0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From version 83.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/03/16 07:10
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
... ... @@ -1,861 +1,149 @@
1 1  = Research at a Glance =
2 2  
3 +== Introduction ==
3 3  
5 +Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various fields such as **social psychology, public policy, behavioral economics, and more**. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout.
4 4  
5 -Welcome to the **Research at a Glance** repository. This section serves as a **centralized reference hub** for key academic studies related to various important Racial themes. Each study is categorized for easy navigation and presented in a **collapsible format** to maintain a clean layout. I wanted to make this for a couple of reasons. Number one is organization. There are a ton of useful studies out there that expose the truth, sometimes inadvertently. You'll notice that in this initial draft the summaries are often woke and reflect the bias of the AI writing them as well as the researchers politically correct conclusions in most cases. That's because I havent gotten to going through and pointing out the reasons I put all of them in here. There is often an underlying hypocrisy or double standar, saying the quiet part out loud, or conclusions that are so much of an antithesis to what the data shows that made me want to include it. At least, thats the idea for once its polished. I have about 150 more studies to upload, so it will be a few weeks before I get through it all. Until such time, feel free to search for them yourself and edit in what you find, or add your own studies. If you like you can do it manually, or if you'd rather go the route I did, just feed the study into an AI and tell them to summarize the study using the following format:
7 +=== How to Use This Repository ===
6 6  
7 -
8 8  - Click on a **category** in the **Table of Contents** to browse studies related to that topic.
9 9  - Click on a **study title** to expand its details, including **key findings, critique, and relevance**.
10 10  - Use the **search function** (Ctrl + F or XWiki's built-in search) to quickly find specific topics or authors.
11 11  - If needed, you can export this page as **PDF or print-friendly format**, and all studies will automatically expand for readability.
12 -- You'll also find a download link to the original full study in pdf form at the bottom of the collapsible block.
13 13  
14 -
15 15  {{toc/}}
16 16  
16 +== Research Studies Repository ==
17 17  
18 18  
19 += Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding =
20 +{{expand expanded="false" title="Click here to expand details"}}
21 +**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
22 +**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
23 +**Author(s):** Smith et al.
24 +**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
25 +**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
26 +**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science
19 19  
28 +**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
20 20  
21 -= Genetics =
30 +=== **Key Statistics** ===
22 22  
23 -
24 -== Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History ==
25 -
26 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Reconstructing Indian Population History"}}
27 -**Source:** *Nature*
28 -**Date of Publication:** *2009*
29 -**Author(s):** *David Reich, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Nick Patterson, Alkes L. Price, Lalji Singh*
30 -**Title:** *"Reconstructing Indian Population History"*
31 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nature08365](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08365)
32 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Population History, South Asian Ancestry* 
33 -
34 -----
35 -
36 -## **Key Statistics**##
37 -
38 38  1. **General Observations:**
39 - - Study analyzed **132 individuals from 25 diverse Indian groups**.
40 - - 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%**.
41 41  
42 42  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
43 - - ANI ancestry is closely related to **Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans**.
44 - - 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.
45 45  
46 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
47 - - ANI ancestry ranges from **39% to 71%** across Indian groups.
48 - - **Caste and linguistic differences** strongly correlate with genetic variation.
40 +=== **Findings** ===
49 49  
50 -----
42 +- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
43 +- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
51 51  
52 -## **Findings**##
45 +=== **Relevance to Subproject** ===
53 53  
54 -1. **Primary Observations:**
55 - - The genetic landscape of India has been shaped by **thousands of years of endogamy**.
56 - - Groups with **only ASI ancestry no longer exist** in mainland India.
57 -
58 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
59 - - **Higher ANI ancestry in upper-caste and Indo-European-speaking groups**.
60 - - **Andaman Islanders** are unique in having **ASI ancestry without ANI influence**.
61 -
62 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
63 - - **Founder effects** have maintained allele frequency differences among Indian groups.
64 - - Predicts **higher incidence of recessive diseases** due to historical genetic isolation.
65 -
66 -----
67 -
68 -## **Critique and Observations**##
69 -
70 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
71 - - **First large-scale genetic analysis** of Indian population history.
72 - - Introduces **new methods for ancestry estimation without direct ancestral reference groups**.
73 -
74 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
75 - - Limited **sample size relative to India's population diversity**.
76 - - Does not include **recent admixture events** post-colonial era.
77 -
78 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
79 - - Future research should **expand sampling across more Indian tribal groups**.
80 - - Use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer resolution of ancestry.
81 -
82 -----
83 -
84 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
85 -- Provides a **genetic basis for caste and linguistic diversity** in India.
86 -- Highlights **founder effects and genetic drift** shaping South Asian populations.
87 -- Supports research on **medical genetics and disease risk prediction** in Indian populations.##
88 -
89 -----
90 -
91 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
92 -
93 -1. Examine **genetic markers linked to disease susceptibility** in Indian subpopulations.
94 -2. Investigate the impact of **recent migration patterns on ANI-ASI ancestry distribution**.
95 -3. Study **gene flow between Indian populations and other global groups**.
96 -
97 -----
98 -
99 -## **Summary of Research Study**
100 -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**.##
101 -
102 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
103 -
104 -----
105 -
106 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
107 -[[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.
108 108  {{/expand}}
109 109  
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]
110 110  
111 -== Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations ==
59 +---
112 112  
113 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"}}
114 -**Source:** *Nature*
115 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
116 -**Author(s):** *David Reich, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Mark Lipson, and others*
117 -**Title:** *"The Simons Genome Diversity Project: 300 Genomes from 142 Diverse Populations"*
118 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nature18964](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964)
119 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Genetic Diversity, Population History, Evolutionary Genomics* 
120 -
121 -----
122 -
123 -## **Key Statistics**##
124 -
61 +## **Key Statistics**
125 125  1. **General Observations:**
126 - - Analyzed **high-coverage genome sequences of 300 individuals from 142 populations**.
127 - - Included **many underrepresented and indigenous groups** from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.
63 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
64 + - [Statistical finding or observation]
128 128  
129 129  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
130 - - Found **higher genetic diversity within African populations** compared to non-African groups.
131 - - Showed **Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry in non-African populations**, particularly in Oceania.
67 + - [Breakdown of findings by gender, race, or other subgroups]
132 132  
133 133  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
134 - - Identified **5.8 million base pairs absent from the human reference genome**.
135 - - Estimated that **mutations have accumulated 5% faster in non-Africans than in Africans**.
70 + - [Any additional findings or significant statistics]
136 136  
137 -----
72 +---
138 138  
139 -## **Findings**##
140 -
74 +## **Findings**
141 141  1. **Primary Observations:**
142 - - **African populations harbor the greatest genetic diversity**, confirming an out-of-Africa dispersal model.
143 - - Indigenous Australians and New Guineans **share a common ancestral population with other non-Africans**.
76 + - [High-level findings or trends in the study]
144 144  
145 145  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
146 - - **Lower heterozygosity in non-Africans** due to founder effects from migration bottlenecks.
147 - - **Denisovan ancestry in South Asians is higher than previously thought**.
79 + - [Disparities or differences highlighted in the study]
148 148  
149 149  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
150 - - **Neanderthal ancestry is higher in East Asians than in Europeans**.
151 - - African hunter-gatherer groups show **deep population splits over 100,000 years ago**.
82 + - [Detailed explanation of any notable specific findings]
152 152  
153 -----
84 +---
154 154  
155 -## **Critique and Observations**##
156 -
86 +## **Critique and Observations**
157 157  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
158 - - **Largest global genetic dataset** outside of the 1000 Genomes Project.
159 - - High sequencing depth allows **more accurate identification of genetic variants**.
88 + - [Examples: strong methodology, large dataset, etc.]
160 160  
161 161  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
162 - - **Limited sample sizes for some populations**, restricting generalizability.
163 - - Lacks ancient DNA comparisons, making it difficult to reconstruct deep ancestry fully.
91 + - [Examples: data gaps, lack of upstream analysis, etc.]
164 164  
165 165  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
166 - - Future studies should include **ancient genomes** to improve demographic modeling.
167 - - Expand research into **how genetic variation affects health outcomes** across populations.
94 + - [Ideas for further research or addressing limitations]
168 168  
169 -----
96 +---
170 170  
171 171  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
172 -- Provides **comprehensive data on human genetic diversity**, useful for **evolutionary studies**.
173 -- Supports research on **Neanderthal and Denisovan introgression** in modern human populations.
174 -- 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.]
175 175  
176 -----
102 +---
177 177  
178 -## **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.]
179 179  
180 -1. Investigate **functional consequences of genetic variation in underrepresented populations**.
181 -2. Study **how selection pressures shaped genetic diversity across different environments**.
182 -3. Explore **medical applications of population-specific genetic markers**.
108 +---
183 183  
184 -----
185 -
186 186  ## **Summary of Research Study**
187 -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]**.
188 188  
189 -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.
190 190  
191 -----
115 +---
192 192  
193 193  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
194 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nature18964.pdf]]##
195 -{{/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}}
196 196  
197 -
198 -== Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies ==
199 -
200 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"}}
201 -**Source:** *Nature Genetics*
202 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
203 -**Author(s):** *Tinca J. C. Polderman, Beben Benyamin, Christiaan A. de Leeuw, Patrick F. Sullivan, Arjen van Bochoven, Peter M. Visscher, Danielle Posthuma*
204 -**Title:** *"Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies"*
205 -**DOI:** [10.1038/ng.328](https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.328)
206 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Heritability, Twin Studies, Behavioral Science* 
207 -
208 -----
209 -
210 -## **Key Statistics**##
211 -
212 -1. **General Observations:**
213 - - Analyzed **17,804 traits from 2,748 twin studies** published between **1958 and 2012**.
214 - - Included data from **14,558,903 twin pairs**, making it the largest meta-analysis on human heritability.
215 -
216 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
217 - - Found **49% average heritability** across all traits.
218 - - **69% of traits follow a simple additive genetic model**, meaning most variance is due to genes, not environment.
219 -
220 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
221 - - **Neurological, metabolic, and psychiatric traits** showed the highest heritability estimates.
222 - - Traits related to **social values and environmental interactions** had lower heritability estimates.
223 -
224 -----
225 -
226 -## **Findings**##
227 -
228 -1. **Primary Observations:**
229 - - Across all traits, genetic factors play a significant role in individual differences.
230 - - The study contradicts models that **overestimate environmental effects in behavioral and cognitive traits**.
231 -
232 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
233 - - **Eye and brain-related traits showed the highest heritability (70-80%)**.
234 - - **Shared environmental effects were negligible (<10%) for most traits**.
235 -
236 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
237 - - Twin correlations suggest **limited evidence for strong non-additive genetic influences**.
238 - - The study highlights **missing heritability in complex traits**, which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have yet to fully explain.
239 -
240 -----
241 -
242 -## **Critique and Observations**##
243 -
244 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
245 - - **Largest-ever heritability meta-analysis**, covering nearly all published twin studies.
246 - - Provides a **comprehensive framework for understanding gene-environment contributions**.
247 -
248 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
249 - - **Underrepresentation of African, South American, and Asian twin cohorts**, limiting global generalizability.
250 - - Cannot **fully separate genetic influences from potential cultural/environmental confounders**.
251 -
252 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
253 - - Future research should use **whole-genome sequencing** for finer-grained heritability estimates.
254 - - **Incorporate non-Western populations** to assess global heritability trends.
255 -
256 -----
257 -
258 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
259 -- Establishes a **quantitative benchmark for heritability across human traits**.
260 -- Reinforces **genetic influence on cognitive, behavioral, and physical traits**.
261 -- Highlights the need for **genome-wide studies to identify missing heritability**.##
262 -
263 -----
264 -
265 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
266 -
267 -1. Investigate how **heritability estimates compare across different socioeconomic backgrounds**.
268 -2. Examine **gene-environment interactions in cognitive and psychiatric traits**.
269 -3. Explore **non-additive genetic effects on human traits using newer statistical models**.
270 -
271 -----
272 -
273 -## **Summary of Research Study**
274 -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.##
275 -
276 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
277 -
278 -----
279 -
280 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
281 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_ng.328.pdf]]##
282 282  {{/expand}}
283 283  
130 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
284 284  
285 -== Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease ==
286 286  
287 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"}}
288 -**Source:** *Nature Reviews Genetics*
289 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
290 -**Author(s):** *Sarah A. Tishkoff, Scott M. Williams*
291 -**Title:** *"Genetic Analysis of African Populations: Human Evolution and Complex Disease"*
292 -**DOI:** [10.1038/nrg865](https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg865)
293 -**Subject Matter:** *Population Genetics, Human Evolution, Complex Diseases* 
294 294  
295 -----
134 +---
296 296  
297 -## **Key Statistics**##
298 -
299 -1. **General Observations:**
300 - - Africa harbors **the highest genetic diversity** of any region, making it key to understanding human evolution.
301 - - The study analyzes **genetic variation and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in African populations**.
302 -
303 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
304 - - African populations exhibit **greater genetic differentiation compared to non-Africans**.
305 - - **Migration and admixture** have shaped modern African genomes over the past **100,000 years**.
306 -
307 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
308 - - The **effective population size (Ne) of Africans** is higher than that of non-African populations.
309 - - LD blocks are **shorter in African genomes**, suggesting more historical recombination events.
310 -
311 -----
312 -
313 -## **Findings**##
314 -
315 -1. **Primary Observations:**
316 - - African populations are the **most genetically diverse**, supporting the *Recent African Origin* hypothesis.
317 - - Genetic variation in African populations can **help fine-map complex disease genes**.
318 -
319 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
320 - - **West Africans exhibit higher genetic diversity** than East Africans due to differing migration patterns.
321 - - Populations such as **San hunter-gatherers show deep genetic divergence**.
322 -
323 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
324 - - Admixture in African Americans includes **West African and European genetic contributions**.
325 - - SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) diversity in African genomes **exceeds that of non-African groups**.
326 -
327 -----
328 -
329 -## **Critique and Observations**##
330 -
331 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
332 - - Provides **comprehensive genetic analysis** of diverse African populations.
333 - - Highlights **how genetic diversity impacts health disparities and disease risks**.
334 -
335 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
336 - - Many **African populations remain understudied**, limiting full understanding of diversity.
337 - - Focuses more on genetic variation than on **specific disease mechanisms**.
338 -
339 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
340 - - Expand research into **underrepresented African populations**.
341 - - Integrate **whole-genome sequencing for a more detailed evolutionary timeline**.
342 -
343 -----
344 -
345 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
346 -- Supports **genetic models of human evolution** and the **out-of-Africa hypothesis**.
347 -- Reinforces **Africa’s key role in disease gene mapping and precision medicine**.
348 -- Provides insight into **historical migration patterns and their genetic impact**.##
349 -
350 -----
351 -
352 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
353 -
354 -1. Investigate **genetic adaptations to local environments within Africa**.
355 -2. Study **the role of African genetic diversity in disease resistance**.
356 -3. Expand research on **how ancient migration patterns shaped modern genetic structure**.
357 -
358 -----
359 -
360 -## **Summary of Research Study**
361 -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**.##
362 -
363 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
364 -
365 -----
366 -
367 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
368 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1038_nrg865MODERN.pdf]]##
369 -{{/expand}}
370 -
371 -
372 -== Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA ==
373 -
374 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Pervasive Findings of Directional Selection in Ancient DNA"}}
375 -**Source:** *bioRxiv Preprint*
376 -**Date of Publication:** *September 15, 2024*
377 -**Author(s):** *Ali Akbari, Alison R. Barton, Steven Gazal, Zheng Li, Mohammadreza Kariminejad, et al.*
378 -**Title:** *"Pervasive findings of directional selection realize the promise of ancient DNA to elucidate human adaptation"*
379 -**DOI:** [10.1101/2024.09.14.613021](https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.14.613021)
380 -**Subject Matter:** *Genomics, Evolutionary Biology, Natural Selection* 
381 -
382 -----
383 -
384 -## **Key Statistics**##
385 -
386 -1. **General Observations:**
387 - - Study analyzes **8,433 ancient individuals** from the past **14,000 years**.
388 - - Identifies **347 genome-wide significant loci** showing strong selection.
389 -
390 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
391 - - Examines **West Eurasian populations** and their genetic evolution.
392 - - Tracks **changes in allele frequencies over millennia**.
393 -
394 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
395 - - **10,000 years of directional selection** affected metabolic, immune, and cognitive traits.
396 - - **Strong selection signals** found for traits like **skin pigmentation, cognitive function, and immunity**.
397 -
398 -----
399 -
400 -## **Findings**##
401 -
402 -1. **Primary Observations:**
403 - - **Hundreds of alleles have been subject to directional selection** over recent millennia.
404 - - Traits like **immune function, metabolism, and cognitive performance** show strong selection.
405 -
406 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
407 - - Selection pressure on **energy storage genes** supports the **Thrifty Gene Hypothesis**.
408 - - **Cognitive performance-related alleles** have undergone selection, but their historical advantages remain unclear.
409 -
410 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
411 - - **Celiac disease risk allele** increased from **0% to 20%** in 4,000 years.
412 - - **Blood type B frequency rose from 0% to 8% in 6,000 years**.
413 - - **Tuberculosis risk allele** fluctuated from **2% to 9% over 3,000 years before declining**.
414 -
415 -----
416 -
417 -## **Critique and Observations**##
418 -
419 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
420 - - **Largest dataset to date** on natural selection in human ancient DNA.
421 - - Uses **direct allele frequency tracking instead of indirect measures**.
422 -
423 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
424 - - Findings **may not translate directly** to modern populations.
425 - - **Unclear whether observed selection pressures persist today**.
426 -
427 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
428 - - Expanding research to **other global populations** to assess universal trends.
429 - - Investigating **long-term evolutionary trade-offs of selected alleles**.
430 -
431 -----
432 -
433 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
434 -- Provides **direct evidence of long-term genetic adaptation** in human populations.
435 -- Supports theories on **polygenic selection shaping human cognition, metabolism, and immunity**.
436 -- Highlights **how past selection pressures may still influence modern health and disease prevalence**.##
437 -
438 -----
439 -
440 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
441 -
442 -1. Examine **selection patterns in non-European populations** for comparison.
443 -2. Investigate **how environmental and cultural shifts influenced genetic selection**.
444 -3. Explore **the genetic basis of traits linked to past and present-day human survival**.
445 -
446 -----
447 -
448 -## **Summary of Research Study**
449 -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**.##
450 -
451 -----
452 -
453 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
454 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1101_2024.09.14.613021doi_.pdf]]##
455 -{{/expand}}
456 -
457 -
458 -== Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age ==
459 -
460 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"}}
461 -**Source:** *Twin Research and Human Genetics (Cambridge University Press)*
462 -**Date of Publication:** *2013*
463 -**Author(s):** *Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.*
464 -**Title:** *"The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age"*
465 -**DOI:** [10.1017/thg.2013.54](https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2013.54)
466 -**Subject Matter:** *Intelligence, Heritability, Developmental Psychology* 
467 -
468 -----
469 -
470 -## **Key Statistics**##
471 -
472 -1. **General Observations:**
473 - - The study documents how the **heritability of IQ increases with age**, reaching an asymptote at **0.80 by adulthood**.
474 - - Analysis is based on **longitudinal twin and adoption studies**.
475 -
476 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
477 - - Shared environmental influence on IQ **declines with age**, reaching **0.10 in adulthood**.
478 - - Monozygotic twins show **increasing genetic similarity in IQ over time**, while dizygotic twins become **less concordant**.
479 -
480 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
481 - - Data from the **Louisville Longitudinal Twin Study and cross-national twin samples** support findings.
482 - - IQ stability over time is **influenced more by genetics than by shared environmental factors**.
483 -
484 -----
485 -
486 -## **Findings**##
487 -
488 -1. **Primary Observations:**
489 - - Intelligence heritability **strengthens throughout development**, contrary to early environmental models.
490 - - Shared environmental effects **decrease by late adolescence**, emphasizing **genetic influence in adulthood**.
491 -
492 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
493 - - Studies from **Scotland, Netherlands, and the US** show **consistent patterns of increasing heritability with age**.
494 - - Findings hold across **varied socio-economic and educational backgrounds**.
495 -
496 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
497 - - Longitudinal adoption studies show **declining impact of adoptive parental influence on IQ** as children age.
498 - - Cross-sectional twin data confirm **higher IQ correlations for monozygotic twins in adulthood**.
499 -
500 -----
501 -
502 -## **Critique and Observations**##
503 -
504 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
505 - - **Robust dataset covering multiple twin and adoption studies over decades**.
506 - - **Clear, replicable trend** demonstrating the increasing role of genetics in intelligence.
507 -
508 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
509 - - Findings apply primarily to **Western industrialized nations**, limiting generalizability.
510 - - **Lack of neurobiological mechanisms** explaining how genes express their influence over time.
511 -
512 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
513 - - Future research should investigate **gene-environment interactions in cognitive aging**.
514 - - Examine **heritability trends in non-Western populations** to determine cross-cultural consistency.
515 -
516 -----
517 -
518 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
519 -- Provides **strong evidence for the genetic basis of intelligence**.
520 -- Highlights the **diminishing role of shared environment in cognitive development**.
521 -- Supports research on **cognitive aging and heritability across the lifespan**.##
522 -
523 -----
524 -
525 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
526 -
527 -1. Investigate **neurogenetic pathways underlying IQ development**.
528 -2. Examine **how education and socioeconomic factors interact with genetic IQ influences**.
529 -3. Study **heritability trends in aging populations and cognitive decline**.
530 -
531 -----
532 -
533 -## **Summary of Research Study**
534 -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**.##
535 -
536 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
537 -
538 -----
539 -
540 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
541 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]##
542 -{{/expand}}
543 -
544 -
545 -== Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications ==
546 -
547 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"}}
548 -**Source:** *Medical Hypotheses (Elsevier)*
549 -**Date of Publication:** *2010*
550 -**Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley*
551 -**Title:** *"Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications"*
552 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.046)
553 -**Subject Matter:** *Human Taxonomy, Evolutionary Biology, Anthropology* 
554 -
555 -----
556 -
557 -## **Key Statistics**##
558 -
559 -1. **General Observations:**
560 - - The study argues that **Homo sapiens is polytypic**, meaning it consists of multiple subspecies rather than a single monotypic species.
561 - - Examines **genetic diversity, morphological variation, and evolutionary lineage** in humans.
562 -
563 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
564 - - Discusses **four primary definitions of race/subspecies**: Essentialist, Taxonomic, Population-based, and Lineage-based.
565 - - Suggests that **human heterozygosity levels are comparable to species that are classified as polytypic**.
566 -
567 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
568 - - The study evaluates **FST values (genetic differentiation measure)** and argues that human genetic differentiation is comparable to that of recognized subspecies in other species.
569 - - Considers **phylogenetic species concepts** in defining human variation.
570 -
571 -----
572 -
573 -## **Findings**##
574 -
575 -1. **Primary Observations:**
576 - - Proposes that **modern human populations meet biological criteria for subspecies classification**.
577 - - Highlights **medical and evolutionary implications** of human taxonomic diversity.
578 -
579 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
580 - - Discusses **how race concepts evolved over time** in biological sciences.
581 - - Compares **human diversity with that of other primates** such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
582 -
583 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
584 - - Evaluates how **genetic markers correlate with population structure**.
585 - - Addresses the **controversy over race classification in modern anthropology**.
586 -
587 -----
588 -
589 -## **Critique and Observations**##
590 -
591 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
592 - - Uses **comparative species analysis** to assess human classification.
593 - - Provides a **biological perspective** on the race concept, moving beyond social constructivism arguments.
594 -
595 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
596 - - Controversial topic with **strong opposing views in anthropology and genetics**.
597 - - **Relies on broad genetic trends**, but does not analyze individual-level genetic variation in depth.
598 -
599 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
600 - - Further research should **incorporate whole-genome studies** to refine subspecies classifications.
601 - - Investigate **how admixture affects taxonomic classification over time**.
602 -
603 -----
604 -
605 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
606 -- Contributes to discussions on **evolutionary taxonomy and species classification**.
607 -- Provides evidence on **genetic differentiation among human populations**.
608 -- Highlights **historical and contemporary scientific debates on race and human variation**.##
609 -
610 -----
611 -
612 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
613 -
614 -1. Examine **FST values in modern and ancient human populations**.
615 -2. Investigate how **adaptive evolution influences population differentiation**.
616 -3. Explore **the impact of genetic diversity on medical treatments and disease susceptibility**.
617 -
618 -----
619 -
620 -## **Summary of Research Study**
621 -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**.##
622 -
623 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
624 -
625 -----
626 -
627 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
628 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]##
629 -{{/expand}}
630 -
631 -
632 -== Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media ==
633 -
634 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"}}
635 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
636 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
637 -**Author(s):** *Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, Thomas R. Coyle*
638 -**Title:** *"Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Intelligence Research, Experts' Background, Controversial Issues, and the Media"*
639 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406)
640 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Intelligence Research, Expert Analysis* 
641 -
642 -----
643 -
644 -## **Key Statistics**##
645 -
646 -1. **General Observations:**
647 - - Survey of **102 experts** on intelligence research and public discourse.
648 - - Evaluated experts' backgrounds, political affiliations, and views on controversial topics in intelligence research.
649 -
650 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
651 - - **90% of experts were from Western countries**, and **83% were male**.
652 - - Political spectrum ranged from **54% left-liberal, 24% conservative**, with significant ideological influences on views.
653 -
654 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
655 - - Experts rated media coverage of intelligence research as **poor (avg. 3.1 on a 9-point scale)**.
656 - - **50% of experts attributed US Black-White IQ differences to genetic factors, 50% to environmental factors**.
657 -
658 -----
659 -
660 -## **Findings**##
661 -
662 -1. **Primary Observations:**
663 - - Experts overwhelmingly support **the g-factor theory of intelligence**.
664 - - **Heritability of intelligence** was widely accepted, though views differed on race and group differences.
665 -
666 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
667 - - **Left-leaning experts were more likely to reject genetic explanations for group IQ differences**.
668 - - **Right-leaning experts tended to favor a stronger role for genetic factors** in intelligence disparities.
669 -
670 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
671 - - The study compared **media coverage of intelligence research** with expert opinions.
672 - - Found a **disconnect between journalists and intelligence researchers**, especially regarding politically sensitive issues.
673 -
674 -----
675 -
676 -## **Critique and Observations**##
677 -
678 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
679 - - **Largest expert survey on intelligence research** to date.
680 - - Provides insight into **how political orientation influences scientific perspectives**.
681 -
682 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
683 - - **Sample primarily from Western countries**, limiting global perspectives.
684 - - Self-selection bias may skew responses toward **those more willing to engage with controversial topics**.
685 -
686 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
687 - - Future studies should include **a broader range of global experts**.
688 - - Additional research needed on **media biases and misrepresentation of intelligence research**.
689 -
690 -----
691 -
692 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
693 -- Provides insight into **expert consensus and division on intelligence research**.
694 -- Highlights the **role of media bias** in shaping public perception of intelligence science.
695 -- Useful for understanding **the intersection of science, politics, and public discourse** on intelligence research.##
696 -
697 -----
698 -
699 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
700 -
701 -1. Examine **cross-national differences** in expert opinions on intelligence.
702 -2. Investigate how **media bias impacts public understanding of intelligence research**.
703 -3. Conduct follow-up studies with **a more diverse expert pool** to test findings.
704 -
705 -----
706 -
707 -## **Summary of Research Study**
708 -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**.##
709 -
710 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
711 -
712 -----
713 -
714 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
715 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]##
716 -{{/expand}}
717 -
718 -
719 -== Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation ==
720 -
721 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"}}
722 -**Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
723 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
724 -**Author(s):** *Davide Piffer*
725 -**Title:** *"A Review of Intelligence GWAS Hits: Their Relationship to Country IQ and the Issue of Spatial Autocorrelation"*
726 -**DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.008)
727 -**Subject Matter:** *Genetics, Intelligence, GWAS, Population Differences* 
728 -
729 -----
730 -
731 -## **Key Statistics**##
732 -
733 -1. **General Observations:**
734 - - Study analyzed **genome-wide association studies (GWAS) hits** linked to intelligence.
735 - - Found a **strong correlation (r = .91) between polygenic intelligence scores and national IQ levels**.
736 -
737 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
738 - - Factor analysis of **9 intelligence-associated alleles** revealed a metagene correlated with **country IQ (r = .86)**.
739 - - **Allele frequencies varied significantly by continent**, aligning with observed population differences in cognitive ability.
740 -
741 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
742 - - GWAS intelligence SNPs predicted **IQ levels more strongly than random genetic markers**.
743 - - Genetic differentiation (Fst values) showed that **selection pressure, rather than drift, influenced intelligence-related allele distributions**.
744 -
745 -----
746 -
747 -## **Findings**##
748 -
749 -1. **Primary Observations:**
750 - - Intelligence-associated SNP frequencies correlate **highly with national IQ levels**.
751 - - Genetic selection for intelligence appears **stronger than selection for height-related genes**.
752 -
753 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
754 - - **East Asian populations** exhibited the **highest frequencies of intelligence-associated alleles**.
755 - - **African populations** showed lower frequencies compared to European and East Asian populations.
756 -
757 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
758 - - Polygenic scores using **intelligence-related alleles significantly outperformed random SNPs** in predicting IQ.
759 - - Selection pressures **may explain differences in global intelligence distribution** beyond genetic drift effects.
760 -
761 -----
762 -
763 -## **Critique and Observations**##
764 -
765 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
766 - - **Comprehensive genetic analysis** of intelligence-linked SNPs.
767 - - Uses **multiple statistical methods (factor analysis, Fst analysis) to confirm results**.
768 -
769 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
770 - - **Correlation does not imply causation**; factors beyond genetics influence intelligence.
771 - - **Limited number of GWAS-identified intelligence alleles**—future studies may identify more.
772 -
773 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
774 - - Larger **cross-population GWAS studies** needed to validate findings.
775 - - Investigate **non-genetic contributors to IQ variance** in addition to genetic factors.
776 -
777 -----
778 -
779 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
780 -- Supports research on **genetic influences on intelligence at a population level**.
781 -- Aligns with broader discussions on **cognitive genetics and natural selection effects**.
782 -- Provides a **quantitative framework for analyzing polygenic selection in intelligence studies**.##
783 -
784 -----
785 -
786 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
787 -
788 -1. Conduct **expanded GWAS studies** including diverse populations.
789 -2. Investigate **gene-environment interactions influencing intelligence**.
790 -3. Explore **historical selection pressures shaping intelligence-related alleles**.
791 -
792 -----
793 -
794 -## **Summary of Research Study**
795 -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.  ##
796 -
797 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
798 -
799 -----
800 -
801 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
802 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]##
803 -{{/expand}}
804 -
805 -
806 -== Study: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding ==
807 -
808 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Click here to expand details"}}
809 -**Source:** Journal of Genetic Epidemiology
810 -**Date of Publication:** 2024-01-15
811 -**Author(s):** Smith et al.
812 -**Title:** "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies"
813 -**DOI:** [https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235](https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235)
814 -**Subject Matter:** Genetics, Social Science 
815 -
816 -**Tags:** `Genetics` `Race & Ethnicity` `Biomedical Research`
817 -
818 - **Key Statistics**
819 -
820 -1. **General Observations:**
821 - - A near-perfect alignment between self-identified race/ethnicity (SIRE) and genetic ancestry was observed.
822 - - Misclassification rate: **0.14%**.
823 -
824 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
825 - - Four groups analyzed: **White, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic**.
826 - - Hispanic genetic clusters showed significant European and Native American lineage.
827 -
828 - **Findings**
829 -
830 -- Self-identified race strongly aligns with genetic ancestry.
831 -- Minor discrepancies exist but do not significantly impact classification.
832 -
833 - **Relevance to Subproject**
834 -
835 -- Reinforces the reliability of **self-reported racial identity** in genetic research.
836 -- Highlights **policy considerations** in biomedical studies.
837 -{{/expand}}
838 -
839 -
840 -----
841 -
842 -= Dating and Interpersonal Relationships =
843 -
844 -
845 -== Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018 ==
846 -
847 -{{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"}}
848 848  **Source:** *JAMA Network Open*
849 849  **Date of Publication:** *2020*
850 850  **Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.*
851 851  **Title:** *"Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"*
852 852  **DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833)
853 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography* 
142 +**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography*
854 854  
855 -----
144 +---
856 856  
857 -## **Key Statistics**##
858 -
146 +## **Key Statistics**
859 859  1. **General Observations:**
860 860   - Study analyzed **General Social Survey (2000-2018)** data.
861 861   - Found **declining trends in sexual activity** among young adults.
... ... @@ -868,10 +868,9 @@
868 868   - Frequency of sexual activity decreased by **8-10%** over the studied period.
869 869   - Number of sexual partners remained **relatively stable** despite declining activity rates.
870 870  
871 -----
159 +---
872 872  
873 -## **Findings**##
874 -
161 +## **Findings**
875 875  1. **Primary Observations:**
876 876   - A significant decline in sexual frequency, especially among **younger men**.
877 877   - Shifts in relationship dynamics and economic stressors may contribute to the trend.
... ... @@ -884,10 +884,9 @@
884 884   - **Mental health and employment status** were correlated with decreased activity.
885 885   - Social factors such as **screen time and digital entertainment consumption** are potential contributors.
886 886  
887 -----
174 +---
888 888  
889 -## **Critique and Observations**##
890 -
176 +## **Critique and Observations**
891 891  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
892 892   - **Large sample size** from a nationally representative dataset.
893 893   - **Longitudinal design** enables trend analysis over time.
... ... @@ -900,27 +900,26 @@
900 900   - Further studies should incorporate **qualitative data** on behavioral shifts.
901 901   - Additional factors such as **economic shifts and social media usage** need exploration.
902 902  
903 -----
189 +---
904 904  
905 905  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
906 906  - Provides evidence on **changing demographic behaviors** in relation to relationships and social interactions.
907 -- 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.
908 908  
909 -----
195 +---
910 910  
911 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
912 -
197 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
913 913  1. Investigate the **impact of digital media consumption** on relationship dynamics.
914 914  2. Examine **regional and cultural differences** in sexual activity trends.
915 915  
916 -----
201 +---
917 917  
918 918  ## **Summary of Research Study**
919 -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.
920 920  
921 921  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
922 922  
923 -----
208 +---
924 924  
925 925  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
926 926  {{velocity}}
... ... @@ -930,111 +930,25 @@
930 930  [[Download>>attach:$filename]]
931 931  #else
932 932  {{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}}
933 -#end {{/velocity}}##
934 -{{/expand}}
218 +#end
219 +{{/velocity}}
935 935  
936 -
937 -== Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis ==
938 -
939 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"}}
940 -**Source:** *Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica*
941 -**Date of Publication:** *2012*
942 -**Author(s):** *Ravisha M. Srinivasjois, Shreya Shah, Prakesh S. Shah, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of Preterm/LBW Births*
943 -**Title:** *"Biracial Couples and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"*
944 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01501.x)
945 -**Subject Matter:** *Neonatal Health, Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Racial Disparities* 
946 -
947 -----
948 -
949 -## **Key Statistics**##
950 -
951 -1. **General Observations:**
952 - - Meta-analysis of **26,335,596 singleton births** from eight studies.
953 - - **Higher risk of adverse birth outcomes in biracial couples** than White couples, but lower than Black couples.
954 -
955 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
956 - - **Maternal race had a stronger influence than paternal race** on birth outcomes.
957 - - **Black mother–White father (BMWF) couples** had a higher risk than **White mother–Black father (WMBF) couples**.
958 -
959 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
960 - - **Adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) for key outcomes:**
961 - - **Low birthweight (LBW):** WMBF (1.21), BMWF (1.75), Black mother–Black father (BMBF) (2.08).
962 - - **Preterm births (PTB):** WMBF (1.17), BMWF (1.37), BMBF (1.78).
963 - - **Stillbirths:** WMBF (1.43), BMWF (1.51), BMBF (1.85).
964 -
965 -----
966 -
967 -## **Findings**##
968 -
969 -1. **Primary Observations:**
970 - - **Biracial couples face a gradient of risk**: higher than White couples but lower than Black couples.
971 - - **Maternal race plays a more significant role** in pregnancy outcomes.
972 -
973 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
974 - - **Black mothers (regardless of paternal race) had the highest risk of LBW and PTB**.
975 - - **White mothers with Black fathers had a lower risk** than Black mothers with White fathers.
976 -
977 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
978 - - The **weathering hypothesis** suggests that **long-term stress exposure** contributes to higher adverse birth risks in Black mothers.
979 - - **Genetic and environmental factors** may interact to influence birth outcomes.
980 -
981 -----
982 -
983 -## **Critique and Observations**##
984 -
985 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
986 - - **Largest meta-analysis** on racial disparities in birth outcomes.
987 - - Uses **adjusted statistical models** to account for confounding variables.
988 -
989 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
990 - - Data limited to **Black-White biracial couples**, excluding other racial groups.
991 - - **Socioeconomic and healthcare access factors** not fully explored.
992 -
993 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
994 - - Future studies should examine **Asian, Hispanic, and Indigenous biracial couples**.
995 - - Investigate **long-term health effects on infants from biracial pregnancies**.
996 -
997 -----
998 -
999 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1000 -- Provides **critical insights into racial disparities** in maternal and infant health.
1001 -- Supports **research on genetic and environmental influences on neonatal health**.
1002 -- Highlights **how maternal race plays a more significant role than paternal race** in birth outcomes.##
1003 -
1004 -----
1005 -
1006 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1007 -
1008 -1. Investigate **the role of prenatal care quality in mitigating racial disparities**.
1009 -2. Examine **how social determinants of health impact biracial pregnancy outcomes**.
1010 -3. Explore **gene-environment interactions influencing birthweight and prematurity risks**.
1011 -
1012 -----
1013 -
1014 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1015 -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**.##
1016 -
1017 -----
1018 -
1019 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1020 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1600-0412.2012.01501.xAbstract.pdf]]##
1021 1021  {{/expand}}
1022 1022  
223 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1023 1023  
1024 -== Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness ==
1025 1025  
1026 -{{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"}}
1027 1027  **Source:** *Current Psychology*
1028 1028  **Date of Publication:** *2024*
1029 1029  **Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver*
1030 1030  **Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"*
1031 1031  **DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z)
1032 -**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation* 
232 +**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation*
1033 1033  
1034 -----
234 +---
1035 1035  
1036 -## **Key Statistics**##
1037 -
236 +## **Key Statistics**
1038 1038  1. **General Observations:**
1039 1039   - Study analyzed **67 self-identified incels** and **103 non-incel men**.
1040 1040   - Incels reported **higher loneliness and lower social support** compared to non-incels.
... ... @@ -1047,10 +1047,9 @@
1047 1047   - 95% of incels in the study reported **having depression**, with 38% receiving a formal diagnosis.
1048 1048   - **Higher externalization of blame** was linked to stronger incel identification.
1049 1049  
1050 -----
249 +---
1051 1051  
1052 -## **Findings**##
1053 -
251 +## **Findings**
1054 1054  1. **Primary Observations:**
1055 1055   - Incels experience **heightened rejection sensitivity and loneliness**.
1056 1056   - Lack of social support correlates with **worse mental health outcomes**.
... ... @@ -1063,10 +1063,9 @@
1063 1063   - Incels **engaged in fewer positive coping mechanisms** such as emotional support or positive reframing.
1064 1064   - Instead, they relied on **solitary coping strategies**, worsening their isolation.
1065 1065  
1066 -----
264 +---
1067 1067  
1068 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1069 -
266 +## **Critique and Observations**
1070 1070  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1071 1071   - **First quantitative study** on incels’ social isolation and mental health.
1072 1072   - **Robust sample size** and validated psychological measures.
... ... @@ -1079,303 +1079,37 @@
1079 1079   - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**.
1080 1080   - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration.
1081 1081  
1082 -----
279 +---
1083 1083  
1084 1084  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1085 1085  - Highlights **mental health vulnerabilities** within the incel community.
1086 1086  - Supports research on **loneliness, attachment styles, and social dominance orientation**.
1087 -- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.##
284 +- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**.
1088 1088  
1089 -----
286 +---
1090 1090  
1091 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1092 -
288 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
1093 1093  1. Explore how **online community participation** affects incel mental health.
1094 1094  2. Investigate **cognitive biases** influencing self-perceived rejection among incels.
1095 1095  3. Assess **therapeutic interventions** to address incel social isolation.
1096 1096  
1097 -----
293 +---
1098 1098  
1099 1099  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1100 -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**.
1101 1101  
1102 1102  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1103 1103  
1104 -----
300 +---
1105 1105  
1106 1106  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1107 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]##
1108 -{{/expand}}
303 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z.pdf]]
1109 1109  
1110 -
1111 -= Crime and Substance Abuse =
1112 -
1113 -
1114 -== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1115 -
1116 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1117 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1118 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1119 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1120 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1121 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1122 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1123 -
1124 -----
1125 -
1126 -## **Key Statistics**##
1127 -
1128 -1. **General Observations:**
1129 - - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1130 - - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
1131 -
1132 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1133 - - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
1134 - - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
1135 -
1136 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1137 - - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1138 - - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1139 -
1140 -----
1141 -
1142 -## **Findings**##
1143 -
1144 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1145 - - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1146 - - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
1147 -
1148 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1149 - - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
1150 - - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
1151 -
1152 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1153 - - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1154 - - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1155 -
1156 -----
1157 -
1158 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1159 -
1160 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1161 - - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1162 - - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
1163 -
1164 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1165 - - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
1166 - - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
1167 -
1168 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1169 - - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1170 - - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1171 -
1172 -----
1173 -
1174 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1175 -- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1176 -- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1177 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1178 -
1179 -----
1180 -
1181 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1182 -
1183 -1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1184 -2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1185 -3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1186 -
1187 -----
1188 -
1189 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1190 -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**.##
1191 -
1192 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1193 -
1194 -----
1195 -
1196 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1197 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1198 1198  {{/expand}}
1199 1199  
307 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1200 1200  
1201 -== Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys ==
1202 -
1203 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
1204 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1205 -**Date of Publication:** *2003*
1206 -**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
1207 -**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
1208 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
1209 -**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research* 
1210 -
1211 -----
1212 -
1213 -## **Key Statistics**##
1214 -
1215 -1. **General Observations:**
1216 - - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
1217 - - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
1218 -
1219 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1220 - - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents.
1221 - - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy.
1222 -
1223 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1224 - - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
1225 - - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
1226 -
1227 -----
1228 -
1229 -## **Findings**##
1230 -
1231 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1232 - - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
1233 - - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
1234 -
1235 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1236 - - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
1237 - - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
1238 -
1239 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1240 - - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
1241 - - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
1242 -
1243 -----
1244 -
1245 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1246 -
1247 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1248 - - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
1249 - - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
1250 -
1251 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1252 - - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
1253 - - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
1254 -
1255 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1256 - - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
1257 - - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
1258 -
1259 -----
1260 -
1261 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1262 -- Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
1263 -- Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
1264 -- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.##
1265 -
1266 -----
1267 -
1268 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1269 -
1270 -1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
1271 -2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
1272 -3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
1273 -
1274 -----
1275 -
1276 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1277 -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**.##
1278 -
1279 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1280 -
1281 -----
1282 -
1283 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1284 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]]##
1285 -{{/expand}}
1286 -
1287 -
1288 -== Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program ==
1289 -
1290 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
1291 -**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
1292 -**Date of Publication:** *2002*
1293 -**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
1294 -**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
1295 -**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
1296 -**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* 
1297 -
1298 -----
1299 -
1300 -## **Key Statistics**##
1301 -
1302 -1. **General Observations:**
1303 - - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
1304 - - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
1305 -
1306 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1307 - - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
1308 - - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
1309 -
1310 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1311 - - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
1312 - - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
1313 -
1314 -----
1315 -
1316 -## **Findings**##
1317 -
1318 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1319 - - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
1320 - - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
1321 -
1322 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1323 - - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
1324 - - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
1325 -
1326 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1327 - - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
1328 - - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
1329 -
1330 -----
1331 -
1332 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1333 -
1334 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1335 - - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
1336 - - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
1337 -
1338 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1339 - - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
1340 - - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
1341 -
1342 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1343 - - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
1344 - - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
1345 -
1346 -----
1347 -
1348 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1349 -- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
1350 -- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
1351 -- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.##
1352 -
1353 -----
1354 -
1355 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1356 -
1357 -1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
1358 -2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
1359 -3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
1360 -
1361 -----
1362 -
1363 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1364 -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**.##
1365 -
1366 -This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1367 -
1368 -----
1369 -
1370 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1371 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]]##
1372 -{{/expand}}
1373 -
1374 -
1375 -== Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults ==
1376 -
1377 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"}}
1378 - Source: Addictive Behaviors
309 +{{expand title="Study: Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults" expanded="false"}} Source: Addictive Behaviors
1379 1379  Date of Publication: 2016
1380 1380  Author(s): Andrea Hussong, Christy Capron, Gregory T. Smith, Jennifer L. Maggs
1381 1381  Title: "Associations Between Cannabis Use and Mental Health Symptoms in Young Adults"
... ... @@ -1436,23 +1436,22 @@
1436 1436  
1437 1437  📄 Download Full Study
1438 1438  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.addbeh.2016.02.030.pdf]]
370 +
1439 1439  {{/expand}}
1440 1440  
373 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1441 1441  
1442 -== Study: Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time? ==
1443 -
1444 -{{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"}}
1445 1445  **Source:** *Intelligence (Elsevier)*
1446 1446  **Date of Publication:** *2014*
1447 1447  **Author(s):** *Michael A. Woodley, Jan te Nijenhuis, Raegan Murphy*
1448 1448  **Title:** *"Is there a Dysgenic Secular Trend Towards Slowing Simple Reaction Time?"*
1449 1449  **DOI:** [10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.05.012)
1450 -**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics* 
381 +**Subject Matter:** *Cognitive Decline, Intelligence, Dysgenics*
1451 1451  
1452 -----
383 +---
1453 1453  
1454 -## **Key Statistics**##
1455 -
385 +## **Key Statistics**
1456 1456  1. **General Observations:**
1457 1457   - The study examines reaction time data from **13 age-matched studies** spanning **1884–2004**.
1458 1458   - Results suggest an estimated **decline of 13.35 IQ points** over this period.
... ... @@ -1465,10 +1465,9 @@
1465 1465   - The estimated **dysgenic rate is 1.21 IQ points lost per decade**.
1466 1466   - Meta-regression analysis confirmed a **steady secular trend in slowing reaction time**.
1467 1467  
1468 -----
398 +---
1469 1469  
1470 -## **Findings**##
1471 -
400 +## **Findings**
1472 1472  1. **Primary Observations:**
1473 1473   - Supports the hypothesis of **intelligence decline due to genetic and environmental factors**.
1474 1474   - Reaction time, a **biomarker for cognitive ability**, has slowed significantly over time.
... ... @@ -1481,10 +1481,9 @@
1481 1481   - Cross-national comparisons indicate a **global trend in slower reaction times**.
1482 1482   - Factors like **modern neurotoxin exposure** and **reduced selective pressure for intelligence** may contribute.
1483 1483  
1484 -----
413 +---
1485 1485  
1486 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1487 -
415 +## **Critique and Observations**
1488 1488  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1489 1489   - **Comprehensive meta-analysis** covering over a century of reaction time data.
1490 1490   - **Robust statistical corrections** for measurement variance between historical and modern studies.
... ... @@ -1497,638 +1497,364 @@
1497 1497   - Future studies should **replicate results with more modern datasets**.
1498 1498   - Investigate **alternative cognitive biomarkers** for intelligence over time.
1499 1499  
1500 -----
428 +---
1501 1501  
1502 1502  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1503 1503  - Provides evidence for **long-term intelligence trends**, contributing to research on **cognitive evolution**.
1504 1504  - Aligns with broader discussions on **dysgenics, neurophysiology, and cognitive load**.
1505 -- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.##
433 +- Supports the argument that **modern societies may be experiencing intelligence decline**.
1506 1506  
1507 -----
435 +---
1508 1508  
1509 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1510 -
437 +## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**
1511 1511  1. Investigate **genetic markers associated with reaction time** and intelligence decline.
1512 1512  2. Examine **regional variations in reaction time trends**.
1513 1513  3. Explore **cognitive resilience factors that counteract the decline**.
1514 1514  
1515 -----
442 +---
1516 1516  
1517 1517  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1518 -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**.
1519 1519  
1520 1520  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1521 1521  
1522 -----
449 +---
1523 1523  
1524 1524  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1525 -[[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 +
1526 1526  {{/expand}}
1527 1527  
456 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1528 1528  
1529 -= 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*
1530 1530  
1531 -== Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports ==
466 +---
1532 1532  
1533 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1534 -**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
1535 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
1536 -**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
1537 -**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
1538 -**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
1539 -**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sports, Higher Education, Institutional Racism* 
1540 -
1541 -----
1542 -
1543 -## **Key Statistics**##
1544 -
468 +## **Key Statistics**
1545 1545  1. **General Observations:**
1546 - - Analyzed **47 college athlete narratives** to explore racial disparities in non-revenue sports.
1547 - - 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**.
1548 1548  
1549 1549  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1550 - - **Predominantly white sports programs** reinforce racial hierarchies in college athletics.
1551 - - **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.
1552 1552  
1553 1553  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1554 - - White athletes are **socialized to remain unaware of racial privilege** in their athletic careers.
1555 - - 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**.
1556 1556  
1557 -----
481 +---
1558 1558  
1559 -## **Findings**##
1560 -
483 +## **Findings**
1561 1561  1. **Primary Observations:**
1562 - - Colleges **actively recruit white athletes** from majority-white communities.
1563 - - 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**.
1564 1564  
1565 1565  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1566 - - **White athletes show limited awareness** of their racial advantage in sports.
1567 - - **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.
1568 1568  
1569 1569  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1570 - - Examines **how sports serve as a mechanism for maintaining racial privilege** in higher education.
1571 - - 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.
1572 1572  
1573 -----
496 +---
1574 1574  
1575 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1576 -
498 +## **Critique and Observations**
1577 1577  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1578 - - **Comprehensive qualitative analysis** of race in college sports.
1579 - - 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**.
1580 1580  
1581 1581  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1582 - - Focuses primarily on **Division I non-revenue sports**, limiting generalizability to other divisions.
1583 - - 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.
1584 1584  
1585 1585  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1586 - - Future research should **compare recruitment policies across different sports and divisions**.
1587 - - 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.
1588 1588  
1589 -----
511 +---
1590 1590  
1591 1591  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1592 -- Provides evidence of **systemic racial biases** in college sports recruitment.
1593 -- Highlights **how institutional policies protect whiteness** in non-revenue athletics.
1594 -- 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**.
1595 1595  
1596 -----
518 +---
1597 1597  
1598 -## **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**.
1599 1599  
1600 -1. Investigate how **racial stereotypes influence college athlete recruitment**.
1601 -2. Examine **the role of media in shaping public perceptions of race in sports**.
1602 -3. Explore **policy reforms to increase racial diversity in non-revenue sports**.
525 +---
1603 1603  
1604 -----
1605 -
1606 1606  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1607 -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.
1608 1608  
1609 1609  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1610 1610  
1611 -----
532 +---
1612 1612  
1613 1613  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1614 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1037_dhe0000140.pdf]]##
535 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2015.08.008.pdf]]
536 +
1615 1615  {{/expand}}
1616 1616  
539 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1617 1617  
1618 -== 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*
1619 1619  
1620 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
1621 -**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1622 -**Date of Publication:** *2016*
1623 -**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axta, M. Norman Oliver*
1624 -**Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
1625 -**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
1626 -**Subject Matter:** *Health Disparities, Racial Bias, Medical Treatment* 
549 +---
1627 1627  
1628 -----
1629 -
1630 -## **Key Statistics**##
1631 -
551 +## **Key Statistics**
1632 1632  1. **General Observations:**
1633 - - Study analyzed **racial disparities in pain perception and treatment recommendations**.
1634 - - 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.
1635 1635  
1636 1636  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1637 - - **50% of medical students surveyed endorsed at least one false belief about biological differences**.
1638 - - 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.
1639 1639  
1640 1640  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1641 - - **Black patients were less likely to receive appropriate pain treatment** compared to white patients.
1642 - - 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**.
1643 1643  
1644 -----
564 +---
1645 1645  
1646 -## **Findings**##
1647 -
566 +## **Findings**
1648 1648  1. **Primary Observations:**
1649 - - False beliefs about biological racial differences **correlate with racial disparities in pain treatment**.
1650 - - 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.
1651 1651  
1652 1652  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1653 - - Physicians who **did not endorse these beliefs** showed **no racial bias** in treatment recommendations.
1654 - - 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.
1655 1655  
1656 1656  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1657 - - Study participants **underestimated Black patients' pain and recommended less effective pain treatments**.
1658 - - 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.
1659 1659  
1660 -----
579 +---
1661 1661  
1662 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1663 -
581 +## **Critique and Observations**
1664 1664  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1665 - - **First empirical study to connect false racial beliefs with medical decision-making**.
1666 - - 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**.
1667 1667  
1668 1668  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1669 - - The study focuses on **Black vs. white disparities**, leaving other racial/ethnic groups unexplored.
1670 - - 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**.
1671 1671  
1672 1672  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1673 - - Future research should examine **how these biases manifest in real clinical settings**.
1674 - - 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**.
1675 1675  
1676 -----
594 +---
1677 1677  
1678 1678  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1679 -- Highlights **racial disparities in healthcare**, specifically in pain assessment and treatment.
1680 -- Supports **research on implicit bias and its impact on medical outcomes**.
1681 -- 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.
1682 1682  
1683 -----
601 +---
1684 1684  
1685 -## **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.
1686 1686  
1687 -1. Investigate **interventions to reduce racial bias in medical decision-making**.
1688 -2. Explore **how implicit bias training impacts pain treatment recommendations**.
1689 -3. Conduct **real-world observational studies on racial disparities in healthcare settings**.
608 +---
1690 1690  
1691 -----
1692 -
1693 1693  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1694 -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**.
1695 1695  
1696 1696  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1697 1697  
1698 -----
615 +---
1699 1699  
1700 1700  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1701 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]##
618 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.intell.2019.101406.pdf]]
619 +
1702 1702  {{/expand}}
1703 1703  
622 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1704 1704  
1705 -== 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*
1706 1706  
1707 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1708 -**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1709 -**Date of Publication:** *2015*
1710 -**Author(s):** *Anne Case, Angus Deaton*
1711 -**Title:** *"Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans in the 21st Century"*
1712 -**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1518393112](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518393112)
1713 -**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Mortality, Socioeconomic Factors* 
632 +---
1714 1714  
1715 -----
1716 -
1717 -## **Key Statistics**##
1718 -
634 +## **Key Statistics**
1719 1719  1. **General Observations:**
1720 - - Mortality rates among **middle-aged white non-Hispanic Americans (ages 45–54)** increased from 1999 to 2013.
1721 - - 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.
1722 1722  
1723 1723  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1724 - - The increase was **most pronounced among those with a high school education or less**.
1725 - - 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**.
1726 1726  
1727 1727  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1728 - - Rising mortality was driven primarily by **suicide, drug and alcohol poisoning, and chronic liver disease**.
1729 - - 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.
1730 1730  
1731 -----
647 +---
1732 1732  
1733 -## **Findings**##
1734 -
649 +## **Findings**
1735 1735  1. **Primary Observations:**
1736 - - The rise in mortality is attributed to **substance abuse, economic distress, and deteriorating mental health**.
1737 - - 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.
1738 1738  
1739 1739  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1740 - - The **largest mortality increases** occurred among **whites without a college degree**.
1741 - - 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.
1742 1742  
1743 1743  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1744 - - **Educational attainment was a major predictor of mortality trends**, with better-educated individuals experiencing lower mortality rates.
1745 - - 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**.
1746 1746  
1747 -----
662 +---
1748 1748  
1749 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1750 -
664 +## **Critique and Observations**
1751 1751  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1752 - - **First major study to highlight rising midlife mortality among U.S. whites**.
1753 - - 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.
1754 1754  
1755 1755  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1756 - - Does not establish **causality** between economic decline and increased mortality.
1757 - - 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.
1758 1758  
1759 1759  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1760 - - Future studies should explore **how economic shifts, healthcare access, and mental health treatment contribute to these trends**.
1761 - - 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**.
1762 1762  
1763 -----
677 +---
1764 1764  
1765 1765  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1766 -- Highlights **socioeconomic and racial disparities** in health outcomes.
1767 -- Supports research on **substance abuse and mental health crises in the U.S.**.
1768 -- 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**.
1769 1769  
1770 -----
684 +---
1771 1771  
1772 -## **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**.
1773 1773  
1774 -1. Investigate **regional differences in rising midlife mortality**.
1775 -2. Examine the **impact of the opioid crisis on long-term health trends**.
1776 -3. Study **policy interventions aimed at reversing rising mortality rates**.
691 +---
1777 1777  
1778 -----
1779 -
1780 1780  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1781 -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**.
1782 1782  
1783 1783  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1784 1784  
1785 -----
698 +---
1786 1786  
1787 1787  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1788 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1518393112.pdf]]##
701 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.mehy.2009.07.046.pdf]]
702 +
1789 1789  {{/expand}}
1790 1790  
705 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}
1791 1791  
1792 -== 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*
1793 1793  
1794 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
1795 -**Source:** *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies*
1796 -**Date of Publication:** *2023*
1797 -**Author(s):** *Maurice Crul, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, Ismintha Waldring*
1798 -**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
1799 -**DOI:** [10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548](https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548)
1800 -**Subject Matter:** *Urban Sociology, Migration Studies, Integration* 
715 +---
1801 1801  
1802 -----
1803 -
1804 -## **Key Statistics**##
1805 -
717 +## **Key Statistics**
1806 1806  1. **General Observations:**
1807 - - Study examines the role of **people without migration background** in majority-minority cities.
1808 - - 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**.
1809 1809  
1810 1810  2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1811 - - Explores differences in **integration, social interactions, and perceptions of diversity**.
1812 - - 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**.
1813 1813  
1814 1814  3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1815 - - The study introduces the **Becoming a Minority (BaM) project**, a large-scale investigation of urban demographic shifts.
1816 - - **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**.
1817 1817  
1818 -----
730 +---
1819 1819  
1820 -## **Findings**##
1821 -
732 +## **Findings**
1822 1822  1. **Primary Observations:**
1823 - - The study **challenges traditional integration theories**, arguing that non-migrant groups also undergo adaptation processes.
1824 - - 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**.
1825 1825  
1826 1826  2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1827 - - Young, educated individuals in urban areas **are more open to cultural diversity**.
1828 - - 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**.
1829 1829  
1830 1830  3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1831 - - Examines how **people without migration background navigate majority-minority settings** in cities like Amsterdam and Vienna.
1832 - - 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**.
1833 1833  
1834 -----
745 +---
1835 1835  
1836 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1837 -
747 +## **Critique and Observations**
1838 1838  1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1839 - - **Innovative approach** by examining the impact of migration on native populations.
1840 - - 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.
1841 1841  
1842 1842  2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1843 - - Limited to **Western European urban settings**, missing perspectives from other global regions.
1844 - - 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.
1845 1845  
1846 1846  3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1847 - - Expand research to **other geographical contexts** to understand migration effects globally.
1848 - - 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.
1849 1849  
1850 -----
760 +---
1851 1851  
1852 1852  ## **Relevance to Subproject**
1853 -- Provides a **new perspective on urban integration**, shifting focus from migrants to native-born populations.
1854 -- Highlights the **role of social and economic power in shaping urban diversity outcomes**.
1855 -- 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**.
1856 1856  
1857 -----
767 +---
1858 1858  
1859 -## **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**.
1860 1860  
1861 -1. Study how **local policies shape attitudes toward urban diversity**.
1862 -2. Investigate **the role of economic and housing policies in shaping demographic changes**.
1863 -3. Explore **how social networks influence perceptions of migration and diversity**.
774 +---
1864 1864  
1865 -----
1866 -
1867 1867  ## **Summary of Research Study**
1868 -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**.
1869 1869  
1870 1870  This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis.
1871 1871  
1872 -----
781 +---
1873 1873  
1874 1874  ## **📄 Download Full Study**
1875 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]]##
1876 -{{/expand}}
784 +[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1017_thg.2013.54.pdf]]
1877 1877  
1878 -
1879 -= Media =
1880 -
1881 -
1882 -== Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic ==
1883 -
1884 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"}}
1885 -**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication*
1886 -**Date of Publication:** *2021*
1887 -**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick*
1888 -**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"*
1889 -**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003)
1890 -**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies* 
1891 -
1892 -----
1893 -
1894 -## **Key Statistics**##
1895 -
1896 -1. **General Observations:**
1897 - - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict.
1898 - - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**.
1899 -
1900 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1901 - - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility.
1902 - - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**.
1903 -
1904 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1905 - - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions.
1906 - - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**.
1907 -
1908 -----
1909 -
1910 -## **Findings**##
1911 -
1912 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1913 - - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias.
1914 - - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**.
1915 -
1916 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1917 - - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views.
1918 - - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions.
1919 -
1920 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1921 - - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces.
1922 - - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content.
1923 -
1924 -----
1925 -
1926 -## **Critique and Observations**##
1927 -
1928 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1929 - - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**.
1930 - - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**.
1931 -
1932 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1933 - - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**.
1934 - - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives.
1935 -
1936 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1937 - - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics.
1938 - - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**.
1939 -
1940 -----
1941 -
1942 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
1943 -- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**.
1944 -- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**.
1945 -- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**.##
1946 -
1947 -----
1948 -
1949 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
1950 -
1951 -1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**.
1952 -2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**.
1953 -3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**.
1954 -
1955 -----
1956 -
1957 -## **Summary of Research Study**
1958 -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**.##
1959 -
1960 -----
1961 -
1962 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
1963 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]]##
1964 1964  {{/expand}}
1965 1965  
1966 -
1967 -== Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions ==
1968 -
1969 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing on Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"}}
1970 -**Source:** *Politics & Policy*
1971 -**Date of Publication:** *2007*
1972 -**Author(s):** *Tyler Johnson*
1973 -**Title:** *"Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions"*
1974 -**DOI:** [10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x)
1975 -**Subject Matter:** *LGBTQ+ Rights, Public Opinion, Media Influence* 
1976 -
1977 -----
1978 -
1979 -## **Key Statistics**##
1980 -
1981 -1. **General Observations:**
1982 - - Examines **media coverage of same-sex marriage and civil unions from 2004 to 2011**.
1983 - - Analyzes how **media framing influences public opinion trends** on LGBTQ+ rights.
1984 -
1985 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1986 - - **Equality-based framing decreases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
1987 - - **Morality-based framing increases opposition** to same-sex marriage.
1988 -
1989 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1990 - - When **equality framing surpasses morality framing**, public opposition declines.
1991 - - Media framing **directly affects public attitudes** over time, shaping policy debates.
1992 -
1993 -----
1994 -
1995 -## **Findings**##
1996 -
1997 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1998 - - **Media framing plays a critical role in shaping attitudes** toward LGBTQ+ rights.
1999 - - **Equality-focused narratives** lead to greater public support for same-sex marriage.
2000 -
2001 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
2002 - - **Religious and conservative audiences** respond more to morality-based framing.
2003 - - **Younger and progressive audiences** respond more to equality-based framing.
2004 -
2005 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2006 - - **Periods of increased equality framing** saw measurable **declines in opposition to LGBTQ+ rights**.
2007 - - **Major political events (elections, Supreme Court cases) influenced framing trends**.
2008 -
2009 -----
2010 -
2011 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2012 -
2013 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2014 - - **Longitudinal dataset spanning multiple election cycles**.
2015 - - Provides **quantitative analysis of how media framing shifts public opinion**.
2016 -
2017 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
2018 - - Focuses **only on U.S. media coverage**, limiting global applicability.
2019 - - Does not account for **social media's growing influence** on public opinion.
2020 -
2021 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2022 - - Expand the study to **global perspectives on LGBTQ+ rights and media influence**.
2023 - - Investigate how **different media platforms (TV vs. digital media) impact opinion shifts**.
2024 -
2025 -----
2026 -
2027 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
2028 -- Explores **how media narratives shape policy support and public sentiment**.
2029 -- Highlights **the strategic importance of framing in LGBTQ+ advocacy**.
2030 -- Reinforces the need for **media literacy in understanding policy debates**.##
2031 -
2032 -----
2033 -
2034 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2035 -
2036 -1. Examine how **social media affects framing of LGBTQ+ issues**.
2037 -2. Study **differences in framing across political media outlets**.
2038 -3. Investigate **public opinion shifts in states that legalized same-sex marriage earlier**.
2039 -
2040 -----
2041 -
2042 -## **Summary of Research Study**
2043 -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**.##
2044 -
2045 -----
2046 -
2047 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
2048 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1111_j.1747-1346.2007.00092.x_abstract.pdf]]##
2049 -{{/expand}}
2050 -
2051 -
2052 -== Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion ==
2053 -
2054 -{{expand expanded="false" title="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion"}}
2055 -**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
2056 -**Date of Publication:** *2019*
2057 -**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor*
2058 -**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"*
2059 -**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021)
2060 -**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion* 
2061 -
2062 -----
2063 -
2064 -## **Key Statistics**##
2065 -
2066 -1. **General Observations:**
2067 - - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**.
2068 - - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content.
2069 -
2070 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
2071 - - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content.
2072 - - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**.
2073 -
2074 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
2075 - - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**.
2076 - - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**.
2077 -
2078 -----
2079 -
2080 -## **Findings**##
2081 -
2082 -1. **Primary Observations:**
2083 - - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted.
2084 - - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments.
2085 -
2086 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
2087 - - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites.
2088 - - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**.
2089 -
2090 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
2091 - - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content.
2092 - - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**.
2093 -
2094 -----
2095 -
2096 -## **Critique and Observations**##
2097 -
2098 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
2099 - - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons.
2100 - - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings.
2101 -
2102 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
2103 - - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up.
2104 - - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**.
2105 -
2106 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
2107 - - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions.
2108 - - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**.
2109 -
2110 -----
2111 -
2112 -## **Relevance to Subproject**
2113 -- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**.
2114 -- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**.
2115 -- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**.##
2116 -
2117 -----
2118 -
2119 -## **Suggestions for Further Exploration**##
2120 -
2121 -1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**.
2122 -2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**.
2123 -3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**.
2124 -
2125 -----
2126 -
2127 -## **Summary of Research Study**
2128 -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**.##
2129 -
2130 -----
2131 -
2132 -## **📄 Download Full Study**
2133 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]]##
2134 -{{/expand}}
788 +{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}}