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

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -11,850 +11,139 @@
11 11  - Use the **search function** (Ctrl + F or XWiki's built-in search) to quickly find specific topics or authors.
12 12  - If needed, you can export this page as **PDF or print-friendly format**, and all studies will automatically expand for readability.
13 13  
14 +{{toc/}}
14 14  
15 -
16 -
17 17  == Research Studies Repository ==
18 18  
19 19  
20 -= Genetics =
19 += Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding =
20 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Click here to expand details"}}
21 +**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
22 +**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
23 +**Author(s):** Smith et al.
24 +**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
25 +**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
26 +**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science
21 21  
28 +**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
22 22  
23 -== Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History ==
30 +=== **Key Statistics** ===
24 24  
25 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
26 -**Source:** *Nature*
27 -**Date of Publication:** *2009*
28 -**Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
29 -**Title:** *"Reconstructing Indian Population History"*
30 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nature08365](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08365)
31 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Population History, South Asian Ancestry* 
32 -
33 ------
34 -
35 -## **Key Statistics**##
36 -
37 37  1. **General Observations:**
38 - - Study analyzed **132 individuals from 25 diverse Indian groups**.
39 - - Identified two major ancestral populations: **Ancestral North Indians (ANI)** and **Ancestral South Indians (ASI)**.
33 + - A near-perfect alignment between self-identified race/ethnicity (SIRE) and genetic ancestry was observed.
34 + - Misclassification rate: **0.14%**.
40 40  
41 41  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
42 - - ANI ancestry is closely related to **Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans**.
43 - - ASI ancestry is **genetically distinct from ANI and East Asians**.
37 + - Four groups analyzed: **White, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic**.
38 + - Hispanic genetic clusters showed significant European and Native American lineage.
44 44  
45 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
46 - - ANI ancestry ranges from **39% to 71%** across Indian groups.
47 - - **Caste and linguistic differences** strongly correlate with genetic variation.
40 +=== **Findings** ===
48 48  
49 ------
42 +- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
43 +- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
50 50  
51 -## **Findings**##
45 +=== **Relevance to Subproject** ===
52 52  
53 -1. **Primary Observations:**
54 - - The genetic landscape of India has been shaped by **thousands of years of endogamy**.
55 - - Groups with **only ASI ancestry no longer exist** in mainland India.
56 -
57 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
58 - - **Higher ANI ancestry in upper-caste and Indo-European-speaking groups**.
59 - - **Andaman Islanders** are unique in having **ASI ancestry without ANI influence**.
60 -
61 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
62 - - **Founder effects** have maintained allele frequency differences among Indian groups.
63 - - Predicts **higher incidence of recessive diseases** due to historical genetic isolation.
64 -
65 ------
66 -
67 -## **Critique and Observations**##
68 -
69 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
70 - - **First large-scale genetic analysis** of Indian population history.
71 - - Introduces **new methods for ancestry estimation without direct ancestral reference groups**.
72 -
73 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
74 - - Limited **sample size relative to India's population diversity**.
75 - - Does not include **recent admixture events** post-colonial era.
76 -
77 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
78 - - Future research should **expand sampling across more Indian tribal groups**.
79 - - Use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer resolution of ancestry.
80 -
81 ------
82 -
83 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
84 -- Provides a **genetic basis for caste and linguistic diversity** in India.
85 -- Highlights **founder effects and genetic drift** shaping South Asian populations.
86 -- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.##
87 -
88 ------
89 -
90 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
91 -
92 -1. Examine **genetic markers linked to disease susceptibility** in Indian subpopulations.
93 -2. Investigate the impact of **recent migration patterns on ANI-ASI ancestry distribution**.
94 -3. Study **gene flow between Indian populations and other global groups**.
95 -
96 ------
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**.##
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]]##
47 +- Reinforces the reliability of **self-reported racial identity** in genetic research.
48 +- Highlights **policy considerations** in biomedical studies.
107 107  {{/expand}}
108 108  
51 +{{expand title="Study: [Study Title] (Click to Expand)" expanded="false"}}
52 +**Source:** [Journal/Institution Name]
53 +**Date of Publication:** [Publication Date]
54 +**Author(s):** [Author(s) Name(s)]
55 +**Title:** "[Study Title]"
56 +**DOI:** [DOI or Link]
57 +**Subject Matter:** [Broad Research Area, e.g., Social Psychology, Public Policy, Behavioral Economics]
109 109  
110 -== Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations ==
59 +---
111 111  
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 -
61 +## **Key Statistics**
124 124  1. **General Observations:**
125 - - Analyzed **high-coverage genome sequences of 300 individuals from 142 populations**.
126 - - Included **many underrepresented and indigenous groups** from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.
63 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
64 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
127 127  
128 128  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
129 - - Found **higher genetic diversity within African populations** compared to non-African groups.
130 - - Showed **Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry in non-African populations**, particularly in Oceania.
67 + - [Breakdown of findings by gender, race, or other subgroups]
131 131  
132 132  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
133 - - Identified **5.8 million base pairs absent from the human reference genome**.
134 - - Estimated that **mutations have accumulated 5% faster in non-Africans than in Africans**.
70 + - [Any additional findings or significant statistics]
135 135  
136 ------
72 +---
137 137  
138 -## **Findings**##
139 -
74 +## **Findings**
140 140  1. **Primary Observations:**
141 - - **African populations harbor the greatest genetic diversity**, confirming an out-of-Africa dispersal model.
142 - - Indigenous Australians and New Guineans **share a common ancestral population with other non-Africans**.
76 + - [High-level findings or trends in the study]
143 143  
144 144  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
145 - - **Lower heterozygosity in non-Africans** due to founder effects from migration bottlenecks.
146 - - **Denisovan ancestry in South Asians is higher than previously thought**.
79 + - [Disparities or differences highlighted in the study]
147 147  
148 148  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
149 - - **Neanderthal ancestry is higher in East Asians than in Europeans**.
150 - - African hunter-gatherer groups show **deep population splits over 100,000 years ago**.
82 + - [Detailed explanation of any notable specific findings]
151 151  
152 ------
84 +---
153 153  
154 -## **Critique and Observations**##
155 -
86 +## **Critique and Observations**
156 156  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
157 - - **Largest global genetic dataset** outside of the 1000 Genomes Project.
158 - - High sequencing depth allows **more accurate identification of genetic variants**.
88 + - [Examples: strong methodology, large dataset, etc.]
159 159  
160 160  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
161 - - **Limited sample sizes for some populations**, restricting generalizability.
162 - - Lacks ancient DNA comparisons, making it difficult to reconstruct deep ancestry fully.
91 + - [Examples: data gaps, lack of upstream analysis, etc.]
163 163  
164 164  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
165 - - Future studies should include **ancient genomes** to improve demographic modeling.
166 - - Expand research into **how genetic variation affects health outcomes** across populations.
94 + - [Ideas for further research or addressing limitations]
167 167  
168 ------
96 +---
169 169  
170 170  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
171 -- Provides **comprehensive data on human genetic diversity**, useful for **evolutionary studies**.
172 -- Supports research on **Neanderthal and Denisovan introgression** in modern human populations.
173 -- Enhances understanding of **genetic adaptation and disease susceptibility across groups**.##
99 +- [Explanation of how this study contributes to your subproject goals.]
100 +- [Any key arguments or findings that support or challenge your views.]
174 174  
175 ------
102 +---
176 176  
177 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
104 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
105 +1. [Research questions or areas to investigate further.]
106 +2. [Potential studies or sources to complement this analysis.]
178 178  
179 -1. Investigate **functional consequences of genetic variation in underrepresented populations**.
180 -2. Study **how selection pressures shaped genetic diversity across different environments**.
181 -3. Explore **medical applications of population-specific genetic markers**.
108 +---
182 182  
183 ------
184 -
185 185  ## **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**.##
111 +This study examines **[core research question or focus]**, providing insights into **[main subject area]**. The research utilized **[sample size and methodology]** to assess **[key variables or measured outcomes]**.
187 187  
188 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the studys contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
113 +This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
189 189  
190 ------
115 +---
191 191  
192 192  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
193 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]##
194 -{{/expand}}
118 +{{velocity}}
119 +#set($doi = "[Insert DOI Here]")
120 +#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf")
121 +#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename"))
122 +[[Download>>attach:$filename]]
123 +#else
124 +{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
125 +#end
126 +{{/velocity}}
195 195  
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 -
211 -1. **General Observations:**
212 - - Analyzed **17,804 traits from 2,748 twin studies** published between **1958 and 2012**.
213 - - Included data from **14,558,903 twin pairs**, making it the largest meta-analysis on human heritability.
214 -
215 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
216 - - Found **49% average heritability** across all traits.
217 - - **69% of traits follow a simple additive genetic model**, meaning most variance is due to genes, not environment.
218 -
219 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
220 - - **Neurological, metabolic, and psychiatric traits** showed the highest heritability estimates.
221 - - Traits related to **social values and environmental interactions** had lower heritability estimates.
222 -
223 ------
224 -
225 -## **Findings**##
226 -
227 -1. **Primary Observations:**
228 - - Across all traits, genetic factors play a significant role in individual differences.
229 - - The study contradicts models that **overestimate environmental effects in behavioral and cognitive traits**.
230 -
231 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
232 - - **Eye and brain-related traits showed the highest heritability (70-80%)**.
233 - - **Shared environmental effects were negligible (<10%) for most traits**.
234 -
235 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
236 - - Twin correlations suggest **limited evidence for strong non-additive genetic influences**.
237 - - The study highlights **missing heritability in complex traits**, which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have yet to fully explain.
238 -
239 ------
240 -
241 -## **Critique and Observations**##
242 -
243 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
244 - - **Largest-ever heritability meta-analysis**, covering nearly all published twin studies.
245 - - Provides a **comprehensive framework for understanding gene-environment contributions**.
246 -
247 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
248 - - **Underrepresentation of African, South American, and Asian twin cohorts**, limiting global generalizability.
249 - - Cannot **fully separate genetic influences from potential cultural/environmental confounders**.
250 -
251 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
252 - - Future research should use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer-grained heritability estimates.
253 - - **Incorporate non-Western populations** to assess global heritability trends.
254 -
255 ------
256 -
257 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
258 -- Establishes a **quantitative benchmark for heritability across human traits**.
259 -- Reinforces **genetic influence on cognitive, behavioral, and physical traits**.
260 -- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.##
261 -
262 ------
263 -
264 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
265 -
266 -1. Investigate how **heritability estimates compare across different socioeconomic backgrounds**.
267 -2. Examine **gene-environment interactions in cognitive and psychiatric traits**.
268 -3. Explore **non-additive genetic effects on human traits using newer statistical models**.
269 -
270 ------
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.##
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]]##
281 281  {{/expand}}
282 282  
130 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
283 283  
284 -== Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease ==
285 285  
286 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
287 -**Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
288 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
289 -**Author(s):** *Sarah A. Tishkoff, Scott M. Williams*
290 -**Title:** *"Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"*
291 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nrg865](https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg865)
292 -**Subject Matter:** *Population Genetics, Human Evolution, Complex Diseases* 
293 293  
294 ------
134 +---
295 295  
296 -## **Key Statistics**##
297 -
298 -1. **General Observations:**
299 - - Africa harbors **the highest genetic diversity** of any region, making it key to understanding human evolution.
300 - - The study analyzes **genetic variation and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in African populations**.
301 -
302 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
303 - - African populations exhibit **greater genetic differentiation compared to non-Africans**.
304 - - **Migration and admixture** have shaped modern African genomes over the past **100,000 years**.
305 -
306 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
307 - - The **effective population size (Ne) of Africans** is higher than that of non-African populations.
308 - - LD blocks are **shorter in African genomes**, suggesting more historical recombination events.
309 -
310 ------
311 -
312 -## **Findings**##
313 -
314 -1. **Primary Observations:**
315 - - African populations are the **most genetically diverse**, supporting the *Recent African Origin* hypothesis.
316 - - Genetic variation in African populations can **help fine-map complex disease genes**.
317 -
318 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
319 - - **West Africans exhibit higher genetic diversity** than East Africans due to differing migration patterns.
320 - - Populations such as **San hunter-gatherers show deep genetic divergence**.
321 -
322 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
323 - - Admixture in African Americans includes **West African and European genetic contributions**.
324 - - SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) diversity in African genomes **exceeds that of non-African groups**.
325 -
326 ------
327 -
328 -## **Critique and Observations**##
329 -
330 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
331 - - Provides **comprehensive genetic analysis** of diverse African populations.
332 - - Highlights **how genetic diversity impacts health disparities and disease risks**.
333 -
334 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
335 - - Many **African populations remain understudied**, limiting full understanding of diversity.
336 - - Focuses more on genetic variation than on **specific disease mechanisms**.
337 -
338 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
339 - - Expand research into **underrepresented African populations**.
340 - - Integrate **whole-genome sequencing for a more detailed evolutionary timeline**.
341 -
342 ------
343 -
344 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
345 -- Supports **genetic models of human evolution** and the **out-of-Africa hypothesis**.
346 -- Reinforces **Africa’s key role in disease gene mapping and precision medicine**.
347 -- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.##
348 -
349 ------
350 -
351 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
352 -
353 -1. Investigate **genetic adaptations to local environments within Africa**.
354 -2. Study **the role of African genetic diversity in disease resistance**.
355 -3. Expand research on **how ancient migration patterns shaped modern genetic structure**.
356 -
357 ------
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**.##
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.
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 -
385 -1. **General Observations:**
386 - - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
387 - - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
388 -
389 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
390 - - Examines **West Eurasian populations** and their genetic evolution.
391 - - Tracks **changes in allele frequencies over millennia**.
392 -
393 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
394 - - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
395 - - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
396 -
397 ------
398 -
399 -## **Findings**##
400 -
401 -1. **Primary Observations:**
402 - - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
403 - - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
404 -
405 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
406 - - Selection pressure on **energy storage genes** supports the **Thrifty Gene Hypothesis**.
407 - - **Cognitive performance-related alleles** have undergone selection, but their historical advantages remain unclear.
408 -
409 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
410 - - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
411 - - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
412 - - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
413 -
414 ------
415 -
416 -## **Critique and Observations**##
417 -
418 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
419 - - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
420 - - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
421 -
422 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
423 - - Findings **may not translate directly** to modern populations.
424 - - **Unclear whether observed selection pressures persist today**.
425 -
426 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
427 - - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
428 - - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
429 -
430 ------
431 -
432 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
433 -- Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
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**.##
436 -
437 ------
438 -
439 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
440 -
441 -1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
442 -2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
443 -3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
444 -
445 ------
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**.##
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 -
471 -1. **General Observations:**
472 - - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
473 - - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
474 -
475 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
476 - - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
477 - - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
478 -
479 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
480 - - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
481 - - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
482 -
483 ------
484 -
485 -## **Findings**##
486 -
487 -1. **Primary Observations:**
488 - - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
489 - - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
490 -
491 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
492 - - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
493 - - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
494 -
495 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
496 - - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
497 - - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
498 -
499 ------
500 -
501 -## **Critique and Observations**##
502 -
503 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
504 - - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
505 - - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
506 -
507 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
508 - - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
509 - - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
510 -
511 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
512 - - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
513 - - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
514 -
515 ------
516 -
517 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
518 -- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
519 -- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
520 -- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.##
521 -
522 ------
523 -
524 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
525 -
526 -1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
527 -2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
528 -3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
529 -
530 ------
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**.##
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 -
558 -1. **General Observations:**
559 - - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
560 - - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
561 -
562 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
563 - - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
564 - - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
565 -
566 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
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 - - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
569 -
570 ------
571 -
572 -## **Findings**##
573 -
574 -1. **Primary Observations:**
575 - - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
576 - - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
577 -
578 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
579 - - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
580 - - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
581 -
582 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
583 - - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
584 - - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
585 -
586 ------
587 -
588 -## **Critique and Observations**##
589 -
590 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
591 - - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
592 - - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
593 -
594 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
595 - - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
596 - - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
597 -
598 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
599 - - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
600 - - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
601 -
602 ------
603 -
604 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
605 -- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
606 -- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
607 -- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.##
608 -
609 ------
610 -
611 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
612 -
613 -1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
614 -2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
615 -3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
616 -
617 ------
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**.##
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.
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 -
645 -1. **General Observations:**
646 - - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
647 - - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
648 -
649 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
650 - - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
651 - - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
652 -
653 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
654 - - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
655 - - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
656 -
657 ------
658 -
659 -## **Findings**##
660 -
661 -1. **Primary Observations:**
662 - - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
663 - - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
664 -
665 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
666 - - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
667 - - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
668 -
669 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
670 - - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
671 - - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
672 -
673 ------
674 -
675 -## **Critique and Observations**##
676 -
677 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
678 - - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
679 - - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
680 -
681 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
682 - - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
683 - - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
684 -
685 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
686 - - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
687 - - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
688 -
689 ------
690 -
691 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
692 -- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
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.##
695 -
696 ------
697 -
698 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
699 -
700 -1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
701 -2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
702 -3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
703 -
704 ------
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**.##
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 -
732 -1. **General Observations:**
733 - - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
734 - - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
735 -
736 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
737 - - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
738 - - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
739 -
740 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
741 - - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
742 - - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
743 -
744 ------
745 -
746 -## **Findings**##
747 -
748 -1. **Primary Observations:**
749 - - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
750 - - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
751 -
752 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
753 - - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
754 - - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
755 -
756 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
757 - - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
758 - - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
759 -
760 ------
761 -
762 -## **Critique and Observations**##
763 -
764 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
765 - - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
766 - - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
767 -
768 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
769 - - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
770 - - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
771 -
772 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
773 - - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
774 - - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
775 -
776 ------
777 -
778 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
779 -- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
780 -- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
781 -- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.##
782 -
783 ------
784 -
785 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
786 -
787 -1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
788 -2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
789 -3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
790 -
791 ------
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.  ##
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.
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"}}
136 +{{expand title="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018" expanded="false"}}
847 847  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
848 848  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
849 849  **Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.*
850 850  **Title:** *"Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"*
851 851  **DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833)
852 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography* 
142 +**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography*
853 853  
854 ------
144 +---
855 855  
856 -## **Key Statistics**##
857 -
146 +## **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.
... ... @@ -867,10 +867,9 @@
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.
869 869  
870 ------
159 +---
871 871  
872 -## **Findings**##
873 -
161 +## **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.
... ... @@ -883,10 +883,9 @@
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.
885 885  
886 ------
174 +---
887 887  
888 -## **Critique and Observations**##
889 -
176 +## **Critique and 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.
... ... @@ -899,27 +899,26 @@
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.
901 901  
902 ------
189 +---
903 903  
904 904  ## **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.##
193 +- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors.
907 907  
908 ------
195 +---
909 909  
910 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
911 -
197 +## **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.
914 914  
915 ------
201 +---
916 916  
917 917  ## **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.  ##
204 +This study examines **trends in sexual frequency and number of partners among U.S. adults (2000-2018)**, highlighting significant **declines in sexual activity, particularly among young men**. The research utilized **General Social Survey data** to analyze the impact of **sociodemographic factors, employment status, and mental well-being** on sexual behavior.
919 919  
920 920  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
921 921  
922 ------
208 +---
923 923  
924 924  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
925 925  {{velocity}}
... ... @@ -929,111 +929,25 @@
929 929  [[Download>>attach:$filename]]
930 930  #else
931 931  {{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
932 -#end {{/velocity}}##
933 -{{/expand}}
218 +#end
219 +{{/velocity}}
934 934  
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 -
950 -1. **General Observations:**
951 - - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
952 - - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
953 -
954 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
955 - - **Maternal race had a stronger influence than paternal race** on birth outcomes.
956 - - **Black mother–White father (BMWF) couples** had a higher risk than **White mother–Black father (WMBF) couples**.
957 -
958 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
959 - - **Adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) for key outcomes:**
960 - - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
961 - - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
962 - - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
963 -
964 ------
965 -
966 -## **Findings**##
967 -
968 -1. **Primary Observations:**
969 - - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
970 - - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
971 -
972 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
973 - - **Black mothers (regardless of paternal race) had the highest risk of LBW and PTB**.
974 - - **White mothers with Black fathers had a lower risk** than Black mothers with White fathers.
975 -
976 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
977 - - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
978 - - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
979 -
980 ------
981 -
982 -## **Critique and Observations**##
983 -
984 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
985 - - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
986 - - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
987 -
988 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
989 - - Data limited to **Black-White biracial couples**, excluding other racial groups.
990 - - **Socioeconomic and healthcare access factors** not fully explored.
991 -
992 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
993 - - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
994 - - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
995 -
996 ------
997 -
998 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
999 -- Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
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.##
1002 -
1003 ------
1004 -
1005 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1006 -
1007 -1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
1008 -2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
1009 -3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
1010 -
1011 ------
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**.##
1015 -
1016 ------
1017 -
1018 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1019 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]##
1020 1020  {{/expand}}
1021 1021  
223 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1022 1022  
1023 -== Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness ==
1024 1024  
1025 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"}}
226 +{{expand title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness" expanded="false"}}
1026 1026  **Source:** *Current Psychology*
1027 1027  **Date of Publication:** *2024*
1028 1028  **Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
1029 1029  **Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
1030 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* 
232 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
1032 1032  
1033 ------
234 +---
1034 1034  
1035 -## **Key Statistics**##
1036 -
236 +## **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.
... ... @@ -1046,10 +1046,9 @@
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.
1048 1048  
1049 ------
249 +---
1050 1050  
1051 -## **Findings**##
1052 -
251 +## **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**.
... ... @@ -1062,10 +1062,9 @@
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.
1064 1064  
1065 ------
264 +---
1066 1066  
1067 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1068 -
266 +## **Critique and 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.
... ... @@ -1078,303 +1078,37 @@
1078 1078   - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**.
1079 1079   - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration.
1080 1080  
1081 ------
279 +---
1082 1082  
1083 1083  ## **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**.##
284 +- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.
1087 1087  
1088 ------
286 +---
1089 1089  
1090 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1091 -
288 +## **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.
1095 1095  
1096 ------
293 +---
1097 1097  
1098 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**.##
296 +This study examines the **psychological characteristics of self-identified incels**, comparing them with non-incel men in terms of **mental health, loneliness, and coping strategies**. The research found **higher depression, anxiety, and avoidant attachment styles among incels**, as well as **greater reliance on solitary coping mechanisms**. It suggests that **lack of social support plays a critical role in exacerbating incel identity and related mental health concerns**.
1100 1100  
1101 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 1102  
1103 ------
300 +---
1104 1104  
1105 1105  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1106 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]##
1107 -{{/expand}}
303 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
1108 1108  
1109 -
1110 -= Crime and Substance Abuse =
1111 -
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 -
1127 -1. **General Observations:**
1128 - - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1129 - - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
1130 -
1131 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1132 - - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
1133 - - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
1134 -
1135 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1136 - - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1137 - - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1138 -
1139 ------
1140 -
1141 -## **Findings**##
1142 -
1143 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1144 - - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1145 - - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
1146 -
1147 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1148 - - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
1149 - - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
1150 -
1151 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1152 - - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1153 - - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1154 -
1155 ------
1156 -
1157 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1158 -
1159 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1160 - - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1161 - - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
1162 -
1163 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1164 - - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
1165 - - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
1166 -
1167 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1168 - - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1169 - - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1170 -
1171 ------
1172 -
1173 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1174 -- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1175 -- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1176 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1177 -
1178 ------
1179 -
1180 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1181 -
1182 -1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1183 -2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1184 -3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1185 -
1186 ------
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**.##
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 1197  {{/expand}}
1198 1198  
307 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1199 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 -
1214 -1. **General Observations:**
1215 - - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
1216 - - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
1217 -
1218 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1219 - - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents.
1220 - - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy.
1221 -
1222 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1223 - - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
1224 - - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
1225 -
1226 ------
1227 -
1228 -## **Findings**##
1229 -
1230 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1231 - - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
1232 - - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
1233 -
1234 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1235 - - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
1236 - - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
1237 -
1238 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1239 - - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
1240 - - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
1241 -
1242 ------
1243 -
1244 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1245 -
1246 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1247 - - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
1248 - - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
1249 -
1250 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1251 - - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
1252 - - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
1253 -
1254 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1255 - - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
1256 - - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
1257 -
1258 ------
1259 -
1260 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1261 -- Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
1262 -- Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
1263 -- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.##
1264 -
1265 ------
1266 -
1267 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1268 -
1269 -1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
1270 -2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
1271 -3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
1272 -
1273 ------
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**.##
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 -
1301 -1. **General Observations:**
1302 - - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1303 - - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
1304 -
1305 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1306 - - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
1307 - - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
1308 -
1309 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1310 - - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1311 - - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1312 -
1313 ------
1314 -
1315 -## **Findings**##
1316 -
1317 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1318 - - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1319 - - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
1320 -
1321 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1322 - - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
1323 - - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
1324 -
1325 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1326 - - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1327 - - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1328 -
1329 ------
1330 -
1331 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1332 -
1333 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1334 - - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1335 - - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
1336 -
1337 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1338 - - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
1339 - - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
1340 -
1341 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1342 - - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1343 - - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1344 -
1345 ------
1346 -
1347 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1348 -- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1349 -- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1350 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1351 -
1352 ------
1353 -
1354 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1355 -
1356 -1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1357 -2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1358 -3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1359 -
1360 ------
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**.##
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.
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
309 +{{expand title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults" expanded="false"}} Source: Addictive Behaviors
1378 1378  Date of Publication: 2016
1379 1379  Author(s): Andrea Hussong, Christy Capron, Gregory T. Smith, Jennifer L. Maggs
1380 1380  Title: "Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"
... ... @@ -1435,23 +1435,22 @@
1435 1435  
1436 1436  📄 Download Full Study
1437 1437  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.addbeh.2016.02.030.pdf]]
370 +
1438 1438  {{/expand}}
1439 1439  
373 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1440 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?"}}
375 +{{expand title="Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?" expanded="false"}}
1444 1444  **Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1445 1445  **Date of Publication:** *2014*
1446 1446  **Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1447 1447  **Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1448 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* 
381 +**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
1450 1450  
1451 ------
383 +---
1452 1452  
1453 -## **Key Statistics**##
1454 -
385 +## **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.
... ... @@ -1464,10 +1464,9 @@
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**.
1466 1466  
1467 ------
398 +---
1468 1468  
1469 -## **Findings**##
1470 -
400 +## **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.
... ... @@ -1480,10 +1480,9 @@
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.
1482 1482  
1483 ------
413 +---
1484 1484  
1485 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1486 -
415 +## **Critique and 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.
... ... @@ -1496,640 +1496,364 @@
1496 1496   - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
1497 1497   - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
1498 1498  
1499 ------
428 +---
1500 1500  
1501 1501  ## **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**.##
433 +- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
1505 1505  
1506 ------
435 +---
1507 1507  
1508 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1509 -
437 +## **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**.
1513 1513  
1514 ------
442 +---
1515 1515  
1516 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**.  ##
445 +This study examines **historical reaction time data** as a measure of **cognitive ability and intelligence decline**, analyzing data from **Western populations between 1884 and 2004**. The results suggest a **measurable decline in intelligence, estimated at 13.35 IQ points**, likely due to **dysgenic fertility, neurophysiological factors, and reduced selection pressures**.
1518 1518  
1519 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.
1520 1520  
1521 ------
449 +---
1522 1522  
1523 1523  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1524 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]##
452 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2014.05.012.pdf]]
453 +
1525 1525  {{/expand}}
1526 1526  
456 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1527 1527  
1528 -= Whiteness & White Guilt =
458 +{{expand title="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation" expanded="false"}}
459 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
460 +**Date of Publication:** *2015*
461 +**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
462 +**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
463 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
464 +**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences*
1529 1529  
1530 -== Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports ==
466 +---
1531 1531  
1532 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1533 -**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
1534 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
1535 -**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
1536 -**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
1537 -**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
1538 -**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sports, Higher Education, Institutional Racism* 
1539 -
1540 ------
1541 -
1542 -## **Key Statistics**##
1543 -
468 +## **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**.
470 + - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
471 + - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
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.
474 + - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
475 + - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
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.
478 + - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
479 + - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
1555 1555  
1556 ------
481 +---
1557 1557  
1558 -## **Findings**##
1559 -
483 +## **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.
485 + - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
486 + - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
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.
489 + - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
490 + - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
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**.
493 + - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
494 + - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
1571 1571  
1572 ------
496 +---
1573 1573  
1574 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1575 -
498 +## **Critique and 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.
500 + - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
501 + - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
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.
504 + - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
505 + - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
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**.
508 + - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
509 + - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
1587 1587  
1588 ------
511 +---
1589 1589  
1590 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**.##
514 +- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
515 +- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
516 +- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.
1594 1594  
1595 ------
518 +---
1596 1596  
1597 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
520 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
521 +1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
522 +2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
523 +3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
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**.
525 +---
1602 1602  
1603 ------
1604 -
1605 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**.##
528 +This study reviews **genome-wide association study (GWAS) findings on intelligence**, demonstrating a **strong correlation between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**. The research highlights how **genetic selection may explain population-level cognitive differences beyond genetic drift effects**. Intelligence-linked alleles showed **higher variability across populations than height-related alleles**, suggesting stronger selection pressures.
1607 1607  
1608 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 1609  
1610 ------
532 +---
1611 1611  
1612 1612  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1613 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]##
535 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
536 +
1614 1614  {{/expand}}
1615 1615  
539 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1616 1616  
1617 -== Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations ==
541 +{{expand title="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media" expanded="false"}}
542 +**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
543 +**Date of Publication:** *2019*
544 +**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
545 +**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
546 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
547 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis*
1618 1618  
1619 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1620 -**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1621 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
1622 -**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axta, M. Norman Oliver*
1623 -**Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
1624 -**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
1625 -**Subject Matter:** *Health Disparities, Racial Bias, Medical Treatment* 
549 +---
1626 1626  
1627 ------
1628 -
1629 -## **Key Statistics**##
1630 -
551 +## **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.
553 + - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
554 + - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
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**.
557 + - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
558 + - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
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**.
561 + - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
562 + - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
1642 1642  
1643 ------
564 +---
1644 1644  
1645 -## **Findings**##
1646 -
566 +## **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**.
568 + - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
569 + - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
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.
572 + - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
573 + - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
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**.
576 + - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
577 + - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
1658 1658  
1659 ------
579 +---
1660 1660  
1661 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1662 -
581 +## **Critique and 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.
583 + - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
584 + - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
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**.
587 + - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
588 + - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
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**.
591 + - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
592 + - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
1674 1674  
1675 ------
594 +---
1676 1676  
1677 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**.##
597 +- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
598 +- Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
599 +- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.
1681 1681  
1682 ------
601 +---
1683 1683  
1684 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
603 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
604 +1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
605 +2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
606 +3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
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**.
608 +---
1689 1689  
1690 ------
1691 -
1692 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**.##
611 +This study surveys **expert opinions on intelligence research**, analyzing **how backgrounds, political ideologies, and media representation influence perspectives on intelligence**. The findings highlight **divisions in scientific consensus**, particularly on **genetic vs. environmental causes of IQ disparities**. Additionally, the research uncovers **widespread dissatisfaction with media portrayals of intelligence research**, pointing to **the impact of ideological biases on public discourse**.
1694 1694  
1695 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 1696  
1697 ------
615 +---
1698 1698  
1699 1699  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1700 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]##
618 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
619 +
1701 1701  {{/expand}}
1702 1702  
622 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1703 1703  
1704 -== Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans ==
624 +{{expand title="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications" expanded="false"}}
625 +**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
626 +**Date of Publication:** *2010*
627 +**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
628 +**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
629 +**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
630 +**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology*
1705 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* 
632 +---
1713 1713  
1714 ------
1715 -
1716 -## **Key Statistics**##
1717 -
634 +## **Key Statistics**
1718 1718  1. **General Observations:**
1719 - - Mortality rates among **middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans (ages 45–54)** increased from 1999 to 2013.
1720 - - This reversal in mortality trends is unique to the U.S.; **no other wealthy country experienced a similar rise**.
636 + - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
637 + - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
1721 1721  
1722 1722  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1723 - - The increase was **most pronounced among those with a high school education or less**.
1724 - - Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic mortality continued to decline over the same period.
640 + - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
641 + - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
1725 1725  
1726 1726  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1727 - - Rising mortality was driven primarily by **suicide, drug and alcohol poisoning, and chronic liver disease**.
1728 - - Midlife morbidity increased as well, with more reports of **poor health, pain, and mental distress**.
644 + - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
645 + - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
1729 1729  
1730 ------
647 +---
1731 1731  
1732 -## **Findings**##
1733 -
649 +## **Findings**
1734 1734  1. **Primary Observations:**
1735 - - The rise in mortality is attributed to **substance abuse, economic distress, and deteriorating mental health**.
1736 - - The increase in **suicides and opioid overdoses parallels broader socioeconomic decline**.
651 + - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
652 + - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
1737 1737  
1738 1738  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1739 - - The **largest mortality increases** occurred among **whites without a college degree**.
1740 - - Chronic pain, functional limitations, and self-reported mental distress **rose significantly in affected groups**.
655 + - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
656 + - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
1741 1741  
1742 1742  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1743 - - **Educational attainment was a major predictor of mortality trends**, with better-educated individuals experiencing lower mortality rates.
1744 - - Mortality among **white Americans with a college degree continued to decline**, resembling trends in other wealthy nations.
659 + - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
660 + - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
1745 1745  
1746 ------
662 +---
1747 1747  
1748 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1749 -
664 +## **Critique and Observations**
1750 1750  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1751 - - **First major study to highlight rising midlife mortality among U.S. whites**.
1752 - - Uses **CDC and Census mortality data spanning over a decade**.
666 + - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
667 + - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
1753 1753  
1754 1754  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1755 - - Does not establish **causality** between economic decline and increased mortality.
1756 - - Lacks **granular data on opioid prescribing patterns and regional differences**.
670 + - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
671 + - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
1757 1757  
1758 1758  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1759 - - Future studies should explore **how economic shifts, healthcare access, and mental health treatment contribute to these trends**.
1760 - - Further research on **racial and socioeconomic disparities in mortality trends** is needed.
674 + - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
675 + - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
1761 1761  
1762 ------
677 +---
1763 1763  
1764 1764  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1765 -- Highlights **socioeconomic and racial disparities** in health outcomes.
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**.##
680 +- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
681 +- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
682 +- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.
1768 1768  
1769 ------
684 +---
1770 1770  
1771 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
686 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
687 +1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
688 +2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
689 +3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
1772 1772  
1773 -1. Investigate **regional differences in rising midlife mortality**.
1774 -2. Examine the **impact of the opioid crisis on long-term health trends**.
1775 -3. Study **policy interventions aimed at reversing rising mortality rates**.
691 +---
1776 1776  
1777 ------
1778 -
1779 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**.##
694 +This study evaluates **whether Homo sapiens should be classified as a polytypic species**, analyzing **genetic diversity, evolutionary lineage, and morphological variation**. Using comparative analysis with other primates and mammals, the research suggests that **human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**, with implications for **evolutionary biology, anthropology, and medicine**.
1781 1781  
1782 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 1783  
1784 ------
698 +---
1785 1785  
1786 1786  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1787 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]##
701 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
702 +
1788 1788  {{/expand}}
1789 1789  
705 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1790 1790  
1791 -== Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities? ==
707 +{{expand title="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age" expanded="false"}}
708 +**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
709 +**Date of Publication:** *2013*
710 +**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
711 +**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
712 +**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
713 +**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology*
1792 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*
1795 -**Date of Publication:** *2023*
1796 -**Author(s):** *Maurice Crul, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, Ismintha Waldring*
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* 
715 +---
1800 1800  
1801 ------
1802 -
1803 -## **Key Statistics**##
1804 -
717 +## **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.
719 + - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
720 + - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
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.
723 + - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
724 + - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
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.
727 + - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
728 + - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
1816 1816  
1817 ------
730 +---
1818 1818  
1819 -## **Findings**##
1820 -
732 +## **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.
734 + - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
735 + - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
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**.
738 + - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
739 + - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
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**.
742 + - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
743 + - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
1832 1832  
1833 ------
745 +---
1834 1834  
1835 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1836 -
747 +## **Critique and 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.
749 + - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
750 + - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
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**.
753 + - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
754 + - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
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**.
757 + - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
758 + - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
1848 1848  
1849 ------
760 +---
1850 1850  
1851 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**.##
763 +- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
764 +- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
765 +- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.
1855 1855  
1856 ------
767 +---
1857 1857  
1858 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
769 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
770 +1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
771 +2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
772 +3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
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**.
774 +---
1863 1863  
1864 ------
1865 -
1866 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**.##
777 +This study documents **The Wilson Effect**, demonstrating how the **heritability of IQ increases throughout development**, reaching a plateau of **0.80 by adulthood**. The findings indicate that **shared environmental effects diminish with age**, while **genetic influences on intelligence strengthen**. Using **longitudinal twin and adoption data**, the research provides **strong empirical support for the increasing role of genetics in cognitive ability over time**.
1868 1868  
1869 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 1870  
1871 ------
781 +---
1872 1872  
1873 1873  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1874 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]]##
1875 -{{/expand}}
784 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
1876 1876  
1877 -
1878 -= Media =
1879 -
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 -
1895 -1. **General Observations:**
1896 - - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
1897 - - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
1898 -
1899 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1900 - - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility.
1901 - - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**.
1902 -
1903 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1904 - - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
1905 - - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
1906 -
1907 ------
1908 -
1909 -## **Findings**##
1910 -
1911 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1912 - - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
1913 - - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
1914 -
1915 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1916 - - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views.
1917 - - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions.
1918 -
1919 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1920 - - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
1921 - - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
1922 -
1923 ------
1924 -
1925 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1926 -
1927 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1928 - - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
1929 - - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
1930 -
1931 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1932 - - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**.
1933 - - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives.
1934 -
1935 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1936 - - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
1937 - - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
1938 -
1939 ------
1940 -
1941 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1942 -- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
1943 -- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
1944 -- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.##
1945 -
1946 ------
1947 -
1948 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1949 -
1950 -1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
1951 -2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
1952 -3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
1953 -
1954 ------
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**.##
1958 -
1959 ------
1960 -
1961 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1962 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]##
1963 1963  {{/expand}}
1964 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 -
1980 -1. **General Observations:**
1981 - - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
1982 - - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
1983 -
1984 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1985 - - **Equality-based framing decreases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
1986 - - **Morality-based framing increases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
1987 -
1988 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1989 - - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
1990 - - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
1991 -
1992 ------
1993 -
1994 -## **Findings**##
1995 -
1996 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1997 - - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
1998 - - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
1999 -
2000 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
2001 - - **Religious and conservative audiences** respond more to morality-based framing.
2002 - - **Younger and progressive audiences** respond more to equality-based framing.
2003 -
2004 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2005 - - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
2006 - - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
2007 -
2008 ------
2009 -
2010 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2011 -
2012 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2013 - - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
2014 - - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
2015 -
2016 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
2017 - - Focuses **only on U.S. media coverage**, limiting global applicability.
2018 - - Does not account for **social media's growing influence** on public opinion.
2019 -
2020 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2021 - - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
2022 - - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
2023 -
2024 ------
2025 -
2026 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
2027 -- Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
2028 -- Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
2029 -- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.##
2030 -
2031 ------
2032 -
2033 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2034 -
2035 -1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
2036 -2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
2037 -3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
2038 -
2039 ------
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**.##
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 -
2065 -1. **General Observations:**
2066 - - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
2067 - - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
2068 -
2069 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
2070 - - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content.
2071 - - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**.
2072 -
2073 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
2074 - - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
2075 - - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
2076 -
2077 ------
2078 -
2079 -## **Findings**##
2080 -
2081 -1. **Primary Observations:**
2082 - - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
2083 - - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
2084 -
2085 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
2086 - - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites.
2087 - - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**.
2088 -
2089 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2090 - - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
2091 - - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
2092 -
2093 ------
2094 -
2095 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2096 -
2097 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2098 - - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
2099 - - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
2100 -
2101 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
2102 - - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up.
2103 - - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**.
2104 -
2105 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2106 - - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
2107 - - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
2108 -
2109 ------
2110 -
2111 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
2112 -- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
2113 -- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
2114 -- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.##
2115 -
2116 ------
2117 -
2118 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2119 -
2120 -1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
2121 -2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
2122 -3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
2123 -
2124 ------
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**.##
2128 -
2129 ------
2130 -
2131 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
2132 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]##
2133 -{{/expand}}
2134 -
2135 -
788 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}