0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From version 80.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 06:49
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 119.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 05:50
Change comment: Uploaded new attachment "Cultural Voyeurism A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Intera.pdf", version 1.2

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -Main.Studies.WebHome
1 +Main Categories.Science & Research.WebHome
Content
... ... @@ -1,28 +1,30 @@
1 +{{toc/}}
2 +
3 +
1 1  = Research at a Glance =
2 2  
3 -== Introduction ==
4 4  
5 -Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various fields such as **social psychology, public policy, behavioral economics, and more**. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout.
6 6  
7 -=== How to Use This Repository ===
8 + Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various important Racial themes. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout. I wanted to make this for a couple of reasons. Number one is organization. There are a ton of useful studies out there that expose the truth, sometimes inadvertently. You'll notice that in this initial draft the summaries are often woke and reflect the bias of the AI writing them as well as the researchers politically correct conclusion in most cases. That's because I haven't gotten to going through and pointing out the reasons I put all of them in here.
8 8  
10 +
11 + There is often an underlying hypocrisy or double standard, saying the quiet part out loud, or conclusions that are so much of an antithesis to what the data shows that made me want to include it. At least, thats the idea for once its polished. I have about 150 more studies to upload, so it will be a few weeks before I get through it all. Until such time, feel free to search for them yourself and edit in what you find, or add your own studies. If you like you can do it manually, or if you'd rather go the route I did, just rename the study to its doi number and feed the study into an AI and tell them to summarize the study using the following format:
12 +
13 +
14 +
9 9  - Click on a **category** in the **Table of Contents** to browse studies related to that topic.
10 10  - Click on a **study title** to expand its details, including **key findings, critique, and relevance**.
11 11  - Use the **search function** (Ctrl + F or XWiki's built-in search) to quickly find specific topics or authors.
12 12  - If needed, you can export this page as **PDF or print-friendly format**, and all studies will automatically expand for readability.
19 +- You'll also find a download link to the original full study in pdf form at the bottom of the collapsible block.
13 13  
14 14  
15 15  
16 -
17 -== Research Studies Repository ==
18 -
19 -
20 20  = Genetics =
21 21  
25 +{{expandable summary="
22 22  
23 -== Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History ==
24 -
25 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
27 +Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
26 26  **Source:** *Nature*
27 27  **Date of Publication:** *2009*
28 28  **Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
... ... @@ -30,10 +30,7 @@
30 30  **DOI:** [10.1038/nature08365](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08365)
31 31  **Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Population History, South Asian Ancestry* 
32 32  
33 ------
34 -
35 -## **Key Statistics**##
36 -
35 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
37 37  1. **General Observations:**
38 38   - Study analyzed **132 individuals from 25 diverse Indian groups**.
39 39   - Identified two major ancestral populations: **Ancestral North Indians (ANI)** and **Ancestral South Indians (ASI)**.
... ... @@ -45,11 +45,9 @@
45 45  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
46 46   - ANI ancestry ranges from **39% to 71%** across Indian groups.
47 47   - **Caste and linguistic differences** strongly correlate with genetic variation.
47 +{{/expandable}}
48 48  
49 ------
50 -
51 -## **Findings**##
52 -
49 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
53 53  1. **Primary Observations:**
54 54   - The genetic landscape of India has been shaped by **thousands of years of endogamy**.
55 55   - Groups with **only ASI ancestry no longer exist** in mainland India.
... ... @@ -61,11 +61,9 @@
61 61  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
62 62   - **Founder effects** have maintained allele frequency differences among Indian groups.
63 63   - Predicts **higher incidence of recessive diseases** due to historical genetic isolation.
61 +{{/expandable}}
64 64  
65 ------
66 -
67 -## **Critique and Observations**##
68 -
63 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
69 69  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
70 70   - **First large-scale genetic analysis** of Indian population history.
71 71   - Introduces **new methods for ancestry estimation without direct ancestral reference groups**.
... ... @@ -77,50 +77,34 @@
77 77  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
78 78   - Future research should **expand sampling across more Indian tribal groups**.
79 79   - Use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer resolution of ancestry.
75 +{{/expandable}}
80 80  
81 ------
82 -
83 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
77 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
84 84  - Provides a **genetic basis for caste and linguistic diversity** in India.
85 85  - Highlights **founder effects and genetic drift** shaping South Asian populations.
86 -- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.##
80 +- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.
81 +{{/expandable}}
87 87  
88 ------
89 -
90 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
91 -
83 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
92 92  1. Examine **genetic markers linked to disease susceptibility** in Indian subpopulations.
93 93  2. Investigate the impact of **recent migration patterns on ANI-ASI ancestry distribution**.
94 94  3. Study **gene flow between Indian populations and other global groups**.
87 +{{/expandable}}
95 95  
96 ------
89 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
90 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature08365.pdf]]
91 +{{/expandable}}
92 +{{/expandable}}
97 97  
98 -## **Summary of Research Study**
99 -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**.##
94 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
95 +**Source:** *Nature*
96 +**Date of Publication:** *2016*
97 +**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
98 +**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
99 +**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
100 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics*
100 100  
101 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
102 -
103 ------
104 -
105 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
106 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature08365.pdf]]##
107 -{{/expand}}
108 -
109 -
110 -== Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations ==
111 -
112 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
113 -**Source:** *Nature*
114 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
115 -**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
116 -**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
117 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
118 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics* 
119 -
120 ------
121 -
122 -## **Key Statistics**##
123 -
102 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
124 124  1. **General Observations:**
125 125   - Analyzed **high-coverage genome sequences of 300 individuals from 142 populations**.
126 126   - Included **many underrepresented and indigenous groups** from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.
... ... @@ -132,11 +132,9 @@
132 132  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
133 133   - Identified **5.8 million base pairs absent from the human reference genome**.
134 134   - Estimated that **mutations have accumulated 5% faster in non-Africans than in Africans**.
114 +{{/expandable}}
135 135  
136 ------
137 -
138 -## **Findings**##
139 -
116 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
140 140  1. **Primary Observations:**
141 141   - **African populations harbor the greatest genetic diversity**, confirming an out-of-Africa dispersal model.
142 142   - Indigenous Australians and New Guineans **share a common ancestral population with other non-Africans**.
... ... @@ -148,11 +148,9 @@
148 148  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
149 149   - **Neanderthal ancestry is higher in East Asians than in Europeans**.
150 150   - African hunter-gatherer groups show **deep population splits over 100,000 years ago**.
128 +{{/expandable}}
151 151  
152 ------
153 -
154 -## **Critique and Observations**##
155 -
130 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
156 156  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
157 157   - **Largest global genetic dataset** outside of the 1000 Genomes Project.
158 158   - High sequencing depth allows **more accurate identification of genetic variants**.
... ... @@ -164,50 +164,36 @@
164 164  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
165 165   - Future studies should include **ancient genomes** to improve demographic modeling.
166 166   - Expand research into **how genetic variation affects health outcomes** across populations.
142 +{{/expandable}}
167 167  
168 ------
169 -
170 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
144 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
171 171  - Provides **comprehensive data on human genetic diversity**, useful for **evolutionary studies**.
172 172  - Supports research on **Neanderthal and Denisovan introgression** in modern human populations.
173 -- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.##
147 +- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.
148 +{{/expandable}}
174 174  
175 ------
176 -
177 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
178 -
150 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
179 179  1. Investigate **functional consequences of genetic variation in underrepresented populations**.
180 180  2. Study **how selection pressures shaped genetic diversity across different environments**.
181 181  3. Explore **medical applications of population-specific genetic markers**.
154 +{{/expandable}}
182 182  
183 ------
156 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
157 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]
158 +{{/expandable}}
159 +{{/expandable}}
184 184  
185 -## **Summary of Research Study**
186 -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**.##
161 +{{expandable summary="
187 187  
188 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
163 +Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
164 +**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
165 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
166 +**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
167 +**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
168 +**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
169 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science*
189 189  
190 ------
191 -
192 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
193 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]##
194 -{{/expand}}
195 -
196 -
197 -== Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies ==
198 -
199 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
200 -**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
201 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
202 -**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
203 -**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
204 -**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
205 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science* 
206 -
207 ------
208 -
209 -## **Key Statistics**##
210 -
171 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
211 211  1. **General Observations:**
212 212   - Analyzed **17,804 traits from 2,748 twin studies** published between **1958 and 2012**.
213 213   - Included data from **14,558,903 twin pairs**, making it the largest meta-analysis on human heritability.
... ... @@ -219,11 +219,9 @@
219 219  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
220 220   - **Neurological, metabolic, and psychiatric traits** showed the highest heritability estimates.
221 221   - Traits related to **social values and environmental interactions** had lower heritability estimates.
183 +{{/expandable}}
222 222  
223 ------
224 -
225 -## **Findings**##
226 -
185 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
227 227  1. **Primary Observations:**
228 228   - Across all traits, genetic factors play a significant role in individual differences.
229 229   - The study contradicts models that **overestimate environmental effects in behavioral and cognitive traits**.
... ... @@ -235,11 +235,9 @@
235 235  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
236 236   - Twin correlations suggest **limited evidence for strong non-additive genetic influences**.
237 237   - The study highlights **missing heritability in complex traits**, which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have yet to fully explain.
197 +{{/expandable}}
238 238  
239 ------
240 -
241 -## **Critique and Observations**##
242 -
199 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
243 243  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
244 244   - **Largest-ever heritability meta-analysis**, covering nearly all published twin studies.
245 245   - Provides a **comprehensive framework for understanding gene-environment contributions**.
... ... @@ -251,39 +251,28 @@
251 251  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
252 252   - Future research should use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer-grained heritability estimates.
253 253   - **Incorporate non-Western populations** to assess global heritability trends.
211 +{{/expandable}}
254 254  
255 ------
256 -
257 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
213 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
258 258  - Establishes a **quantitative benchmark for heritability across human traits**.
259 259  - Reinforces **genetic influence on cognitive, behavioral, and physical traits**.
260 -- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.##
216 +- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.
217 +{{/expandable}}
261 261  
262 ------
263 -
264 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
265 -
219 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
266 266  1. Investigate how **heritability estimates compare across different socioeconomic backgrounds**.
267 267  2. Examine **gene-environment interactions in cognitive and psychiatric traits**.
268 268  3. Explore **non-additive genetic effects on human traits using newer statistical models**.
223 +{{/expandable}}
269 269  
270 ------
225 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
226 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]
227 +{{/expandable}}
228 +{{/expandable}}
271 271  
272 -## **Summary of Research Study**
273 -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.##
230 +{{expandable summary="
274 274  
275 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
276 -
277 ------
278 -
279 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
280 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]##
281 -{{/expand}}
282 -
283 -
284 -== Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease ==
285 -
286 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
232 +Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
287 287  **Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
288 288  **Date of Publication:** *2002*
289 289  **Author(s):** *Sarah A. Tishkoff, Scott M. Williams*
... ... @@ -291,10 +291,7 @@
291 291  **DOI:** [10.1038/nrg865](https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg865)
292 292  **Subject Matter:** *Population Genetics, Human Evolution, Complex Diseases* 
293 293  
294 ------
295 -
296 -## **Key Statistics**##
297 -
240 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
298 298  1. **General Observations:**
299 299   - Africa harbors **the highest genetic diversity** of any region, making it key to understanding human evolution.
300 300   - The study analyzes **genetic variation and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in African populations**.
... ... @@ -306,11 +306,9 @@
306 306  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
307 307   - The **effective population size (Ne) of Africans** is higher than that of non-African populations.
308 308   - LD blocks are **shorter in African genomes**, suggesting more historical recombination events.
252 +{{/expandable}}
309 309  
310 ------
311 -
312 -## **Findings**##
313 -
254 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
314 314  1. **Primary Observations:**
315 315   - African populations are the **most genetically diverse**, supporting the *Recent African Origin* hypothesis.
316 316   - Genetic variation in African populations can **help fine-map complex disease genes**.
... ... @@ -322,11 +322,9 @@
322 322  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
323 323   - Admixture in African Americans includes **West African and European genetic contributions**.
324 324   - SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) diversity in African genomes **exceeds that of non-African groups**.
266 +{{/expandable}}
325 325  
326 ------
327 -
328 -## **Critique and Observations**##
329 -
268 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
330 330  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
331 331   - Provides **comprehensive genetic analysis** of diverse African populations.
332 332   - Highlights **how genetic diversity impacts health disparities and disease risks**.
... ... @@ -338,50 +338,36 @@
338 338  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
339 339   - Expand research into **underrepresented African populations**.
340 340   - Integrate **whole-genome sequencing for a more detailed evolutionary timeline**.
280 +{{/expandable}}
341 341  
342 ------
343 -
344 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
282 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
345 345  - Supports **genetic models of human evolution** and the **out-of-Africa hypothesis**.
346 346  - Reinforces **Africa’s key role in disease gene mapping and precision medicine**.
347 -- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.##
285 +- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.
286 +{{/expandable}}
348 348  
349 ------
350 -
351 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
352 -
288 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
353 353  1. Investigate **genetic adaptations to local environments within Africa**.
354 354  2. Study **the role of African genetic diversity in disease resistance**.
355 355  3. Expand research on **how ancient migration patterns shaped modern genetic structure**.
292 +{{/expandable}}
356 356  
357 ------
294 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
295 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]
296 +{{/expandable}}
297 +{{/expandable}}
358 358  
359 -## **Summary of Research Study**
360 -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**.##
299 +{{expandable summary="
361 361  
362 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
301 +Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
302 +**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
303 +**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
304 +**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
305 +**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
306 +**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
307 +**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection*
363 363  
364 ------
365 -
366 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
367 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]##
368 -{{/expand}}
369 -
370 -
371 -== Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA ==
372 -
373 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
374 -**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
375 -**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
376 -**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
377 -**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
378 -**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
379 -**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection* 
380 -
381 ------
382 -
383 -## **Key Statistics**##
384 -
309 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
385 385  1. **General Observations:**
386 386   - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
387 387   - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
... ... @@ -393,11 +393,9 @@
393 393  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
394 394   - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
395 395   - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
321 +{{/expandable}}
396 396  
397 ------
398 -
399 -## **Findings**##
400 -
323 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
401 401  1. **Primary Observations:**
402 402   - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
403 403   - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
... ... @@ -410,11 +410,9 @@
410 410   - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
411 411   - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
412 412   - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
336 +{{/expandable}}
413 413  
414 ------
415 -
416 -## **Critique and Observations**##
417 -
338 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
418 418  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
419 419   - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
420 420   - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
... ... @@ -426,48 +426,34 @@
426 426  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
427 427   - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
428 428   - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
350 +{{/expandable}}
429 429  
430 ------
431 -
432 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
352 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
433 433  - Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
434 434  - Supports theories on **polygenic selection shaping human cognition, metabolism, and immunity**.
435 -- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.##
355 +- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.
356 +{{/expandable}}
436 436  
437 ------
438 -
439 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
440 -
358 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
441 441  1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
442 442  2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
443 443  3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
362 +{{/expandable}}
444 444  
445 ------
364 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
365 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]
366 +{{/expandable}}
367 +{{/expandable}}
446 446  
447 -## **Summary of Research Study**
448 -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**.##
369 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
370 +**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
371 +**Date of Publication:** *2013*
372 +**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
373 +**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
374 +**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
375 +**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology*
449 449  
450 ------
451 -
452 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
453 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]##
454 -{{/expand}}
455 -
456 -
457 -== Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age ==
458 -
459 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
460 -**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
461 -**Date of Publication:** *2013*
462 -**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
463 -**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
464 -**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
465 -**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology* 
466 -
467 ------
468 -
469 -## **Key Statistics**##
470 -
377 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
471 471  1. **General Observations:**
472 472   - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
473 473   - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
... ... @@ -479,11 +479,9 @@
479 479  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
480 480   - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
481 481   - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
389 +{{/expandable}}
482 482  
483 ------
484 -
485 -## **Findings**##
486 -
391 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
487 487  1. **Primary Observations:**
488 488   - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
489 489   - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
... ... @@ -495,11 +495,9 @@
495 495  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
496 496   - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
497 497   - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
403 +{{/expandable}}
498 498  
499 ------
500 -
501 -## **Critique and Observations**##
502 -
405 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
503 503  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
504 504   - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
505 505   - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
... ... @@ -511,50 +511,34 @@
511 511  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
512 512   - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
513 513   - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
417 +{{/expandable}}
514 514  
515 ------
516 -
517 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
419 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
518 518  - Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
519 519  - Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
520 -- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.##
422 +- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.
423 +{{/expandable}}
521 521  
522 ------
523 -
524 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
525 -
425 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
526 526  1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
527 527  2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
528 528  3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
429 +{{/expandable}}
529 529  
530 ------
431 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
432 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
433 +{{/expandable}}
434 +{{/expandable}}
531 531  
532 -## **Summary of Research Study**
533 -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**.##
436 +{{expandable summary="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
437 +**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
438 +**Date of Publication:** *2010*
439 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
440 +**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
441 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
442 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology*
534 534  
535 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
536 -
537 ------
538 -
539 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
540 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]##
541 -{{/expand}}
542 -
543 -
544 -== Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications ==
545 -
546 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
547 -**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
548 -**Date of Publication:** *2010*
549 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
550 -**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
551 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
552 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology* 
553 -
554 ------
555 -
556 -## **Key Statistics**##
557 -
444 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
558 558  1. **General Observations:**
559 559   - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
560 560   - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
... ... @@ -566,11 +566,9 @@
566 566  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
567 567   - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
568 568   - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
456 +{{/expandable}}
569 569  
570 ------
571 -
572 -## **Findings**##
573 -
458 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
574 574  1. **Primary Observations:**
575 575   - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
576 576   - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
... ... @@ -582,11 +582,9 @@
582 582  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
583 583   - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
584 584   - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
470 +{{/expandable}}
585 585  
586 ------
587 -
588 -## **Critique and Observations**##
589 -
472 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
590 590  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
591 591   - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
592 592   - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
... ... @@ -598,50 +598,36 @@
598 598  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
599 599   - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
600 600   - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
484 +{{/expandable}}
601 601  
602 ------
603 -
604 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
486 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
605 605  - Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
606 606  - Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
607 -- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.##
489 +- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.
490 +{{/expandable}}
608 608  
609 ------
610 -
611 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
612 -
492 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
613 613  1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
614 614  2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
615 615  3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
496 +{{/expandable}}
616 616  
617 ------
498 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
499 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
500 +{{/expandable}}
501 +{{/expandable}}
618 618  
619 -## **Summary of Research Study**
620 -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**.##
503 += IQ =
621 621  
622 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
505 +{{expandable summary="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
506 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
507 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
508 +**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
509 +**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
510 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
511 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis*
623 623  
624 ------
625 -
626 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
627 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]##
628 -{{/expand}}
629 -
630 -
631 -== Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media ==
632 -
633 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
634 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
635 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
636 -**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
637 -**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
638 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
639 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis* 
640 -
641 ------
642 -
643 -## **Key Statistics**##
644 -
513 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
645 645  1. **General Observations:**
646 646   - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
647 647   - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
... ... @@ -653,11 +653,9 @@
653 653  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
654 654   - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
655 655   - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
525 +{{/expandable}}
656 656  
657 ------
658 -
659 -## **Findings**##
660 -
527 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
661 661  1. **Primary Observations:**
662 662   - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
663 663   - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
... ... @@ -669,11 +669,9 @@
669 669  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
670 670   - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
671 671   - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
539 +{{/expandable}}
672 672  
673 ------
674 -
675 -## **Critique and Observations**##
676 -
541 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
677 677  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
678 678   - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
679 679   - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
... ... @@ -685,50 +685,34 @@
685 685  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
686 686   - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
687 687   - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
553 +{{/expandable}}
688 688  
689 ------
690 -
691 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
555 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
692 692  - Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
693 693  - Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
694 -- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.##
558 +- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.
559 +{{/expandable}}
695 695  
696 ------
697 -
698 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
699 -
561 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
700 700  1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
701 701  2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
702 702  3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
565 +{{/expandable}}
703 703  
704 ------
567 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
568 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
569 +{{/expandable}}
570 +{{/expandable}}
705 705  
706 -## **Summary of Research Study**
707 -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**.##
572 +{{expandable summary="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
573 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
574 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
575 +**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
576 +**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
577 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
578 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences*
708 708  
709 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
710 -
711 ------
712 -
713 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
714 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]##
715 -{{/expand}}
716 -
717 -
718 -== Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation ==
719 -
720 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
721 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
722 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
723 -**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
724 -**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
725 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
726 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences* 
727 -
728 ------
729 -
730 -## **Key Statistics**##
731 -
580 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
732 732  1. **General Observations:**
733 733   - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
734 734   - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
... ... @@ -740,11 +740,9 @@
740 740  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
741 741   - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
742 742   - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
592 +{{/expandable}}
743 743  
744 ------
745 -
746 -## **Findings**##
747 -
594 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
748 748  1. **Primary Observations:**
749 749   - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
750 750   - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
... ... @@ -756,11 +756,9 @@
756 756  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
757 757   - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
758 758   - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
606 +{{/expandable}}
759 759  
760 ------
761 -
762 -## **Critique and Observations**##
763 -
608 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
764 764  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
765 765   - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
766 766   - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
... ... @@ -772,78 +772,37 @@
772 772  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
773 773   - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
774 774   - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
620 +{{/expandable}}
775 775  
776 ------
777 -
778 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
622 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
779 779  - Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
780 780  - Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
781 -- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.##
625 +- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.
626 +{{/expandable}}
782 782  
783 ------
784 -
785 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
786 -
628 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
787 787  1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
788 788  2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
789 789  3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
632 +{{/expandable}}
790 790  
791 ------
634 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
635 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
636 +{{/expandable}}
637 +{{/expandable}}
792 792  
793 -## **Summary of Research Study**
794 -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.  ##
639 +{{expandable summary="Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding"}}
640 +**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
641 +**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
642 +**Author(s):** Smith et al.
643 +**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
644 +**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
645 +**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science
646 +{{/expandable}}
795 795  
796 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
648 += Dating =
797 797  
798 ------
799 -
800 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
801 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]##
802 -{{/expand}}
803 -
804 -
805 -== Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding ==
806 -
807 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Click here to expand details"}}
808 -**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
809 -**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
810 -**Author(s):** Smith et al.
811 -**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
812 -**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
813 -**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science 
814 -
815 -**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
816 -
817 -=== **Key Statistics** ===
818 -
819 -1. **General Observations:**
820 - - A near-perfect alignment between self-identified race/ethnicity (SIRE) and genetic ancestry was observed.
821 - - Misclassification rate: **0.14%**.
822 -
823 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
824 - - Four groups analyzed: **White, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic**.
825 - - Hispanic genetic clusters showed significant European and Native American lineage.
826 -
827 -=== **Findings** ===
828 -
829 -- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
830 -- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
831 -
832 -=== **Relevance to Subproject** ===
833 -
834 -- Reinforces the reliability of **self-reported racial identity** in genetic research.
835 -- Highlights **policy considerations** in biomedical studies.
836 -{{/expand}}
837 -
838 -
839 ------
840 -
841 -= Dating and Interpersonal Relationships =
842 -
843 -
844 -== Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018 ==
845 -
846 -{{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"}}
650 +{{expandable summary="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"}}
847 847  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
848 848  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
849 849  **Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.*
... ... @@ -851,10 +851,7 @@
851 851  **DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833)
852 852  **Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography* 
853 853  
854 ------
855 -
856 -## **Key Statistics**##
857 -
658 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
858 858  1. **General Observations:**
859 859   - Study analyzed **General Social Survey (2000-2018)** data.
860 860   - Found **declining trends in sexual activity** among young adults.
... ... @@ -866,11 +866,9 @@
866 866  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
867 867   - Frequency of sexual activity decreased by **8-10%** over the studied period.
868 868   - Number of sexual partners remained **relatively stable** despite declining activity rates.
670 +{{/expandable}}
869 869  
870 ------
871 -
872 -## **Findings**##
873 -
672 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
874 874  1. **Primary Observations:**
875 875   - A significant decline in sexual frequency, especially among **younger men**.
876 876   - Shifts in relationship dynamics and economic stressors may contribute to the trend.
... ... @@ -882,11 +882,9 @@
882 882  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
883 883   - **Mental health and employment status** were correlated with decreased activity.
884 884   - Social factors such as **screen time and digital entertainment consumption** are potential contributors.
684 +{{/expandable}}
885 885  
886 ------
887 -
888 -## **Critique and Observations**##
889 -
686 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
890 890  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
891 891   - **Large sample size** from a nationally representative dataset.
892 892   - **Longitudinal design** enables trend analysis over time.
... ... @@ -898,55 +898,32 @@
898 898  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
899 899   - Further studies should incorporate **qualitative data** on behavioral shifts.
900 900   - Additional factors such as **economic shifts and social media usage** need exploration.
698 +{{/expandable}}
901 901  
902 ------
903 -
904 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
700 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
905 905  - Provides evidence on **changing demographic behaviors** in relation to relationships and social interactions.
906 -- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.##
702 +- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.
703 +{{/expandable}}
907 907  
908 ------
909 -
910 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
911 -
705 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
912 912  1. Investigate the **impact of digital media consumption** on relationship dynamics.
913 913  2. Examine **regional and cultural differences** in sexual activity trends.
708 +{{/expandable}}
914 914  
915 ------
710 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
711 +
712 +{{/expandable}}
713 +{{/expandable}}
916 916  
917 -## **Summary of Research Study**
918 -This study examines **trends in sexual frequency and number of partners among U.S. adults (2000-2018)**, highlighting significant **declines in sexual activity, particularly among young men**. The research utilized **General Social Survey data** to analyze the impact of **sociodemographic factors, employment status, and mental well-being** on sexual behavior.  ##
715 +{{expandable summary="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
716 +**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
717 +**Date of Publication:** *2012*
718 +**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
719 +**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
720 +**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
721 +**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities*
919 919  
920 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
921 -
922 ------
923 -
924 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
925 -{{velocity}}
926 -#set($doi = "10.1001_jamanetworkopen.2020.3833")
927 -#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf")
928 -#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename"))
929 -[[Download>>attach:$filename]]
930 -#else
931 -{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
932 -#end {{/velocity}}##
933 -{{/expand}}
934 -
935 -
936 -== Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis ==
937 -
938 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
939 -**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
940 -**Date of Publication:** *2012*
941 -**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
942 -**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
943 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
944 -**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities* 
945 -
946 ------
947 -
948 -## **Key Statistics**##
949 -
723 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
950 950  1. **General Observations:**
951 951   - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
952 952   - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
... ... @@ -960,11 +960,9 @@
960 960   - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
961 961   - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
962 962   - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
737 +{{/expandable}}
963 963  
964 ------
965 -
966 -## **Findings**##
967 -
739 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
968 968  1. **Primary Observations:**
969 969   - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
970 970   - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
... ... @@ -976,11 +976,9 @@
976 976  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
977 977   - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
978 978   - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
751 +{{/expandable}}
979 979  
980 ------
981 -
982 -## **Critique and Observations**##
983 -
753 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
984 984  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
985 985   - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
986 986   - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
... ... @@ -992,48 +992,34 @@
992 992  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
993 993   - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
994 994   - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
765 +{{/expandable}}
995 995  
996 ------
997 -
998 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
767 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
999 999  - Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
1000 1000  - Supports **research on genetic and environmental influences on neonatal health**.
1001 -- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.##
770 +- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.
771 +{{/expandable}}
1002 1002  
1003 ------
1004 -
1005 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1006 -
773 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1007 1007  1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
1008 1008  2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
1009 1009  3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
777 +{{/expandable}}
1010 1010  
1011 ------
779 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
780 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]
781 +{{/expandable}}
782 +{{/expandable}}
1012 1012  
1013 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1014 -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**.##
784 +{{expandable summary="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
785 +**Source:** *Current Psychology*
786 +**Date of Publication:** *2024*
787 +**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
788 +**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
789 +**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
790 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
1015 1015  
1016 ------
1017 -
1018 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1019 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]##
1020 -{{/expand}}
1021 -
1022 -
1023 -== Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness ==
1024 -
1025 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
1026 -**Source:** *Current Psychology*
1027 -**Date of Publication:** *2024*
1028 -**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
1029 -**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
1030 -**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
1031 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation* 
1032 -
1033 ------
1034 -
1035 -## **Key Statistics**##
1036 -
792 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1037 1037  1. **General Observations:**
1038 1038   - Study analyzed **67 self-identified incels** and **103 non-incel men**.
1039 1039   - Incels reported **higher loneliness and lower social support** compared to non-incels.
... ... @@ -1045,11 +1045,9 @@
1045 1045  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1046 1046   - 95% of incels in the study reported **having depression**, with 38% receiving a formal diagnosis.
1047 1047   - **Higher externalization of blame** was linked to stronger incel identification.
804 +{{/expandable}}
1048 1048  
1049 ------
1050 -
1051 -## **Findings**##
1052 -
806 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1053 1053  1. **Primary Observations:**
1054 1054   - Incels experience **heightened rejection sensitivity and loneliness**.
1055 1055   - Lack of social support correlates with **worse mental health outcomes**.
... ... @@ -1061,11 +1061,9 @@
1061 1061  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1062 1062   - Incels **engaged in fewer positive coping mechanisms** such as emotional support or positive reframing.
1063 1063   - Instead, they relied on **solitary coping strategies**, worsening their isolation.
818 +{{/expandable}}
1064 1064  
1065 ------
1066 -
1067 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1068 -
820 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1069 1069  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1070 1070   - **First quantitative study** on incels’ social isolation and mental health.
1071 1071   - **Robust sample size** and validated psychological measures.
... ... @@ -1077,53 +1077,36 @@
1077 1077  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1078 1078   - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**.
1079 1079   - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration.
832 +{{/expandable}}
1080 1080  
1081 ------
1082 -
1083 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
834 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1084 1084  - Highlights **mental health vulnerabilities** within the incel community.
1085 1085  - Supports research on **loneliness, attachment styles, and social dominance orientation**.
1086 -- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.##
837 +- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.
838 +{{/expandable}}
1087 1087  
1088 ------
1089 -
1090 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1091 -
840 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1092 1092  1. Explore how **online community participation** affects incel mental health.
1093 1093  2. Investigate **cognitive biases** influencing self-perceived rejection among incels.
1094 1094  3. Assess **therapeutic interventions** to address incel social isolation.
844 +{{/expandable}}
1095 1095  
1096 ------
846 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
847 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
848 +{{/expandable}}
849 +{{/expandable}}
1097 1097  
1098 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1099 -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**.##
1100 -
1101 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1102 -
1103 ------
1104 -
1105 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1106 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]##
1107 -{{/expand}}
1108 -
1109 -
1110 1110  = Crime and Substance Abuse =
1111 1111  
853 +{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
854 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
855 +**Date of Publication:** *2002*
856 +**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
857 +**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
858 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
859 +**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
1112 1112  
1113 -== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1114 -
1115 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1116 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1117 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1118 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1119 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1120 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1121 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1122 -
1123 ------
1124 -
1125 -## **Key Statistics**##
1126 -
861 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1127 1127  1. **General Observations:**
1128 1128   - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1129 1129   - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
... ... @@ -1135,11 +1135,9 @@
1135 1135  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1136 1136   - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1137 1137   - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
873 +{{/expandable}}
1138 1138  
1139 ------
1140 -
1141 -## **Findings**##
1142 -
875 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1143 1143  1. **Primary Observations:**
1144 1144   - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1145 1145   - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
... ... @@ -1151,11 +1151,9 @@
1151 1151  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1152 1152   - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1153 1153   - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
887 +{{/expandable}}
1154 1154  
1155 ------
1156 -
1157 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1158 -
889 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1159 1159  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1160 1160   - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1161 1161   - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
... ... @@ -1167,50 +1167,34 @@
1167 1167  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1168 1168   - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1169 1169   - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
901 +{{/expandable}}
1170 1170  
1171 ------
1172 -
1173 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
903 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1174 1174  - Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1175 1175  - Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1176 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
906 +- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
907 +{{/expandable}}
1177 1177  
1178 ------
1179 -
1180 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1181 -
909 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1182 1182  1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1183 1183  2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1184 1184  3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
913 +{{/expandable}}
1185 1185  
1186 ------
915 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
916 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
917 +{{/expandable}}
918 +{{/expandable}}
1187 1187  
1188 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1189 -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**.##
920 +{{expandable summary="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
921 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
922 +**Date of Publication:** *2003*
923 +**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
924 +**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
925 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
926 +**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research*
1190 1190  
1191 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1192 -
1193 ------
1194 -
1195 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1196 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1197 -{{/expand}}
1198 -
1199 -
1200 -== Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys ==
1201 -
1202 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
1203 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1204 -**Date of Publication:** *2003*
1205 -**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
1206 -**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
1207 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
1208 -**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research* 
1209 -
1210 ------
1211 -
1212 -## **Key Statistics**##
1213 -
928 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1214 1214  1. **General Observations:**
1215 1215   - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
1216 1216   - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
... ... @@ -1222,82 +1222,62 @@
1222 1222  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1223 1223   - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
1224 1224   - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
940 +{{/expandable}}
1225 1225  
1226 ------
1227 -
1228 -## **Findings**##
1229 -
942 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1230 1230  1. **Primary Observations:**
1231 1231   - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
1232 1232   - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
1233 1233  
1234 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
947 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1235 1235   - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
1236 1236   - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
1237 1237  
1238 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
951 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1239 1239   - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
1240 1240   - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
954 +{{/expandable}}
1241 1241  
1242 ------
1243 -
1244 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1245 -
1246 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
956 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
957 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1247 1247   - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
1248 1248   - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
1249 1249  
1250 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
961 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1251 1251   - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
1252 1252   - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
1253 1253  
1254 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
965 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1255 1255   - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
1256 1256   - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
968 +{{/expandable}}
1257 1257  
1258 ------
1259 -
1260 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
970 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1261 1261  - Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
1262 1262  - Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
1263 -- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.##
973 +- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.
974 +{{/expandable}}
1264 1264  
1265 ------
1266 -
1267 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1268 -
976 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1269 1269  1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
1270 1270  2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
1271 1271  3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
980 +{{/expandable}}
1272 1272  
1273 ------
982 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
983 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]
984 +{{/expandable}}
985 +{{/expandable}}
1274 1274  
1275 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1276 -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**.##
987 +{{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
988 +**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
989 +**Date of Publication:** *2002*
990 +**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
991 +**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
992 +**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
993 +**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
1277 1277  
1278 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1279 -
1280 ------
1281 -
1282 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1283 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]##
1284 -{{/expand}}
1285 -
1286 -
1287 -== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1288 -
1289 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1290 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1291 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1292 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1293 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1294 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1295 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1296 -
1297 ------
1298 -
1299 -## **Key Statistics**##
1300 -
995 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1301 1301  1. **General Observations:**
1302 1302   - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1303 1303   - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
... ... @@ -1309,11 +1309,9 @@
1309 1309  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1310 1310   - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1311 1311   - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1007 +{{/expandable}}
1312 1312  
1313 ------
1314 -
1315 -## **Findings**##
1316 -
1009 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1317 1317  1. **Primary Observations:**
1318 1318   - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1319 1319   - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
... ... @@ -1325,11 +1325,9 @@
1325 1325  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1326 1326   - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1327 1327   - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1021 +{{/expandable}}
1328 1328  
1329 ------
1330 -
1331 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1332 -
1023 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1333 1333  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1334 1334   - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1335 1335   - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
... ... @@ -1341,117 +1341,36 @@
1341 1341  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1342 1342   - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1343 1343   - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1035 +{{/expandable}}
1344 1344  
1345 ------
1346 -
1347 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1037 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1348 1348  - Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1349 1349  - Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1350 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1040 +- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
1041 +{{/expandable}}
1351 1351  
1352 ------
1353 -
1354 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1355 -
1043 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1356 1356  1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1357 1357  2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1358 1358  3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1047 +{{/expandable}}
1359 1359  
1360 ------
1049 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1050 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]
1051 +{{/expandable}}
1052 +{{/expandable}}
1361 1361  
1362 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1363 -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**.##
1054 +{{expandable summary="
1364 1364  
1365 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1056 +Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
1057 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1058 +**Date of Publication:** *2014*
1059 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1060 +**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1061 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
1062 +**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
1366 1366  
1367 ------
1368 -
1369 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1370 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1371 -{{/expand}}
1372 -
1373 -
1374 -== Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults ==
1375 -
1376 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"}}
1377 - Source: Addictive Behaviors
1378 -Date of Publication: 2016
1379 -Author(s): Andrea Hussong, Christy Capron, Gregory T. Smith, Jennifer L. Maggs
1380 -Title: "Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"
1381 -DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.02.030
1382 -Subject Matter: Substance Use, Mental Health, Adolescent Development
1383 -
1384 -Key Statistics
1385 -General Observations:
1386 -
1387 -Study examined cannabis use trends in young adults over time.
1388 -Found significant correlations between cannabis use and increased depressive symptoms.
1389 -Subgroup Analysis:
1390 -
1391 -Males exhibited higher rates of cannabis use, but females reported stronger mental health impacts.
1392 -Individuals with pre-existing anxiety disorders were more likely to report problematic cannabis use.
1393 -Other Significant Data Points:
1394 -
1395 -Frequent cannabis users showed a 23% higher likelihood of developing anxiety symptoms.
1396 -Co-occurring substance use (e.g., alcohol) exacerbated negative psychological effects.
1397 -Findings
1398 -Primary Observations:
1399 -
1400 -Cannabis use was linked to higher depressive and anxiety symptoms, particularly in frequent users.
1401 -Self-medication patterns emerged among those with pre-existing mental health conditions.
1402 -Subgroup Trends:
1403 -
1404 -Early cannabis initiation (before age 16) was associated with greater mental health risks.
1405 -College-aged users reported more impairments in daily functioning due to cannabis use.
1406 -Specific Case Analysis:
1407 -
1408 -Participants with a history of childhood trauma were twice as likely to develop problematic cannabis use.
1409 -Co-use of cannabis and alcohol significantly increased impulsivity scores in the study sample.
1410 -Critique and Observations
1411 -Strengths of the Study:
1412 -
1413 -Large, longitudinal dataset with a diverse sample of young adults.
1414 -Controlled for confounding variables like socioeconomic status and prior substance use.
1415 -Limitations of the Study:
1416 -
1417 -Self-reported cannabis use may introduce bias in reported frequency and effects.
1418 -Did not assess specific THC potency levels, which could influence mental health outcomes.
1419 -Suggestions for Improvement:
1420 -
1421 -Future research should investigate dose-dependent effects of cannabis on mental health.
1422 -Assess long-term psychological outcomes of early cannabis exposure.
1423 -Relevance to Subproject
1424 -Supports mental health risk assessment models related to substance use.
1425 -Highlights gender differences in substance-related psychological impacts.
1426 -Provides insight into self-medication behaviors among young adults.
1427 -Suggestions for Further Exploration
1428 -Investigate the long-term impact of cannabis use on neurodevelopment.
1429 -Examine the role of genetic predisposition in cannabis-related mental health risks.
1430 -Assess regional differences in cannabis use trends post-legalization.
1431 -Summary of Research Study
1432 -This study examines the relationship between cannabis use and mental health symptoms in young adults, focusing on depressive and anxiety-related outcomes. Using a longitudinal dataset, the researchers found higher risks of anxiety and depression in frequent cannabis users, particularly among those with pre-existing mental health conditions or early cannabis initiation.
1433 -
1434 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1435 -
1436 -📄 Download Full Study
1437 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.addbeh.2016.02.030.pdf]]
1438 -{{/expand}}
1439 -
1440 -
1441 -== Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time? ==
1442 -
1443 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"}}
1444 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1445 -**Date of Publication:** *2014*
1446 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1447 -**Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1448 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
1449 -**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics* 
1450 -
1451 ------
1452 -
1453 -## **Key Statistics**##
1454 -
1064 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1455 1455  1. **General Observations:**
1456 1456   - The study examines reaction time data from **13 age-matched studies** spanning **1884–2004**.
1457 1457   - Results suggest an estimated **decline of 13.35 IQ points** over this period.
... ... @@ -1463,11 +1463,9 @@
1463 1463  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1464 1464   - The estimated **dysgenic rate is 1.21 IQ points lost per decade**.
1465 1465   - Meta-regression analysis confirmed a **steady secular trend in slowing reaction time**.
1076 +{{/expandable}}
1466 1466  
1467 ------
1468 -
1469 -## **Findings**##
1470 -
1078 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1471 1471  1. **Primary Observations:**
1472 1472   - Supports the hypothesis of **intelligence decline due to genetic and environmental factors**.
1473 1473   - Reaction time, a **biomarker for cognitive ability**, has slowed significantly over time.
... ... @@ -1479,11 +1479,9 @@
1479 1479  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1480 1480   - Cross-national comparisons indicate a **global trend in slower reaction times**.
1481 1481   - Factors like **modern neurotoxin exposure** and **reduced selective pressure for intelligence** may contribute.
1090 +{{/expandable}}
1482 1482  
1483 ------
1484 -
1485 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1486 -
1092 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1487 1487  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1488 1488   - **Comprehensive meta-analysis** covering over a century of reaction time data.
1489 1489   - **Robust statistical corrections** for measurement variance between historical and modern studies.
... ... @@ -1495,226 +1495,247 @@
1495 1495  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1496 1496   - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
1497 1497   - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
1104 +{{/expandable}}
1498 1498  
1499 ------
1500 -
1501 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1106 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1502 1502  - Provides evidence for **long-term intelligence trends**, contributing to research on **cognitive evolution**.
1503 1503  - Aligns with broader discussions on **dysgenics, neurophysiology, and cognitive load**.
1504 -- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.##
1109 +- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
1110 +{{/expandable}}
1505 1505  
1506 ------
1507 -
1508 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1509 -
1112 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1510 1510  1. Investigate **genetic markers associated with reaction time** and intelligence decline.
1511 1511  2. Examine **regional variations in reaction time trends**.
1512 1512  3. Explore **cognitive resilience factors that counteract the decline**.
1116 +{{/expandable}}
1513 1513  
1514 ------
1118 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1119 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]
1120 +{{/expandable}}
1121 +{{/expandable}}
1515 1515  
1516 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1517 -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**.  ##
1123 += Whiteness & White Guilt =
1518 1518  
1519 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1125 +{{expandable summary="Study: Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"}}
1126 +**Source:** *Psychological Science*
1127 +**Date of Publication:** *2014*
1128 +**Author(s):** *Caleb E. Lai, Anthony G. Greenwald, et al.*
1129 +**Title:** *"Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"*
1130 +**DOI:** [10.1177/0956797614535812](https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614535812)
1131 +**Subject Matter:** *Implicit Bias, Racial Psychology, Psychological Conditioning*
1520 1520  
1521 ------
1133 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1134 +1. **General Observations:**
1135 + - Tested **17 different interventions** across **6,321 participants**, all measured via IAT (Implicit Association Test).
1136 + - Focused exclusively on reducing **pro-White, anti-Black preferences** — no reciprocal testing on anti-White bias.
1522 1522  
1523 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1524 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]##
1525 -{{/expand}}
1138 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1139 + - Educational and exposure-based interventions (e.g., multiculturalism, egalitarian messaging) failed to reduce bias significantly.
1140 + - Most effective short-term results came from **trauma-based or emotionally coercive interventions**.
1526 1526  
1142 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1143 + - The **"Black hero" intervention**, where participants imagined being violently attacked by a White man and rescued by a Black man, was among the most effective.
1144 + - Effects of even the most extreme interventions **dissipated within 24–72 hours**, with no long-term behavioral change.
1145 +{{/expandable}}
1527 1527  
1528 -= Whiteness & White Guilt =
1147 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1148 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1149 + - The interventions that produced the most dramatic IAT changes used **emotionally graphic narratives** depicting Whites as violent aggressors and Blacks as saviors.
1150 + - Merely showing positive Black images or promoting egalitarian values had minimal effect on implicit associations.
1529 1529  
1530 -== Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports ==
1152 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1153 + - In the **"Black hero" condition**, participants were asked to imagine being physically beaten by a White person and then rescued by a Black person — an intentionally vivid and disturbing scenario.
1154 + - The **"Black victim" intervention** relied on emotionally shocking imagery of anti-Black violence (e.g., lynching) to induce guilt and disrupt positive associations with Whiteness.
1531 1531  
1532 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1156 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1157 + - None of the scenarios reversed the framing (e.g., Black aggressor/White victim), confirming the ideological goal was **to degrade White identity**, not merely reduce bias.
1158 + - The study was **cited by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)** to justify DEI-aligned policy recommendations.
1159 +{{/expandable}}
1160 +
1161 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1162 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1163 + - Large sample size and systematic comparison across diverse intervention types.
1164 + - Clearly shows that **implicit preference is resilient** and not easily changed by education or exposure alone.
1165 +
1166 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1167 + - The most “effective” methods **relied on emotional manipulation, not persuasion or evidence**.
1168 + - Assumes **natural in-group preference is pathological** when expressed by White subjects but makes no effort to test other groups.
1169 + - **Zero attention to pro-Black or anti-White bias** — only White attitudes are pathologized.
1170 +
1171 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1172 + - Test the **psychological harm** and ethical implications of using graphic racial trauma to coerce attitude change.
1173 + - Include interventions that **strengthen ingroup empathy** without demonizing other groups.
1174 + - Disaggregate bias by **class, region, and individual experience**, rather than racially reducing all bias to “Whiteness.”
1175 +{{/expandable}}
1176 +
1177 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1178 +- Provides direct evidence that **DEI-style implicit bias training** is based on emotionally abusive and **anti-White psychological framing**.
1179 +- Shows how **social science selectively targets Whites for attitude correction**, often using fictionalized racial trauma scenarios.
1180 +- Demonstrates that even extreme interventions **fail to achieve long-term change**, undermining the scientific justification for such policies.
1181 +{{/expandable}}
1182 +
1183 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1184 +1. Investigate **implicit bias training outcomes** in real-world institutional settings.
1185 +2. Study **the ethical limits of psychological reprogramming** in DEI policies.
1186 +3. Explore **natural ingroup preference across all races** using morally neutral frameworks.
1187 +{{/expandable}}
1188 +
1189 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1190 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:lai2014.pdf]]
1191 +{{/expandable}}
1192 +{{/expandable}}
1193 +
1194 +
1195 +{{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1533 1533  **Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
1534 1534  **Date of Publication:** *2019*
1535 1535  **Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
1536 1536  **Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
1537 1537  **DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
1538 -**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sports, Higher Education, Institutional Racism* 
1201 +**Subject Matter:** *Critical Race Theory, Sports Sociology, Anti-White Institutional Framing*
1539 1539  
1540 ------
1541 -
1542 -## **Key Statistics**##
1543 -
1203 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1544 1544  1. **General Observations:**
1545 - - Analyzed **47 college athlete narratives** to explore racial disparities in non-revenue sports.
1546 - - Found three interrelated themes: **racial segregation, racial innocence, and racial protection**.
1205 + - Based on **47 athlete interviews**, cherry-picked from non-revenue Division I sports.
1206 + - The study claims **segregation”**, but presents no evidence of actual exclusion or policy bias — just demographic imbalance.
1547 1547  
1548 1548  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1549 - - **Predominantly white sports programs** reinforce racial hierarchies in college athletics.
1550 - - **Recruitment policies favor white athletes** from affluent, suburban backgrounds.
1209 + - Attributes **White participation** in certain sports to "systemic racism", ignoring **self-selection, geography, and cultural affinity**.
1210 + - Claims White athletes are “protected” from race discussions — but never engages with **Black overrepresentation in revenue sports**.
1551 1551  
1552 1552  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1553 - - White athletes are **socialized to remain unaware of racial privilege** in their athletic careers.
1554 - - Media and institutional narratives protect white athletes from discussions on race and systemic inequities.
1213 + - White athletes are portrayed as **ignorant of their privilege**, a claim drawn entirely from CRT frameworks rather than behavior or outcome.
1214 + - **No empirical data** is offered on policy, scholarship distribution, or team selection criteria.
1215 +{{/expandable}}
1555 1555  
1556 ------
1557 -
1558 -## **Findings**##
1559 -
1217 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1560 1560  1. **Primary Observations:**
1561 - - Colleges **actively recruit white athletes** from majority-white communities.
1562 - - Institutional policies **uphold whiteness** by failing to challenge racial biases in recruitment and team culture.
1219 + - Frames **normal demographic patterns** (e.g., majority-White rosters in tennis or rowing) as "institutional whiteness".
1220 + - **Ignores the structural dominance** of Black athletes in high-profile revenue sports like football and basketball.
1563 1563  
1564 1564  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1565 - - **White athletes show limited awareness** of their racial advantage in sports.
1566 - - **Black athletes are overrepresented** in revenue-generating sports but underrepresented in non-revenue teams.
1223 + - White athletes are criticized for **lacking racial awareness**, reinforcing the moral framing of **Whiteness as inherently problematic**.
1224 + - **Cultural preference, individual merit, and athletic subculture** are all excluded from consideration.
1567 1567  
1568 1568  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1569 - - Examines **how sports serve as a mechanism for maintaining racial privilege** in higher education.
1570 - - Discusses the **role of athletics in reinforcing systemic segregation and exclusion**.
1227 + - Argues that college sports **reinforce racial hierarchy** without ever showing how White athletes benefit more than Black athletes.
1228 + - Offers **no comparative analysis** of scholarships, graduation rates, or media portrayal by race.
1229 +{{/expandable}}
1571 1571  
1572 ------
1573 -
1574 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1575 -
1231 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1576 1576  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1577 - - **Comprehensive qualitative analysis** of race in college sports.
1578 - - Examines **institutional conditions** that sustain racial disparities in athletics.
1233 + - Useful as a clear example of **how CRT ideologues weaponize demography** to frame White majority spaces as inherently suspect.
1234 + - Shows how **academic literature systematically avoids symmetrical analysis** when outcomes favor White participants.
1579 1579  
1580 1580  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1581 - - Focuses primarily on **Division I non-revenue sports**, limiting generalizability to other divisions.
1582 - - Lacks extensive **quantitative data on racial demographics** in college athletics.
1237 + - **Excludes revenue sports**, where Black athletes dominate by numbers, prestige, and compensation.
1238 + - **Fails to explain** how team composition emerges from voluntary participation, geography, or subcultural identity.
1239 + - Treats **racial imbalance as proof of racism**, bypassing merit, interest, or socioeconomic context.
1583 1583  
1584 1584  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1585 - - Future research should **compare recruitment policies across different sports and divisions**.
1586 - - Investigate **how athletic scholarships contribute to racial inequities in higher education**.
1242 + - Include **White athlete perspectives** without pre-framing them as racially naive or complicit.
1243 + - **Compare all sports**, including those where Black athletes thrive and lead.
1244 + - Remove CRT framing and **evaluate outcomes empirically**, not ideologically.
1245 +{{/expandable}}
1587 1587  
1588 ------
1247 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1248 +- Demonstrates how **DEI-aligned research reframes benign patterns** as oppressive when White majorities are involved.
1249 +- Illustrates **anti-White academic framing** in environments where no institutional barrier exists.
1250 +- Provides a concrete example of how **CRT avoids acknowledging Black dominance in elite spaces** (revenue athletics).
1251 +{{/expandable}}
1589 1589  
1590 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1591 -- Provides evidence of **systemic racial biases** in college sports recruitment.
1592 -- Highlights **how institutional policies protect whiteness** in non-revenue athletics.
1593 -- Supports research on **diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in sports and education**.##
1253 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1254 +1. Investigate **racial self-sorting and cultural affiliation** in athletic participation.
1255 +2. Compare **media framing of White-majority vs. Black-majority sports**.
1256 +3. Study **how CRT narratives distort athletic merit and demographic outcomes**.
1257 +{{/expandable}}
1594 1594  
1595 ------
1259 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1260 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]
1261 +{{/expandable}}
1262 +{{/expandable}}
1596 1596  
1597 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1598 1598  
1599 -1. Investigate how **racial stereotypes influence college athlete recruitment**.
1600 -2. Examine **the role of media in shaping public perceptions of race in sports**.
1601 -3. Explore **policy reforms to increase racial diversity in non-revenue sports**.
1602 -
1603 ------
1604 -
1605 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1606 -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**.##
1607 -
1608 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1609 -
1610 ------
1611 -
1612 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1613 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]##
1614 -{{/expand}}
1615 -
1616 -
1617 -== Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations ==
1618 -
1619 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1265 +{{expandable summary="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1620 1620  **Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1621 1621  **Date of Publication:** *2016*
1622 -**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axta, M. Norman Oliver*
1268 +**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axt, M. Norman Oliver*
1623 1623  **Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
1624 1624  **DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
1625 -**Subject Matter:** *Health Disparities, Racial Bias, Medical Treatment
1271 +**Subject Matter:** *Medical Ethics, Race in Medicine, Implicit Bias*
1626 1626  
1627 ------
1628 -
1629 -## **Key Statistics**##
1630 -
1273 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1631 1631  1. **General Observations:**
1632 - - Study analyzed **racial disparities in pain perception and treatment recommendations**.
1633 - - Found that **white laypeople and medical students endorsed false beliefs about biological differences** between Black and white individuals.
1275 + - Analyzed responses from **222 white medical students and residents**.
1276 + - Investigated belief in **false biological differences between Black and White people**.
1277 + - Measured how those beliefs affected **pain ratings and treatment recommendations**.
1634 1634  
1635 1635  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1636 - - **50% of medical students surveyed endorsed at least one false belief about biological differences**.
1637 - - Participants who held these false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients pain levels**.
1280 + - **50% of participants endorsed at least one false belief** (e.g., Black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings).
1281 + - Those who endorsed false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients' pain**.
1638 1638  
1639 1639  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1640 - - **Black patients were less likely to receive appropriate pain treatment** compared to white patients.
1641 - - The study confirmed that **historical misconceptions about racial differences still persist in modern medicine**.
1284 + - Bias was **most prominent among first-year students**, diminishing slightly with experience.
1285 + - Study used **hypothetical case vignettes**, not real patient data.
1286 +{{/expandable}}
1642 1642  
1643 ------
1644 -
1645 -## **Findings**##
1646 -
1288 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1647 1647  1. **Primary Observations:**
1648 - - False beliefs about biological racial differences **correlate with racial disparities in pain treatment**.
1649 - - Medical students and residents who endorsed these beliefs **showed greater racial bias in treatment recommendations**.
1290 + - False biological beliefs were **strongly correlated with racial disparity** in pain assessment.
1291 + - Endorsement of such beliefs led to **less appropriate treatment for Black patients** in fictional cases.
1650 1650  
1651 1651  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1652 - - Physicians who **did not endorse these beliefs** showed **no racial bias** in treatment recommendations.
1653 - - Bias was **strongest among first-year medical students** and decreased slightly in later years of training.
1294 + - Medical students with **no false beliefs showed no treatment bias**.
1295 + - No evidence was presented of **active discrimination** — bias appeared linked to **misinformation, not malice**.
1654 1654  
1655 1655  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1656 - - Study participants **underestimated Black patients' pain and recommended less effective pain treatments**.
1657 - - The study suggests that **racial disparities in medical care stem, in part, from these enduring false beliefs**.
1298 + - Fictional vignettes demonstrated that **misinformation about biology**, not systemic malice, led to unequal care.
1299 + - The study **did not show bias against White patients**, nor explore disparities affecting them.
1300 +{{/expandable}}
1658 1658  
1659 ------
1660 -
1661 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1662 -
1302 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1663 1663  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1664 - - **First empirical study to connect false racial beliefs with medical decision-making**.
1665 - - Utilizes a **large sample of medical students and residents** from diverse institutions.
1304 + - Provides valuable insight into **how medical myths can affect judgment**.
1305 + - Demonstrates the importance of **clinical education and evidence-based practice**.
1666 1666  
1667 1667  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1668 - - The study focuses on **Black vs. white disparities**, leaving other racial/ethnic groups unexplored.
1669 - - Participants' responses were based on **hypothetical medical cases, not real-world treatment decisions**.
1308 + - Fails to examine **bias affecting White patients**, including under-treatment of opioid dependence or mental health.
1309 + - Only focuses on one direction of disparity, treating **White patients as a control** rather than a population worthy of study.
1310 + - **Overemphasizes "racial bias"** narrative despite the findings being more about **ignorance than intent**.
1670 1670  
1671 1671  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1672 - - Future research should examine **how these biases manifest in real clinical settings**.
1673 - - Investigate **whether medical training can correct these biases over time**.
1313 + - Include **comparison groups for all races**, not just a binary Black–White framework.
1314 + - Investigate **systemic neglect of poor rural White populations**, especially in Appalachia and the Midwest.
1315 + - Clarify the **distinction between false belief and racial animus**, which the study conflates under CRT framing.
1316 +{{/expandable}}
1674 1674  
1675 ------
1318 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1319 +- Shows how **DEI-aligned narratives exploit limited findings** to vilify White professionals.
1320 +- Provides an example of a **legitimate medical education issue being repackaged as “racial bias.”**
1321 +- Highlights the **lack of reciprocal scrutiny** of how minorities may receive **preferential narrative framing** or **programmatic support**.
1322 +{{/expandable}}
1676 1676  
1677 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1678 -- Highlights **racial disparities in healthcare**, specifically in pain assessment and treatment.
1679 -- Supports **research on implicit bias and its impact on medical outcomes**.
1680 -- Provides evidence for **the need to address racial bias in medical education**.##
1324 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1325 +1. Study whether **DEI training reduces false beliefs** or simply **induces White guilt**.
1326 +2. Investigate **biases against White rural patients**, especially regarding **opioid or pain management stigma**.
1327 +3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**.
1328 +{{/expandable}}
1681 1681  
1682 ------
1330 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1331 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]
1332 +{{/expandable}}
1333 +{{/expandable}}
1683 1683  
1684 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1685 1685  
1686 -1. Investigate **interventions to reduce racial bias in medical decision-making**.
1687 -2. Explore **how implicit bias training impacts pain treatment recommendations**.
1688 -3. Conduct **real-world observational studies on racial disparities in healthcare settings**.
1336 +{{expandable summary="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1337 +**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1338 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
1339 +**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
1340 +**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
1341 +**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
1342 +**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors*
1689 1689  
1690 ------
1691 -
1692 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1693 -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**.##
1694 -
1695 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1696 -
1697 ------
1698 -
1699 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1700 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]##
1701 -{{/expand}}
1702 -
1703 -
1704 -== Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans ==
1705 -
1706 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1707 -**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1708 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
1709 -**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
1710 -**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
1711 -**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
1712 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors* 
1713 -
1714 ------
1715 -
1716 -## **Key Statistics**##
1717 -
1344 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1718 1718  1. **General Observations:**
1719 1719   - Mortality rates among **middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans (ages 45–54)** increased from 1999 to 2013.
1720 1720   - This reversal in mortality trends is unique to the U.S.; **no other wealthy country experienced a similar rise**.
... ... @@ -1726,11 +1726,9 @@
1726 1726  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1727 1727   - Rising mortality was driven primarily by **suicide, drug and alcohol poisoning, and chronic liver disease**.
1728 1728   - Midlife morbidity increased as well, with more reports of **poor health, pain, and mental distress**.
1356 +{{/expandable}}
1729 1729  
1730 ------
1731 -
1732 -## **Findings**##
1733 -
1358 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1734 1734  1. **Primary Observations:**
1735 1735   - The rise in mortality is attributed to **substance abuse, economic distress, and deteriorating mental health**.
1736 1736   - The increase in **suicides and opioid overdoses parallels broader socioeconomic decline**.
... ... @@ -1742,11 +1742,9 @@
1742 1742  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1743 1743   - **Educational attainment was a major predictor of mortality trends**, with better-educated individuals experiencing lower mortality rates.
1744 1744   - Mortality among **white Americans with a college degree continued to decline**, resembling trends in other wealthy nations.
1370 +{{/expandable}}
1745 1745  
1746 ------
1747 -
1748 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1749 -
1372 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1750 1750  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1751 1751   - **First major study to highlight rising midlife mortality among U.S. whites**.
1752 1752   - Uses **CDC and Census mortality data spanning over a decade**.
... ... @@ -1758,140 +1758,106 @@
1758 1758  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1759 1759   - Future studies should explore **how economic shifts, healthcare access, and mental health treatment contribute to these trends**.
1760 1760   - Further research on **racial and socioeconomic disparities in mortality trends** is needed.
1384 +{{/expandable}}
1761 1761  
1762 ------
1763 -
1764 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1386 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1765 1765  - Highlights **socioeconomic and racial disparities** in health outcomes.
1766 1766  - Supports research on **substance abuse and mental health crises in the U.S.**.
1767 -- Provides evidence for **the role of economic instability in public health trends**.##
1389 +- Provides evidence for **the role of economic instability in public health trends**.
1390 +{{/expandable}}
1768 1768  
1769 ------
1770 -
1771 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1772 -
1392 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1773 1773  1. Investigate **regional differences in rising midlife mortality**.
1774 1774  2. Examine the **impact of the opioid crisis on long-term health trends**.
1775 1775  3. Study **policy interventions aimed at reversing rising mortality rates**.
1396 +{{/expandable}}
1776 1776  
1777 ------
1398 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1399 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]
1400 +{{/expandable}}
1401 +{{/expandable}}
1778 1778  
1779 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1780 -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**.##
1781 -
1782 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1783 -
1784 ------
1785 -
1786 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1787 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]##
1788 -{{/expand}}
1789 -
1790 -
1791 -== Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities? ==
1792 -
1793 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
1794 -**Source:** *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies*
1403 +{{expandable summary="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
1404 +**Source:** *Urban Studies*
1795 1795  **Date of Publication:** *2023*
1796 -**Author(s):** *Maurice Crul, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, Ismintha Waldring*
1406 +**Author(s):** *Nina Glick Schiller, Jens Schneider, Ayşe Çağlar*
1797 1797  **Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
1798 -**DOI:** [10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548](https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548)
1799 -**Subject Matter:** *Urban Sociology, Migration Studies, Integration* 
1408 +**DOI:** [10.1177/00420980231170057](https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231170057)
1409 +**Subject Matter:** *Urban Diversity, Migration, Identity Politics*
1800 1800  
1801 ------
1802 -
1803 -## **Key Statistics**##
1804 -
1411 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1805 1805  1. **General Observations:**
1806 - - Study examines the role of **people without migration background** in majority-minority cities.
1807 - - Analyzes **over 3,000 survey responses and 150 in-depth interviews** from six North-Western European cities.
1413 + - Based on interviews with **White European residents** in three major European cities.
1414 + - Focused on how **"non-migrants" (code for native Whites)** perceive and adapt to so-called “superdiversity”.
1808 1808  
1809 1809  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1810 - - Explores differences in **integration, social interactions, and perceptions of diversity**.
1811 - - Studies how **class, education, and neighborhood composition** affect adaptation to urban diversity.
1417 + - Interviewees were **overwhelmingly framed as obstacles** to multicultural harmony.
1418 + - Researchers **pathologized attachment to local culture or ethnic identity** as “resistance to change.
1812 1812  
1813 1813  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1814 - - The study introduces the **Becoming a Minority (BaM) project**, a large-scale investigation of urban demographic shifts.
1815 - - **People without migration background perceive diversity differently**, with some embracing and others resisting change.
1421 + - Claims that even positive civic participation by Whites may **“reinforce white privilege.”**
1422 + - Provides **no quantitative data** on actual neighborhood changes or crime statistics.
1423 +{{/expandable}}
1816 1816  
1817 ------
1818 -
1819 -## **Findings**##
1820 -
1425 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1821 1821  1. **Primary Observations:**
1822 - - The study **challenges traditional integration theories**, arguing that non-migrant groups also undergo adaptation processes.
1823 - - Some residents **struggle with demographic changes**, while others see diversity as an asset.
1427 + - Argues that White natives, by simply existing and having a historical presence, **“shape urban inequality.”**
1428 + - Positions White cultural norms as inherently oppressive or exclusionary.
1824 1824  
1825 1825  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1826 - - Young, educated individuals in urban areas **are more open to cultural diversity**.
1827 - - Older and less mobile residents **report feelings of displacement and social isolation**.
1431 + - Critiques White residents for seeking **cultural familiarity or demographic continuity.**
1432 + - Presents **White neighborhood cohesion** as a form of invisible boundary-making.
1828 1828  
1829 1829  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1830 - - Examines how **people without migration background navigate majority-minority settings** in cities like Amsterdam and Vienna.
1831 - - Analyzes **whether former ethnic majority groups now perceive themselves as minorities**.
1435 + - Interviews frame **normal concerns about safety, schooling, or housing** as coded “racism.”
1436 + - Treats **multicultural disruption** as inherently positive, and **resistance as bigotry.**
1437 +{{/expandable}}
1832 1832  
1833 ------
1834 -
1835 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1836 -
1439 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1837 1837  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1838 - - **Innovative approach** by examining the impact of migration on native populations.
1839 - - Uses **both qualitative and quantitative data** for robust analysis.
1441 + - Reveals how **social scientists increasingly treat Whiteness itself as a problem.**
1442 + - Offers an **unintentional case study in academic anti-White framing.**
1840 1840  
1841 1841  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1842 - - Limited to **Western European urban settings**, missing perspectives from other global regions.
1843 - - Does not fully explore **policy interventions for fostering social cohesion**.
1445 + - **Completely ignores migrant-driven displacement** of working-class Whites.
1446 + - Makes **no attempt to understand White residents sympathetically**, only as barriers.
1447 + - Lacks analysis of **economic factors, crime, housing scarcity, or policy failures** contributing to discontent.
1844 1844  
1845 1845  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1846 - - Expand research to **other geographical contexts** to understand migration effects globally.
1847 - - Investigate **long-term trends in urban adaptation and community building**.
1450 + - Include **White perspectives without presuming guilt or fragility.**
1451 + - Disaggregate “White” by **class, locality, or experience** — not treat as a monolith.
1452 + - Balance cultural analysis with **hard demographic and economic data.**
1453 +{{/expandable}}
1848 1848  
1849 ------
1455 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1456 +- Demonstrates how **academic literature increasingly stigmatizes White presence** in urban life.
1457 +- Shows how **“diversity” is defined as the absence or silence of native populations.**
1458 +- Useful for exposing how **CRT and superdiversity discourse erase White communities' legitimacy.**
1459 +{{/expandable}}
1850 1850  
1851 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1852 -- Provides a **new perspective on urban integration**, shifting focus from migrants to native-born populations.
1853 -- Highlights the **role of social and economic power in shaping urban diversity outcomes**.
1854 -- Challenges existing **assimilation theories by showing bidirectional adaptation in diverse cities**.##
1461 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1462 +1. Study the **psychological impact of demographic displacement** on native European populations.
1463 +2. Examine **rising crime and social fragmentation** in “superdiverse” zones.
1464 +3. Analyze how **housing, schooling, and local economies** are impacted by mass migration.
1465 +{{/expandable}}
1855 1855  
1856 ------
1467 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1468 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1177_00420980231170057.pdf]]
1469 +{{/expandable}}
1470 +{{/expandable}}
1857 1857  
1858 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1859 1859  
1860 -1. Study how **local policies shape attitudes toward urban diversity**.
1861 -2. Investigate **the role of economic and housing policies in shaping demographic changes**.
1862 -3. Explore **how social networks influence perceptions of migration and diversity**.
1863 -
1864 ------
1865 -
1866 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1867 -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**.##
1868 -
1869 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1870 -
1871 ------
1872 -
1873 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1874 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]]##
1875 -{{/expand}}
1876 -
1877 -
1878 1878  = Media =
1879 1879  
1475 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic"}}
1476 +**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
1477 +**Date of Publication:** *2021*
1478 +**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
1479 +**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
1480 +**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
1481 +**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies*
1880 1880  
1881 -== Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic ==
1882 -
1883 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"}}
1884 -**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
1885 -**Date of Publication:** *2021*
1886 -**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
1887 -**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
1888 -**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
1889 -**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies* 
1890 -
1891 ------
1892 -
1893 -## **Key Statistics**##
1894 -
1483 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1895 1895  1. **General Observations:**
1896 1896   - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
1897 1897   - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
... ... @@ -1903,11 +1903,9 @@
1903 1903  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1904 1904   - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
1905 1905   - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
1495 +{{/expandable}}
1906 1906  
1907 ------
1908 -
1909 -## **Findings**##
1910 -
1497 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1911 1911  1. **Primary Observations:**
1912 1912   - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
1913 1913   - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
... ... @@ -1919,11 +1919,9 @@
1919 1919  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1920 1920   - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
1921 1921   - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
1509 +{{/expandable}}
1922 1922  
1923 ------
1924 -
1925 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1926 -
1511 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1927 1927  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1928 1928   - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
1929 1929   - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
... ... @@ -1935,48 +1935,34 @@
1935 1935  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1936 1936   - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
1937 1937   - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
1523 +{{/expandable}}
1938 1938  
1939 ------
1940 -
1941 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1525 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1942 1942  - Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
1943 1943  - Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
1944 -- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.##
1528 +- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.
1529 +{{/expandable}}
1945 1945  
1946 ------
1947 -
1948 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1949 -
1531 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1950 1950  1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
1951 1951  2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
1952 1952  3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
1535 +{{/expandable}}
1953 1953  
1954 ------
1537 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1538 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]
1539 +{{/expandable}}
1540 +{{/expandable}}
1955 1955  
1956 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1957 -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**.##
1542 +{{expandable summary="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
1543 +**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
1544 +**Date of Publication:** *2007*
1545 +**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
1546 +**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
1547 +**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
1548 +**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence*
1958 1958  
1959 ------
1960 -
1961 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1962 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]##
1963 -{{/expand}}
1964 -
1965 -
1966 -== Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions ==
1967 -
1968 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
1969 -**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
1970 -**Date of Publication:** *2007*
1971 -**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
1972 -**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
1973 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
1974 -**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence* 
1975 -
1976 ------
1977 -
1978 -## **Key Statistics**##
1979 -
1550 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1980 1980  1. **General Observations:**
1981 1981   - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
1982 1982   - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
... ... @@ -1988,11 +1988,9 @@
1988 1988  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1989 1989   - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
1990 1990   - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
1562 +{{/expandable}}
1991 1991  
1992 ------
1993 -
1994 -## **Findings**##
1995 -
1564 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1996 1996  1. **Primary Observations:**
1997 1997   - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
1998 1998   - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
... ... @@ -2004,11 +2004,9 @@
2004 2004  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2005 2005   - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
2006 2006   - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
1576 +{{/expandable}}
2007 2007  
2008 ------
2009 -
2010 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2011 -
1578 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
2012 2012  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2013 2013   - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
2014 2014   - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
... ... @@ -2020,48 +2020,34 @@
2020 2020  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2021 2021   - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
2022 2022   - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
1590 +{{/expandable}}
2023 2023  
2024 ------
2025 -
2026 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1592 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
2027 2027  - Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
2028 2028  - Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
2029 -- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.##
1595 +- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.
1596 +{{/expandable}}
2030 2030  
2031 ------
2032 -
2033 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2034 -
1598 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
2035 2035  1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
2036 2036  2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
2037 2037  3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
1602 +{{/expandable}}
2038 2038  
2039 ------
1604 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1605 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]
1606 +{{/expandable}}
1607 +{{/expandable}}
2040 2040  
2041 -## **Summary of Research Study**
2042 -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**.##
1609 +{{expandable summary="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
1610 +**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1611 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
1612 +**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
1613 +**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
1614 +**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
1615 +**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion*
2043 2043  
2044 ------
2045 -
2046 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
2047 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]##
2048 -{{/expand}}
2049 -
2050 -
2051 -== Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion ==
2052 -
2053 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
2054 -**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
2055 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
2056 -**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
2057 -**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
2058 -**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
2059 -**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion* 
2060 -
2061 ------
2062 -
2063 -## **Key Statistics**##
2064 -
1617 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
2065 2065  1. **General Observations:**
2066 2066   - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
2067 2067   - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
... ... @@ -2073,11 +2073,9 @@
2073 2073  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
2074 2074   - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
2075 2075   - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
1629 +{{/expandable}}
2076 2076  
2077 ------
2078 -
2079 -## **Findings**##
2080 -
1631 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
2081 2081  1. **Primary Observations:**
2082 2082   - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
2083 2083   - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
... ... @@ -2089,11 +2089,9 @@
2089 2089  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2090 2090   - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
2091 2091   - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
1643 +{{/expandable}}
2092 2092  
2093 ------
2094 -
2095 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2096 -
1645 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
2097 2097  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2098 2098   - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
2099 2099   - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
... ... @@ -2105,31 +2105,255 @@
2105 2105  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2106 2106   - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
2107 2107   - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
1657 +{{/expandable}}
2108 2108  
2109 ------
2110 -
2111 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1659 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
2112 2112  - Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
2113 2113  - Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
2114 -- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.##
1662 +- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.
1663 +{{/expandable}}
2115 2115  
2116 ------
2117 -
2118 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2119 -
1665 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
2120 2120  1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
2121 2121  2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
2122 2122  3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
1669 +{{/expandable}}
2123 2123  
2124 ------
1671 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1672 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]
1673 +{{/expandable}}
1674 +{{/expandable}}
2125 2125  
2126 -## **Summary of Research Study**
2127 -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**.##
1676 +{{expandable summary="Study: White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years"}}
1677 +Source: Journal of Advertising Research
1678 +Date of Publication: 2022
1679 +Author(s): Peter M. Lenk, Eric T. Bradlow, Randolph E. Bucklin, Sungeun (Clara) Kim
1680 +Title: "White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years: A Meta-Analysis"
1681 +DOI: 10.2501/JAR-2022-028
1682 +Subject Matter: Advertising Trends, Racial Representation, Cultural Shifts
2128 2128  
2129 ------
1684 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
2130 2130  
2131 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
2132 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]##
2133 -{{/expand}}
1686 +**General Observations:**
2134 2134  
1688 +Meta-analysis of 74 studies conducted between 1955 and 2020 on racial representation in advertising.
2135 2135  
1690 +Sample included mostly White U.S. participants, with consistent tracking of their preferences.
1691 +
1692 +**Subgroup Analysis:**
1693 +
1694 +Found a steady increase in positive responses toward Black models/actors in ads by White viewers.
1695 +
1696 +Recent decades show equal or greater preference for Black faces compared to White ones.
1697 +
1698 +**Other Significant Data Points:**
1699 +
1700 +Study frames this shift as a positive move toward diversity, ignoring implications for displaced White cultural representation.
1701 +
1702 +No equivalent data was collected on Black or Hispanic attitudes toward White representation.
1703 +{{/expandable}}
1704 +
1705 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1706 +
1707 +**Primary Observations:**
1708 +
1709 +White Americans have become increasingly receptive or favorable toward Black figures in advertising, even over timeframes of widespread cultural change.
1710 +
1711 +These preferences held across product types, media formats, and ad genres.
1712 +
1713 +**Subgroup Trends:**
1714 +
1715 +Studies from the 1960s–1980s showed preference for in-group racial representation, which has dropped sharply for Whites in recent decades.
1716 +
1717 +The largest positive attitudinal shift occurred between 1995–2020, coinciding with major DEI and cultural programming trends.
1718 +
1719 +**Specific Case Analysis:**
1720 +
1721 +The authors position this as “progress,” but offer no critical reflection on the effects of displacing White imagery from national advertising narratives.
1722 +
1723 +Completely omits consumer preference studies in countries outside the U.S., especially in more homogeneous nations.
1724 +{{/expandable}}
1725 +
1726 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1727 +
1728 +**Strengths of the Study:**
1729 +
1730 +Large-scale dataset across decades provides a clear empirical view of long-term trends.
1731 +
1732 +Useful as a benchmark of how White American preferences have evolved under sociocultural pressure.
1733 +
1734 +**Limitations of the Study:**
1735 +
1736 +Fails to ask whether increasing diversity is consumer-driven or culturally imposed.
1737 +
1738 +Ignores the potential alienation or displacement of White cultural identity from mainstream advertising.
1739 +
1740 +Assumes “diverse equals better” without testing economic or emotional impact of those shifts.
1741 +
1742 +**Suggestions for Improvement:**
1743 +
1744 +Include non-White viewer reactions to all-White or traditional American imagery for balance.
1745 +
1746 +Test whether consumers notice racial proportions or experience fatigue from overcorrection.
1747 +
1748 +Explore regional or class-based variance among White viewers, not just aggregate averages.
1749 +{{/expandable}}
1750 +
1751 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1752 +
1753 +Demonstrates how White cultural imagery has been steadily replaced or downplayed in the public sphere.
1754 +
1755 +Useful for showing how marketing professionals and researchers frame White displacement as “progress.”
1756 +
1757 +Empirically supports the decline of White in-group preference — possibly due to reeducation, guilt framing, or media saturation.
1758 +{{/expandable}}
1759 +
1760 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1761 +
1762 +Study how overrepresentation of minorities in advertising compares to actual demographics.
1763 +
1764 +Examine whether consumers feel represented or alienated by identity-based marketing.
1765 +
1766 +Investigate the psychological and cultural impact of long-term demographic displacement in national advertising.
1767 +{{/expandable}}
1768 +
1769 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1770 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.2501_JAR-2022-028.pdf]]
1771 +{{/expandable}}
1772 +{{/expandable}}
1773 +
1774 +{{expandable summary="Study: Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"}}
1775 +**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1776 +**Date of Publication:** *2020*
1777 +**Author(s):** *John A. Banas, Lauren L. Miller, David A. Braddock, Sun Kyong Lee*
1778 +**Title:** *"Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"*
1779 +**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqz032](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz032)
1780 +**Subject Matter:** *Media Psychology, Prejudice Reduction, Intergroup Relations*
1781 +
1782 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1783 +1. **General Observations:**
1784 + - Aggregated **71 studies involving 27,000+ participants**.
1785 + - Focused on how **media portrayals of out-groups (primarily minorities)** affect attitudes among dominant in-groups (i.e., Whites).
1786 +
1787 +2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1788 + - **Fictional entertainment** had stronger effects than news.
1789 + - **Positive portrayals of minorities** correlated with significant reductions in “prejudice”.
1790 +
1791 +3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1792 + - Effects were stronger when minority characters were portrayed as **warm, competent, and morally relatable**.
1793 + - Contact was more effective when it mimicked **face-to-face friendship narratives**.
1794 +{{/expandable}}
1795 +
1796 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1797 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1798 + - Media is a **powerful tool for shaping racial attitudes**, capable of reducing “prejudice” without real-world contact.
1799 + - **Repeated exposure** to positive portrayals of minorities led to increased acceptance and reduced negative bias.
1800 +
1801 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1802 + - **White participants** were the primary targets of reconditioning.
1803 + - Minority participants were not studied in terms of **prejudice against Whites**.
1804 +
1805 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1806 + - “Parasocial” relationships with minority characters (TV/movie exposure) had comparable psychological effects to actual friendships.
1807 + - Media framing functioned as a **top-down mechanism for social engineering**, not just passive reflection of society.
1808 +{{/expandable}}
1809 +
1810 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1811 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1812 + - High-quality quantitative meta-analysis with clear design and robust statistical handling.
1813 + - Acknowledges **media’s ability to alter long-held social beliefs** without physical contact.
1814 +
1815 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1816 + - Only defines “prejudice” as **negative attitudes from Whites toward minorities** — no exploration of anti-White media narratives or bias.
1817 + - Ignores the effects of **overexposure to minority portrayals** on cultural alienation or backlash.
1818 + - Assumes **assimilation into DEI norms is inherently positive**, and any reluctance to accept them is “prejudice”.
1819 +
1820 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1821 + - Study reciprocal dynamics — how **minority media portrayals impact attitudes toward Whites**.
1822 + - Investigate whether constant valorization of minorities leads to **resentment, guilt, or political disengagement** among White viewers.
1823 + - Analyze **media saturation effects**, especially in multicultural propaganda and corporate DEI messaging.
1824 +{{/expandable}}
1825 +
1826 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1827 +- Provides **direct evidence** that media is being used to **reshape racial attitudes** through emotional, parasocial contact.
1828 +- Reinforces concern that **“tolerance” is engineered via asymmetric emotional exposure**, not organic consensus.
1829 +- Useful for documenting how **Whiteness is often treated as a bias to be corrected**, not a culture to be respected.
1830 +{{/expandable}}
1831 +
1832 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1833 +1. Investigate **reverse parasocial effects** — how negative portrayals of White men affect self-perception and mental health.
1834 +2. Study how **mass entertainment normalizes demographic shifts** and silences native concerns.
1835 +3. Compare effects of **Western vs. non-Western media systems** in promoting diversity narratives.
1836 +{{/expandable}}
1837 +
1838 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1839 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf]]
1840 +{{/expandable}}
1841 +{{/expandable}}
1842 +
1843 +
1844 +{{expandable summary="Study: Cultural Voyeurism – A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Interaction"}}
1845 +**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1846 +**Date of Publication:** *2018*
1847 +**Author(s):** *Osei Appiah*
1848 +**Title:** *"Cultural Voyeurism: A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Interaction"*
1849 +**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
1850 +**Subject Matter:** *Intergroup contact, racial stereotypes, media, identity formation*
1851 +
1852 +{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1853 +1. **No empirical dataset** — this is a theoretical framework paper, not a quantitative study.
1854 +2. **Heavily cites prior empirical work**, including:
1855 + - Czopp & Monteith (2006) on “complimentary stereotypes”
1856 + - Armstrong et al. (1992), Entman & Rojecki (2000) on media distortion of race
1857 + - Pettigrew et al. (2011) on intergroup contact
1858 +
1859 +3. **Statistical implications:** Repeatedly emphasizes the role of media in shaping racial beliefs when direct interracial contact is absent.
1860 +{{/expandable}}
1861 +
1862 +{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1863 +1. **Primary Observations:**
1864 + - Defines *cultural voyeurism* as the process of using media to observe and learn about other racial/ethnic groups.
1865 + - Claims it can both reinforce stereotypes and reduce prejudice depending on context.
1866 + - Suggests that Whites’ fascination with Black culture (e.g., hip-hop, athleticism) is a driver of empathy and improved race relations.
1867 +
1868 +2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1869 + - White youth are singled out as cultural voyeurs increasingly emulating Black identity for social cachet (“coolness”).
1870 + - Positive media portrayals of Blacks (e.g., in entertainment) said to reduce racial bias.
1871 +
1872 +3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1873 + - No case study provided, but mentions “Duck Dynasty” and “hip-hop culture” as stereotyped White/Black identity constructs respectively.
1874 +{{/expandable}}
1875 +
1876 +{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1877 +1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1878 + - Recognizes media’s dual role in shaping intergroup perception.
1879 + - Accurately captures the obsession with racial “coolness” as a social phenomenon.
1880 +
1881 +2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1882 + - Frames White identification with Black culture as inherently progressive, ignoring issues of **anti-White displacement**.
1883 + - Treats *positive stereotypes of minorities* (e.g., athleticism, musicality) as meaningful substitutes for structural reality.
1884 + - Lacks any meaningful inquiry into *reverse cultural voyeurism* (i.e., non-Whites voyeuristically consuming and appropriating White identity or values).
1885 +
1886 +3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1887 + - Should confront whether “cultural voyeurism” ultimately erodes group boundaries and majority cultural integrity.
1888 + - Needs empirical validation of claims.
1889 + - Avoids uncomfortable realities about how White identity is increasingly stigmatized in media — which undermines genuine empathy or parity.
1890 +{{/expandable}}
1891 +
1892 +{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1893 +- Helps explain how **media conditioning** primes young Whites to *admire, emulate, and eventually submit* to Black cultural dominance.
1894 +- Directly supports the narrative that **pro-White identity is systematically delegitimized**, while pro-Black identity is commodified and glamorized — then sold back to White youth.
1895 +- Useful in chapters/sections covering cultural appropriation *in reverse* — not by Whites, but **of Whiteness** by outsiders for critique and exploitation.
1896 +{{/expandable}}
1897 +
1898 +{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1899 +1. Are there longitudinal studies showing cultural voyeurism weakening in-group preference among Whites?
1900 +2. Does this phenomenon correspond to decreased fertility, civic participation, or political alignment with group interest?
1901 +3. How do non-Western societies handle voyeuristic consumption of majority culture — do they permit or punish it?
1902 +{{/expandable}}
1903 +
1904 +{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1905 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:Cultural Voyeurism A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Intera.pdf]]
1906 +{{/expandable}}
1907 +{{/expandable}}
1908 +
Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +472.9 KB
Content
Cultural Voyeurism A New Framework for Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and Mediated Intergroup Intera.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +103.1 KB
Content
lai2014.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +15.4 MB
Content
lenk-et-al-white-americans-preference-for-black-people-in-advertising-has-increased-in-the-past-66-years-a-meta-analysis.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2.1 MB
Content