
1613 1613  {{/expand}}
1614 1614  
539 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1615 1615  
1616 -== Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations ==
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*
1617 1617  
1618 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1619 -**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1620 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
1621 -**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axta, M. Norman Oliver*
1622 -**Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
1623 -**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
1624 -**Subject Matter:** *Health Disparities, Racial Bias, Medical Treatment* 
549 +---
1625 1625  
1626 ------
1627 -
1628 -## **Key Statistics**##
1629 -
551 +## **Key Statistics**
1630 1630  1. **General Observations:**
1631 - - Study analyzed **racial disparities in pain perception and treatment recommendations**.
1632 - - Found that **white laypeople and medical students endorsed false beliefs about biological differences** between Black and white individuals.
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.
1633 1633  
1634 1634  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1635 - - **50% of medical students surveyed endorsed at least one false belief about biological differences**.
1636 - - Participants who held these false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients pain levels**.
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.
1637 1637  
1638 1638  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1639 - - **Black patients were less likely to receive appropriate pain treatment** compared to white patients.
1640 - - The study confirmed that **historical misconceptions about racial differences still persist in modern medicine**.
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**.
1641 1641  
1642 ------
564 +---
1643 1643  
1644 -## **Findings**##
1645 -
566 +## **Findings**
1646 1646  1. **Primary Observations:**
1647 - - False beliefs about biological racial differences **correlate with racial disparities in pain treatment**.
1648 - - Medical students and residents who endorsed these beliefs **showed greater racial bias in treatment recommendations**.
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.
1649 1649  
1650 1650  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1651 - - Physicians who **did not endorse these beliefs** showed **no racial bias** in treatment recommendations.
1652 - - Bias was **strongest among first-year medical students** and decreased slightly in later years of training.
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.
1653 1653  
1654 1654  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1655 - - Study participants **underestimated Black patients' pain and recommended less effective pain treatments**.
1656 - - The study suggests that **racial disparities in medical care stem, in part, from these enduring false beliefs**.
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.
1657 1657  
1658 ------
579 +---
1659 1659  
1660 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1661 -
581 +## **Critique and Observations**
1662 1662  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1663 - - **First empirical study to connect false racial beliefs with medical decision-making**.
1664 - - Utilizes a **large sample of medical students and residents** from diverse institutions.
583 + - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
584 + - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
1665 1665  
1666 1666  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1667 - - The study focuses on **Black vs. white disparities**, leaving other racial/ethnic groups unexplored.
1668 - - Participants' responses were based on **hypothetical medical cases, not real-world treatment decisions**.
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**.
1669 1669  
1670 1670  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1671 - - Future research should examine **how these biases manifest in real clinical settings**.
1672 - - Investigate **whether medical training can correct these biases over time**.
591 + - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
592 + - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
1673 1673  
1674 ------
594 +---
1675 1675  
1676 1676  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1677 -- Highlights **racial disparities in healthcare**, specifically in pain assessment and treatment.
1678 -- Supports **research on implicit bias and its impact on medical outcomes**.
1679 -- Provides evidence for **the need to address racial bias in medical education**.##
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.
1680 1680  
1681 ------
601 +---
1682 1682  
1683 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
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.
1684 1684  
1685 -1. Investigate **interventions to reduce racial bias in medical decision-making**.
1686 -2. Explore **how implicit bias training impacts pain treatment recommendations**.
1687 -3. Conduct **real-world observational studies on racial disparities in healthcare settings**.
608 +---
1688 1688  
1689 ------
1690 -
1691 1691  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1692 -This study examines **racial bias in pain perception and treatment** among **white laypeople and medical professionals**, demonstrating that **false beliefs about biological differences contribute to disparities in pain management**. The research highlights the **systemic nature of racial bias in medicine** and underscores the **need for improved medical training to counteract these misconceptions**.##
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**.
1693 1693  
1694 1694  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1695 1695  
1696 ------
615 +---
1697 1697  
1698 1698  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1699 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]##
618 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
619 +
1700 1700  {{/expand}}
1701 1701  
622 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1702 1702  
1703 -== Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans ==
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*
1704 1704  
1705 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1706 -**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1707 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
1708 -**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
1709 -**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
1710 -**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
1711 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors* 
632 +---
1712 1712  
1713 ------
1714 -
1715 -## **Key Statistics**##
1716 -
634 +## **Key Statistics**
1717 1717  1. **General Observations:**
1718 - - Mortality rates among **middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans (ages 45–54)** increased from 1999 to 2013.
1719 - - This reversal in mortality trends is unique to the U.S.; **no other wealthy country experienced a similar rise**.
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.
1720 1720  
1721 1721  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1722 - - The increase was **most pronounced among those with a high school education or less**.
1723 - - Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic mortality continued to decline over the same period.
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**.
1724 1724  
1725 1725  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1726 - - Rising mortality was driven primarily by **suicide, drug and alcohol poisoning, and chronic liver disease**.
1727 - - Midlife morbidity increased as well, with more reports of **poor health, pain, and mental distress**.
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.
1728 1728  
1729 ------
647 +---
1730 1730  
1731 -## **Findings**##
1732 -
649 +## **Findings**
1733 1733  1. **Primary Observations:**
1734 - - The rise in mortality is attributed to **substance abuse, economic distress, and deteriorating mental health**.
1735 - - The increase in **suicides and opioid overdoses parallels broader socioeconomic decline**.
651 + - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
652 + - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
1736 1736  
1737 1737  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1738 - - The **largest mortality increases** occurred among **whites without a college degree**.
1739 - - Chronic pain, functional limitations, and self-reported mental distress **rose significantly in affected groups**.
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.
1740 1740  
1741 1741  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1742 - - **Educational attainment was a major predictor of mortality trends**, with better-educated individuals experiencing lower mortality rates.
1743 - - Mortality among **white Americans with a college degree continued to decline**, resembling trends in other wealthy nations.
659 + - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
660 + - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
1744 1744  
1745 ------
662 +---
1746 1746  
1747 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1748 -
664 +## **Critique and Observations**
1749 1749  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1750 - - **First major study to highlight rising midlife mortality among U.S. whites**.
1751 - - Uses **CDC and Census mortality data spanning over a decade**.
666 + - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
667 + - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
1752 1752  
1753 1753  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1754 - - Does not establish **causality** between economic decline and increased mortality.
1755 - - Lacks **granular data on opioid prescribing patterns and regional differences**.
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.
1756 1756  
1757 1757  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1758 - - Future studies should explore **how economic shifts, healthcare access, and mental health treatment contribute to these trends**.
1759 - - Further research on **racial and socioeconomic disparities in mortality trends** is needed.
674 + - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
675 + - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
1760 1760  
1761 ------
677 +---
1762 1762  
1763 1763  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1764 -- Highlights **socioeconomic and racial disparities** in health outcomes.
1765 -- Supports research on **substance abuse and mental health crises in the U.S.**.
1766 -- Provides evidence for **the role of economic instability in public health trends**.##
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**.
1767 1767  
1768 ------
684 +---
1769 1769  
1770 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
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**.
1771 1771  
1772 -1. Investigate **regional differences in rising midlife mortality**.
1773 -2. Examine the **impact of the opioid crisis on long-term health trends**.
1774 -3. Study **policy interventions aimed at reversing rising mortality rates**.
691 +---
1775 1775  
1776 ------
1777 -
1778 1778  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1779 -This study documents a **reversal in mortality trends among middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans**, showing an increase in **suicide, drug overdoses, and alcohol-related deaths** from 1999 to 2013. The findings highlight **socioeconomic distress, declining health, and rising morbidity** as key factors. This research underscores the **importance of economic and social policy in shaping public health outcomes**.##
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**.
1780 1780  
1781 1781  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1782 1782  
1783 ------
698 +---
1784 1784  
1785 1785  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1786 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]##
701 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
702 +
1787 1787  {{/expand}}
1788 1788  
705 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1789 1789  
1790 -== Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities? ==
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*
1791 1791  
1792 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
1793 -**Source:** *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies*
1794 -**Date of Publication:** *2023*
1795 -**Author(s):** *Maurice Crul, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, Ismintha Waldring*
1796 -**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
1797 -**DOI:** [10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548](https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548)
1798 -**Subject Matter:** *Urban Sociology, Migration Studies, Integration* 
715 +---
1799 1799  
1800 ------
1801 -
1802 -## **Key Statistics**##
1803 -
717 +## **Key Statistics**
1804 1804  1. **General Observations:**
1805 - - Study examines the role of **people without migration background** in majority-minority cities.
1806 - - Analyzes **over 3,000 survey responses and 150 in-depth interviews** from six North-Western European cities.
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**.
1807 1807  
1808 1808  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1809 - - Explores differences in **integration, social interactions, and perceptions of diversity**.
1810 - - Studies how **class, education, and neighborhood composition** affect adaptation to urban diversity.
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**.
1811 1811  
1812 1812  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1813 - - The study introduces the **Becoming a Minority (BaM) project**, a large-scale investigation of urban demographic shifts.
1814 - - **People without migration background perceive diversity differently**, with some embracing and others resisting change.
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**.
1815 1815  
1816 ------
730 +---
1817 1817  
1818 -## **Findings**##
1819 -
732 +## **Findings**
1820 1820  1. **Primary Observations:**
1821 - - The study **challenges traditional integration theories**, arguing that non-migrant groups also undergo adaptation processes.
1822 - - Some residents **struggle with demographic changes**, while others see diversity as an asset.
734 + - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
735 + - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
1823 1823  
1824 1824  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1825 - - Young, educated individuals in urban areas **are more open to cultural diversity**.
1826 - - Older and less mobile residents **report feelings of displacement and social isolation**.
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**.
1827 1827  
1828 1828  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1829 - - Examines how **people without migration background navigate majority-minority settings** in cities like Amsterdam and Vienna.
1830 - - Analyzes **whether former ethnic majority groups now perceive themselves as minorities**.
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**.
1831 1831  
1832 ------
745 +---
1833 1833  
1834 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1835 -
747 +## **Critique and Observations**
1836 1836  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1837 - - **Innovative approach** by examining the impact of migration on native populations.
1838 - - Uses **both qualitative and quantitative data** for robust analysis.
749 + - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
750 + - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
1839 1839  
1840 1840  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1841 - - Limited to **Western European urban settings**, missing perspectives from other global regions.
1842 - - Does not fully explore **policy interventions for fostering social cohesion**.
753 + - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
754 + - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
1843 1843  
1844 1844  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1845 - - Expand research to **other geographical contexts** to understand migration effects globally.
1846 - - Investigate **long-term trends in urban adaptation and community building**.
757 + - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
758 + - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
1847 1847  
1848 ------
760 +---
1849 1849  
1850 1850  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1851 -- Provides a **new perspective on urban integration**, shifting focus from migrants to native-born populations.
1852 -- Highlights the **role of social and economic power in shaping urban diversity outcomes**.
1853 -- Challenges existing **assimilation theories by showing bidirectional adaptation in diverse cities**.##
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**.
1854 1854  
1855 ------
767 +---
1856 1856  
1857 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
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**.
1858 1858  
1859 -1. Study how **local policies shape attitudes toward urban diversity**.
1860 -2. Investigate **the role of economic and housing policies in shaping demographic changes**.
1861 -3. Explore **how social networks influence perceptions of migration and diversity**.
774 +---
1862 1862  
1863 ------
1864 -
1865 1865  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1866 -This study examines how **people without migration background experience demographic change in majority-minority cities**. Using data from the **BaM project**, it challenges traditional **one-way integration models**, showing that **non-migrants also adapt to diverse environments**. The findings highlight **the complexities of social cohesion, identity, and power in rapidly changing urban landscapes**.##
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**.
1867 1867  
1868 1868  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1869 1869  
1870 ------
781 +---
1871 1871  
1872 1872  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1873 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]]##
1874 -{{/expand}}
784 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
1875 1875  
1876 -
1877 -= Media =
1878 -
1879 -
1880 -== Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic ==
1881 -
1882 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"}}
1883 -**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
1884 -**Date of Publication:** *2021*
1885 -**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
1886 -**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
1887 -**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
1888 -**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies* 
1889 -
1890 ------
1891 -
1892 -## **Key Statistics**##
1893 -
1894 -1. **General Observations:**
1895 - - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
1896 - - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
1897 -
1898 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1899 - - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility.
1900 - - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**.
1901 -
1902 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1903 - - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
1904 - - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
1905 -
1906 ------
1907 -
1908 -## **Findings**##
1909 -
1910 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1911 - - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
1912 - - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
1913 -
1914 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1915 - - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views.
1916 - - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions.
1917 -
1918 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1919 - - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
1920 - - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
1921 -
1922 ------
1923 -
1924 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1925 -
1926 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1927 - - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
1928 - - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
1929 -
1930 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1931 - - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**.
1932 - - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives.
1933 -
1934 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1935 - - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
1936 - - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
1937 -
1938 ------
1939 -
1940 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1941 -- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
1942 -- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
1943 -- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.##
1944 -
1945 ------
1946 -
1947 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1948 -
1949 -1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
1950 -2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
1951 -3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
1952 -
1953 ------
1954 -
1955 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1956 -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**.##
1957 -
1958 ------
1959 -
1960 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1961 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]##
1962 1962  {{/expand}}
1963 1963  
1964 -
1965 -== Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions ==
1966 -
1967 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
1968 -**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
1969 -**Date of Publication:** *2007*
1970 -**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
1971 -**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
1972 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
1973 -**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence* 
1974 -
1975 ------
1976 -
1977 -## **Key Statistics**##
1978 -
1979 -1. **General Observations:**
1980 - - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
1981 - - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
1982 -
1983 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1984 - - **Equality-based framing decreases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
1985 - - **Morality-based framing increases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
1986 -
1987 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1988 - - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
1989 - - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
1990 -
1991 ------
1992 -
1993 -## **Findings**##
1994 -
1995 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1996 - - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
1997 - - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
1998 -
1999 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
2000 - - **Religious and conservative audiences** respond more to morality-based framing.
2001 - - **Younger and progressive audiences** respond more to equality-based framing.
2002 -
2003 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2004 - - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
2005 - - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
2006 -
2007 ------
2008 -
2009 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2010 -
2011 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2012 - - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
2013 - - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
2014 -
2015 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
2016 - - Focuses **only on U.S. media coverage**, limiting global applicability.
2017 - - Does not account for **social media's growing influence** on public opinion.
2018 -
2019 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2020 - - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
2021 - - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
2022 -
2023 ------
2024 -
2025 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
2026 -- Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
2027 -- Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
2028 -- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.##
2029 -
2030 ------
2031 -
2032 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2033 -
2034 -1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
2035 -2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
2036 -3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
2037 -
2038 ------
2039 -
2040 -## **Summary of Research Study**
2041 -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**.##
2042 -
2043 ------
2044 -
2045 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
2046 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]##
2047 -{{/expand}}
2048 -
2049 -
2050 -== Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion ==
2051 -
2052 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
2053 -**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
2054 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
2055 -**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
2056 -**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
2057 -**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
2058 -**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion* 
2059 -
2060 ------
2061 -
2062 -## **Key Statistics**##
2063 -
2064 -1. **General Observations:**
2065 - - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
2066 - - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
2067 -
2068 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
2069 - - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content.
2070 - - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**.
2071 -
2072 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
2073 - - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
2074 - - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
2075 -
2076 ------
2077 -
2078 -## **Findings**##
2079 -
2080 -1. **Primary Observations:**
2081 - - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
2082 - - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
2083 -
2084 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
2085 - - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites.
2086 - - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**.
2087 -
2088 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2089 - - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
2090 - - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
2091 -
2092 ------
2093 -
2094 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2095 -
2096 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2097 - - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
2098 - - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
2099 -
2100 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
2101 - - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up.
2102 - - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**.
2103 -
2104 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2105 - - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
2106 - - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
2107 -
2108 ------
2109 -
2110 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
2111 -- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
2112 -- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
2113 -- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.##
2114 -
2115 ------
2116 -
2117 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2118 -
2119 -1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
2120 -2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
2121 -3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
2122 -
2123 ------
2124 -
2125 -## **Summary of Research Study**
2126 -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**.##
2127 -
2128 ------
2129 -
2130 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
2131 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]##
2132 -{{/expand}}
2133 -
2134 -
2135 -
788 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}