<![CDATA[Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum - Ergonomics, Statistics & Logistics]]>

<![CDATA[Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum - Ergonomics, Statistics & Logistics]]> https://www.scivillage.com/ Tue, 09 Jun 2026 02:03:39 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[Making sense of America’s low fertility rate]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20602.html Mon, 08 Jun 2026 16:58:27 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20602.html https://www.wsj.com/health/wellness/us-f..._permalink

INTRO: In April, the federal government reported that America’s total fertility rate—the number of children a woman is statistically expected to have over her lifetime—had dropped to 1.57.

The alarm was immediate, with lawmakers and pundits invoking the specter of a graying, shrinking America unable to fund its elders. But experts who have spent careers studying this number had a somewhat different reaction: We’ve seen this movie before.

“Completed fertility among all U.S. women was lower for those born around 1955 than for those born around 1980, and it was much lower for college-graduate women born around 1955 than for those born around 1980,” says Claudia Goldin, a professor of economics at Harvard and a Nobel laureate who has studied women, work and family for decades. “We’ve been having this conversation for 50 years. Why is it all of a sudden a problem now?”

That isn’t to say the downward trend should be ignored... (MORE - details)]]> https://www.wsj.com/health/wellness/us-f..._permalink

INTRO: In April, the federal government reported that America’s total fertility rate—the number of children a woman is statistically expected to have over her lifetime—had dropped to 1.57.

The alarm was immediate, with lawmakers and pundits invoking the specter of a graying, shrinking America unable to fund its elders. But experts who have spent careers studying this number had a somewhat different reaction: We’ve seen this movie before.

“Completed fertility among all U.S. women was lower for those born around 1955 than for those born around 1980, and it was much lower for college-graduate women born around 1955 than for those born around 1980,” says Claudia Goldin, a professor of economics at Harvard and a Nobel laureate who has studied women, work and family for decades. “We’ve been having this conversation for 50 years. Why is it all of a sudden a problem now?”

That isn’t to say the downward trend should be ignored... (MORE - details)]]> <![CDATA[Many more US voters support gay candidates, but only if they look and act ‘straight’]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20561.html Tue, 02 Jun 2026 01:00:37 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20561.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1130385

INTRO: The period between 2018 and 2022, sometimes referred to as “the rainbow wave,” featured an unprecedented increase in LGBTQ candidates elected to office. Pete Buttigieg’s rise (from mayor of South Bend, Indiana, to U.S. secretary of transportation with a 2020 bid for president in between) sparked a national dialogue about whether gay candidates no longer faced an electoral penalty at the ballot box.

A new study from Northwestern University sought to answer whether Americans have moved past prejudices against gay people, and what kind of gay candidates face little to no electoral penalty. The research reveals American voters are more accepting of gay candidates than at any point in our history, but acceptance is conditional and varies by political party.

The paper, “The Right Kind of (Gay) Man? Sexuality, Gender Presentation and Heteronormative Constraints on Electability,” recently published in the Journal of Politics. The lead author Martin Naunov, an assistant professor of political science and a faculty associate at the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern, found strikingly different implications for being gay in American politics versus acting and looking gay.

The study found Republican voters continue to penalize candidates for being gay and for being even slightly gender nonconforming. Among Democratic and young voters, the anti-gay penalty has partly vanished and partly shifted to penalizing candidates who look or sound slightly gender nonconforming.

“On the left, the bias against gay candidates has moved from ‘don’t be gay’ to ‘don’t look or sound gay,’” Naunov said. “Voters across the political spectrum, including those who think of themselves as allies, still show bias against candidates who look or sound even slightly gender nonconforming — a key cultural marker of gayness. This has real consequences for who gets elected and represented in public life.”

The study is the first to introduce gender presentation — the masculinity or femininity of a candidate’s appearance — into the debate over electability, and separate sexuality and gender presentation as two related but distinct biases that earlier political science studies have conflated.

The study also breaks new ground as the first political science experiment to examine both between-group and within-group discrimination. The existing literature has studied whether voters reject a group outright (gay vs. straight, Black vs. white, immigrant vs. native), overlooking a second, more insidious bias: those who embody visible markers of their minority identity.

Individuals with markers of a minority identity such as a gay candidate with a lisp, an immigrant job applicant with an accent or a Black defendant who speaks African American Vernacular English can face penalties even from people who reject anti-gay, anti-immigrant or anti-Black bias at the entire group level.

“In the real world, bias rarely operates on group identities alone. It operates on the physical markers that make identity distinctive and visible,” Naunov said. “Bias often targets a substantial subset of the minority group who may face penalties even from people who reject anti-gay bias at the group level.” (MORE - no ads)
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Since most LGBT+ candidates are going to be Democrats, it's a tad glaring not to take that into account as a factor in Republican voting. Correspondingly, left-wing voters aren't going to vote for Black conservatives, etc, either.]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1130385

INTRO: The period between 2018 and 2022, sometimes referred to as “the rainbow wave,” featured an unprecedented increase in LGBTQ candidates elected to office. Pete Buttigieg’s rise (from mayor of South Bend, Indiana, to U.S. secretary of transportation with a 2020 bid for president in between) sparked a national dialogue about whether gay candidates no longer faced an electoral penalty at the ballot box.

A new study from Northwestern University sought to answer whether Americans have moved past prejudices against gay people, and what kind of gay candidates face little to no electoral penalty. The research reveals American voters are more accepting of gay candidates than at any point in our history, but acceptance is conditional and varies by political party.

The paper, “The Right Kind of (Gay) Man? Sexuality, Gender Presentation and Heteronormative Constraints on Electability,” recently published in the Journal of Politics. The lead author Martin Naunov, an assistant professor of political science and a faculty associate at the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern, found strikingly different implications for being gay in American politics versus acting and looking gay.

The study found Republican voters continue to penalize candidates for being gay and for being even slightly gender nonconforming. Among Democratic and young voters, the anti-gay penalty has partly vanished and partly shifted to penalizing candidates who look or sound slightly gender nonconforming.

“On the left, the bias against gay candidates has moved from ‘don’t be gay’ to ‘don’t look or sound gay,’” Naunov said. “Voters across the political spectrum, including those who think of themselves as allies, still show bias against candidates who look or sound even slightly gender nonconforming — a key cultural marker of gayness. This has real consequences for who gets elected and represented in public life.”

The study is the first to introduce gender presentation — the masculinity or femininity of a candidate’s appearance — into the debate over electability, and separate sexuality and gender presentation as two related but distinct biases that earlier political science studies have conflated.

The study also breaks new ground as the first political science experiment to examine both between-group and within-group discrimination. The existing literature has studied whether voters reject a group outright (gay vs. straight, Black vs. white, immigrant vs. native), overlooking a second, more insidious bias: those who embody visible markers of their minority identity.

Individuals with markers of a minority identity such as a gay candidate with a lisp, an immigrant job applicant with an accent or a Black defendant who speaks African American Vernacular English can face penalties even from people who reject anti-gay, anti-immigrant or anti-Black bias at the entire group level.

“In the real world, bias rarely operates on group identities alone. It operates on the physical markers that make identity distinctive and visible,” Naunov said. “Bias often targets a substantial subset of the minority group who may face penalties even from people who reject anti-gay bias at the group level.” (MORE - no ads)
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Since most LGBT+ candidates are going to be Democrats, it's a tad glaring not to take that into account as a factor in Republican voting. Correspondingly, left-wing voters aren't going to vote for Black conservatives, etc, either.]]> <![CDATA[Severe UC math deficits resulting from dropping entry testing standards due to DEI]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20542.html Fri, 29 May 2026 19:42:05 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20542.html Citing ‘severe’ math deficits, UC faculty demand a return to SAT tests for STEM applicants
https://www.latimes.com/california/story...admissions

KEY POINTS: Hundreds of UC faculty are urging a return of SAT or ACT test requirements for STEM applicants, citing math deficits after six years of being test-free. A UC San Diego report of soaring math unpreparedness is fueling faculty warnings that reliable testing is needed for admissions. Critics call the SAT inequitable and say high school grades are a good predictor of college success.

EXCERPTS: UC gained national attention in May 2020 when regents unanimously voted to suspend SAT and ACT testing requirements and eliminate them entirely by 2025. Board members cited concerns the tests were biased against students of color and those from lower-income families — including students who did not have access to prep courses.

[...] “Something had changed drastically. The bottom was taken out, and there were 25 to 30% of the students who were in free fall. There was nothing you could do for them. They were just not prepared.”

Stankova said her colleagues were bracing for sharp criticism. “Our letter is going to be attacked from all sides,” she said. The math professor argued that the SAT push was in aid of disadvantaged students.

“I don’t see SAT hurting diversity. I actually see it helping it, because you have right now the lack of SATs hurting the underrepresented minorities. You give them a ticket, an entrance ticket to a great university system like UC, only that they fail. How is that diversity?” Stankova said.

Not all see a return to testing as the best path. A September 2025 report by Saul Geiser of the UC Berkeley Center for Studies in Higher Education and a former senior UC admissions official, said the SAT is “a poor fit for America’s public universities.”

Geiser argued that the high school GPA outperforms the SAT in predicting first-year student success once income and race are controlled. He also argued that ranking applicants by SAT scores ends up disadvantaging high-achieving low-income, first-generation and underrepresented minorities... (MORE - missing details)]]> Citing ‘severe’ math deficits, UC faculty demand a return to SAT tests for STEM applicants
https://www.latimes.com/california/story...admissions

KEY POINTS: Hundreds of UC faculty are urging a return of SAT or ACT test requirements for STEM applicants, citing math deficits after six years of being test-free. A UC San Diego report of soaring math unpreparedness is fueling faculty warnings that reliable testing is needed for admissions. Critics call the SAT inequitable and say high school grades are a good predictor of college success.

EXCERPTS: UC gained national attention in May 2020 when regents unanimously voted to suspend SAT and ACT testing requirements and eliminate them entirely by 2025. Board members cited concerns the tests were biased against students of color and those from lower-income families — including students who did not have access to prep courses.

[...] “Something had changed drastically. The bottom was taken out, and there were 25 to 30% of the students who were in free fall. There was nothing you could do for them. They were just not prepared.”

Stankova said her colleagues were bracing for sharp criticism. “Our letter is going to be attacked from all sides,” she said. The math professor argued that the SAT push was in aid of disadvantaged students.

“I don’t see SAT hurting diversity. I actually see it helping it, because you have right now the lack of SATs hurting the underrepresented minorities. You give them a ticket, an entrance ticket to a great university system like UC, only that they fail. How is that diversity?” Stankova said.

Not all see a return to testing as the best path. A September 2025 report by Saul Geiser of the UC Berkeley Center for Studies in Higher Education and a former senior UC admissions official, said the SAT is “a poor fit for America’s public universities.”

Geiser argued that the high school GPA outperforms the SAT in predicting first-year student success once income and race are controlled. He also argued that ranking applicants by SAT scores ends up disadvantaging high-achieving low-income, first-generation and underrepresented minorities... (MORE - missing details)]]> <![CDATA[Demographic forces stall global progress toward gender equality]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20521.html Wed, 27 May 2026 01:05:31 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20521.html Demographic forces stall global progress toward gender equality
https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/artic...us/pgag133

PRESS RELEASE: Average support for gender equality worldwide has plateaued, in part because of higher population growth in countries where support is low and higher fertility among those with less egalitarian views. Public support for women’s equal participation in education, paid work, and politics has increased in many countries but stagnated globally.

Plamen Akaliyski, Catherine Bowen, and colleagues turned to the World Values Survey and European Values Study, which cover 86% of the global population, to explore dynamics in gender equality opinions around the world. The authors analyzed data from 78 countries from 1995 to 2022, focusing on three questions regarding women’s equal right to paid work, the equal importance of university education for boys and girls, and women’s equal suitability as political leaders.

The results indicate that Western countries are trending more egalitarian. Western countries, however, show slow or even negative population growth. Conversely, countries in West and South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and North African-Islamic cultural zones have become less egalitarian over time and show high population growth.

A similar pattern also occurs at the individual level. In the most recent wave of the World Values Survey and European Values Study, women with less egalitarian views had more children by the time they reached their 40s and also had children earlier in life. As parents tend to transmit their gender-related views to their children, differential fertility is likely to raise the proportion of people with less egalitarian views within national populations.

According to the authors, differential population growth and differential fertility within countries have counteracted the trend toward increasing gender egalitarianism.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The West compensates for less reproduction among its non-fundamentalist population by coaching and culturally recruiting the traditionalist children via the educational system and other outlet exposure. Clearly the latter isn't as secular or tuned-in to the output of the humanities and social sciences in these ab-Western countries.]]> Demographic forces stall global progress toward gender equality
https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/artic...us/pgag133

PRESS RELEASE: Average support for gender equality worldwide has plateaued, in part because of higher population growth in countries where support is low and higher fertility among those with less egalitarian views. Public support for women’s equal participation in education, paid work, and politics has increased in many countries but stagnated globally.

Plamen Akaliyski, Catherine Bowen, and colleagues turned to the World Values Survey and European Values Study, which cover 86% of the global population, to explore dynamics in gender equality opinions around the world. The authors analyzed data from 78 countries from 1995 to 2022, focusing on three questions regarding women’s equal right to paid work, the equal importance of university education for boys and girls, and women’s equal suitability as political leaders.

The results indicate that Western countries are trending more egalitarian. Western countries, however, show slow or even negative population growth. Conversely, countries in West and South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and North African-Islamic cultural zones have become less egalitarian over time and show high population growth.

A similar pattern also occurs at the individual level. In the most recent wave of the World Values Survey and European Values Study, women with less egalitarian views had more children by the time they reached their 40s and also had children earlier in life. As parents tend to transmit their gender-related views to their children, differential fertility is likely to raise the proportion of people with less egalitarian views within national populations.

According to the authors, differential population growth and differential fertility within countries have counteracted the trend toward increasing gender egalitarianism.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The West compensates for less reproduction among its non-fundamentalist population by coaching and culturally recruiting the traditionalist children via the educational system and other outlet exposure. Clearly the latter isn't as secular or tuned-in to the output of the humanities and social sciences in these ab-Western countries.]]> <![CDATA[Overpopulation can impair fertility. New study explains why (demographic decline)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20484.html Thu, 21 May 2026 18:41:20 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20484.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1129213

INTRO: Scientists have reported it for decades: Overpopulation can impair reproduction. Crowded chickens lay fewer eggs. Crowded mice have smaller broods. In humans, several studies have associated increased population density with reduced fertility.

External factors, such as resource scarcity and social influences, undoubtedly play a role. But researchers have long suspected that intrinsic, biological mechanisms may also be at play as an evolutionary tool to keep populations in check.

New University of Colorado Boulder research, published this month in the journal Nature Communications, identifies one key mechanism. It found that overcrowded animals secrete a chemical messenger that can damage eggs, impair embryos and cause genetic mutations in offspring for generations to come.

“It has been well documented that population density has a direct and negative impact on human and animal fertility, but the underlying mechanisms have been elusive,” said senior author Ding Xue, professor of molecular, cellular and developmental biology at CU Boulder. “Our study provides novel insights into how overpopulation can cause various developmental defects, including reduced fertility and increased mortality.”

The study comes as the world population nears 8.3 billion— three times what it was in 1950. Meanwhile, the authors note, birth rates are on the decline. Worldwide, the fertility rate has gone from five births per woman in 1950 to 2.3 births in 2021. According to the World Health Organization, one in six people experience infertility (defined as the inability to achieve a pregnancy after 12 months of trying).

“Overpopulation and crowding stress have emerged as major challenges in contemporary societies, especially in urban cities, where two-thirds of the world population live,” said Xue. “Our study may provide important molecular insights into the underlying health problems that can come with it.” (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1129213

INTRO: Scientists have reported it for decades: Overpopulation can impair reproduction. Crowded chickens lay fewer eggs. Crowded mice have smaller broods. In humans, several studies have associated increased population density with reduced fertility.

External factors, such as resource scarcity and social influences, undoubtedly play a role. But researchers have long suspected that intrinsic, biological mechanisms may also be at play as an evolutionary tool to keep populations in check.

New University of Colorado Boulder research, published this month in the journal Nature Communications, identifies one key mechanism. It found that overcrowded animals secrete a chemical messenger that can damage eggs, impair embryos and cause genetic mutations in offspring for generations to come.

“It has been well documented that population density has a direct and negative impact on human and animal fertility, but the underlying mechanisms have been elusive,” said senior author Ding Xue, professor of molecular, cellular and developmental biology at CU Boulder. “Our study provides novel insights into how overpopulation can cause various developmental defects, including reduced fertility and increased mortality.”

The study comes as the world population nears 8.3 billion— three times what it was in 1950. Meanwhile, the authors note, birth rates are on the decline. Worldwide, the fertility rate has gone from five births per woman in 1950 to 2.3 births in 2021. According to the World Health Organization, one in six people experience infertility (defined as the inability to achieve a pregnancy after 12 months of trying).

“Overpopulation and crowding stress have emerged as major challenges in contemporary societies, especially in urban cities, where two-thirds of the world population live,” said Xue. “Our study may provide important molecular insights into the underlying health problems that can come with it.” (MORE - no ads)]]> <![CDATA[Nearly 10% of surgeons are leaving the profession within 8 years]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20478.html Wed, 20 May 2026 22:19:07 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20478.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1128983

EXCERPTS: Nearly one in 10 surgeons leave active clinical practice within eight years. Highest losses were in oral and maxillofacial surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, and plastic and reconstructive surgery; mid-career surgeons are most at risk. Across the surgical profession, the percentage of rural surgeons has shrunk while the percentage of female surgeons has increased.

[...] While the study doesn’t examine why surgeons are leaving, it does show where policy changes and support are most needed, according to the researchers. “By identifying who is most likely to leave, we can create targeted retention strategies to support surgeons most likely to leave, and close these gaps,” said Pawlik... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1128983

EXCERPTS: Nearly one in 10 surgeons leave active clinical practice within eight years. Highest losses were in oral and maxillofacial surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, and plastic and reconstructive surgery; mid-career surgeons are most at risk. Across the surgical profession, the percentage of rural surgeons has shrunk while the percentage of female surgeons has increased.

[...] While the study doesn’t examine why surgeons are leaving, it does show where policy changes and support are most needed, according to the researchers. “By identifying who is most likely to leave, we can create targeted retention strategies to support surgeons most likely to leave, and close these gaps,” said Pawlik... (MORE - no ads)]]> <![CDATA[To create change, new leaders should read the room]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20426.html Thu, 14 May 2026 00:34:37 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20426.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1128160

EXCERPTS: When Ted Lasso became the coach of last-place AFC Richmond in a popular television show, he jumped in with a can-do coaching style that ignited a team ready for change. Like Lasso, new leaders are more likely than their predecessors to improve motivation and organizational performance — but only if employees already believe change is needed.

However, a change-oriented style is also more likely to backfire for a new leader than for their predecessor. That can happen if organization members are satisfied with the status quo under the previous leader.

So finds new research from David Harrison, associate dean for research and Charles and Elizabeth Prothro Regents Distinguished University Chair in Business Administration at the McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin. “Leaders who come into a position with their own agenda or prior style will only succeed if that style happens to be a fit with the top manager behaviors the employees want to see,” Harrison says.

[...] To succeed at organizational change, a leader needs to hit a sweet spot among three interacting factors, the study finds. Being the new leader on the block. Incumbents are mostly ineffectual in creating change — both positive and negative.

“Employees are just not responsive to them,” Harrison says. “They pay far less attention to the known quantity that is the continuing leader.”

By contrast, “A new leader grabs attention. Employees are looking to that person to signal what they’re all going to do.”

Existing attitudes. Successors have a window of opportunity to create change, but they need to read the room, Harrison says. Their style must align with the behaviors employees want to see. If an organization has been having problems, employees are more likely to be hungry for change, he adds. “What they want to see depends on how well or poorly the organization is doing.” (MORE - missing details, no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1128160

EXCERPTS: When Ted Lasso became the coach of last-place AFC Richmond in a popular television show, he jumped in with a can-do coaching style that ignited a team ready for change. Like Lasso, new leaders are more likely than their predecessors to improve motivation and organizational performance — but only if employees already believe change is needed.

However, a change-oriented style is also more likely to backfire for a new leader than for their predecessor. That can happen if organization members are satisfied with the status quo under the previous leader.

So finds new research from David Harrison, associate dean for research and Charles and Elizabeth Prothro Regents Distinguished University Chair in Business Administration at the McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin. “Leaders who come into a position with their own agenda or prior style will only succeed if that style happens to be a fit with the top manager behaviors the employees want to see,” Harrison says.

[...] To succeed at organizational change, a leader needs to hit a sweet spot among three interacting factors, the study finds. Being the new leader on the block. Incumbents are mostly ineffectual in creating change — both positive and negative.

“Employees are just not responsive to them,” Harrison says. “They pay far less attention to the known quantity that is the continuing leader.”

By contrast, “A new leader grabs attention. Employees are looking to that person to signal what they’re all going to do.”

Existing attitudes. Successors have a window of opportunity to create change, but they need to read the room, Harrison says. Their style must align with the behaviors employees want to see. If an organization has been having problems, employees are more likely to be hungry for change, he adds. “What they want to see depends on how well or poorly the organization is doing.” (MORE - missing details, no ads)]]> <![CDATA[Why only rich kids and family connected ones can make it in today's music industry]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20412.html Mon, 11 May 2026 19:21:29 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20412.html Elite, privileged backgrounds and lack of authentic personal hardship stories supposedly thus compensated for by lots of social justice posturing and allegorical sermons hinting that "this is what makes me morally superior to you narrow-minded proles in flyover country."
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

VIDEO EXCERPT: If you look back historically, bands like The Beatles, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, The Who, The Kinks, Nirvana, Allison Chains, Sound Garden, Pearl Jam, Smashing Pumpkins, Oasis, The White Stripes... These are all working class bands that come from very humble beginnings and can tell stories based on their upbringing. Something that rich people frankly can't do.

Rick Beato .... https://youtu.be/sjJrR1OdAIg

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/sjJrR1OdAIg]]> Elite, privileged backgrounds and lack of authentic personal hardship stories supposedly thus compensated for by lots of social justice posturing and allegorical sermons hinting that "this is what makes me morally superior to you narrow-minded proles in flyover country."
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

VIDEO EXCERPT: If you look back historically, bands like The Beatles, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, The Who, The Kinks, Nirvana, Allison Chains, Sound Garden, Pearl Jam, Smashing Pumpkins, Oasis, The White Stripes... These are all working class bands that come from very humble beginnings and can tell stories based on their upbringing. Something that rich people frankly can't do.

Rick Beato .... https://youtu.be/sjJrR1OdAIg

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/sjJrR1OdAIg]]> <![CDATA[Dads are dying after their kids are born, and no one is tracking it (data)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20362.html Mon, 04 May 2026 16:43:12 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20362.html https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1126420

INTRO: It took the better part of a century for maternal mortality to be recognized, forgotten and finally recognized again as an urgent public health crisis in the United States. In contrast, research shows fathers — particularly men in their 20s through early 40s — die disproportionately from preventable causes such as suicide, overdose, homicide and accidental injury. Yet paternal mortality is rarely examined in connection to the transition to parenthood.

Northwestern University scientists are trying to change that.

A new Northwestern study examined all 130,267 babies born in Georgia in 2017 and tracked whether their fathers died at any point during the following five years, through 2022. Of those fathers who died within five years (796), 60% of the deaths were preventable, which the study authors call a “huge, missed opportunity.” These deaths resulted from homicide (143), accidental injury (142), suicide (102) or overdose (93), while 296 fathers died of natural causes.

The study was published May 4 in JAMA Pediatrics.

While maternal mortality review committees focus specifically and in depth on deaths of mothers in the first year of a child’s life, this is, to the researchers’ knowledge, the first study published in a major medical journal to examine paternal mortality in the years following a child’s birth.

“Our data show that fathers die frequently in the first years of their child’s life, and we have no systems in place to understand how we might prevent it,” said corresponding author Dr. Craig Garfield, professor of pediatrics and medical social sciences at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. “That’s a huge blind spot.”

The findings echo what maternal mortality research has long shown: Deaths around the transition to parenthood are shaped less by biology than by social vulnerability, and many are preventable — even as paternal deaths remain largely uncounted and unaddressed. Prior research has shown that paternal involvement is linked to better child and family health outcomes, while paternal absence is associated with a range of adverse outcomes for children... (MORE - no ads)]]> https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1126420

INTRO: It took the better part of a century for maternal mortality to be recognized, forgotten and finally recognized again as an urgent public health crisis in the United States. In contrast, research shows fathers — particularly men in their 20s through early 40s — die disproportionately from preventable causes such as suicide, overdose, homicide and accidental injury. Yet paternal mortality is rarely examined in connection to the transition to parenthood.

Northwestern University scientists are trying to change that.

A new Northwestern study examined all 130,267 babies born in Georgia in 2017 and tracked whether their fathers died at any point during the following five years, through 2022. Of those fathers who died within five years (796), 60% of the deaths were preventable, which the study authors call a “huge, missed opportunity.” These deaths resulted from homicide (143), accidental injury (142), suicide (102) or overdose (93), while 296 fathers died of natural causes.

The study was published May 4 in JAMA Pediatrics.

While maternal mortality review committees focus specifically and in depth on deaths of mothers in the first year of a child’s life, this is, to the researchers’ knowledge, the first study published in a major medical journal to examine paternal mortality in the years following a child’s birth.

“Our data show that fathers die frequently in the first years of their child’s life, and we have no systems in place to understand how we might prevent it,” said corresponding author Dr. Craig Garfield, professor of pediatrics and medical social sciences at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. “That’s a huge blind spot.”

The findings echo what maternal mortality research has long shown: Deaths around the transition to parenthood are shaped less by biology than by social vulnerability, and many are preventable — even as paternal deaths remain largely uncounted and unaddressed. Prior research has shown that paternal involvement is linked to better child and family health outcomes, while paternal absence is associated with a range of adverse outcomes for children... (MORE - no ads)]]> <![CDATA[Human languages: four surprising laws behind their evolution (statistical structure)]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20342.html Fri, 01 May 2026 16:57:53 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20342.html Universal patterns emerge in human languages, revealing “four surprising laws” behind their evolution
https://thedebrief.org/universal-pattern...evolution/

EXCERPTS: Human languages as disparate as English, Japanese, and Russian follow remarkably similar evolutionary paths, according to a new AI study, which investigated how new concepts were added over time.

Researchers from Fudan, Harvard, and Stony Brook Universities revealed their findings in a recent paper published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, based on their work across 21 languages, many of which are separated by time, going back to the medieval period, as well as distance.

[...] “We were inspired by the idea that AI technologies for representing language semantics (word embeddings) give us a rigorous way to reason about the evolution of language,” Dr. Skiena said. “With word embeddings, each distinct vocabulary is associated with a particular point in a high-dimensional feature space. Words with similar meanings are represented by nearby points.”

“In essence,” Dr. Skiena continued, “our paper asks how the vocabulary of languages distributed in this feature space, and what kind of mathematical process would create a similar distribution.”

[...] The challenge was producing a model that captured how real languages evolve. “We wanted to prove that certain mathematical models generated embedding spaces that look very much like real natural languages,” Dr. Skiena said. “But what do real natural languages look like?”

“We had to develop a set of four surprising laws/principles that govern the structure of real languages,” Dr. Skiena added, “and then prove that our favored mathematical model generates embedding spaces that also had these unusual properties.”

“I think of cultural influences as the force that shapes the evolution of languages, but it is clear that the brain shapes these cultural influences,” Dr. Skiena said, regarding the similarities the researchers found among different languages. Co-author Dr. Sergiy Verstyuk added, in a conversation with The Debrief, that although there are potential connections between their work and neuroscience studies, that was not the direct aim of their work.

Among the commonalities the researchers discovered was that popular words were often clustered with other popular words in specific regions of the mathematical space. Additionally, the hierarchy of this type of clustering was quite similar between many languages. Word creation usually occurred in bursts, with recent words surrounding other recent words, as new concepts entered the vernacular, similar to the periodicity of rapid change in biological evolution... (MORE - missing details)]]> Universal patterns emerge in human languages, revealing “four surprising laws” behind their evolution
https://thedebrief.org/universal-pattern...evolution/

EXCERPTS: Human languages as disparate as English, Japanese, and Russian follow remarkably similar evolutionary paths, according to a new AI study, which investigated how new concepts were added over time.

Researchers from Fudan, Harvard, and Stony Brook Universities revealed their findings in a recent paper published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, based on their work across 21 languages, many of which are separated by time, going back to the medieval period, as well as distance.

[...] “We were inspired by the idea that AI technologies for representing language semantics (word embeddings) give us a rigorous way to reason about the evolution of language,” Dr. Skiena said. “With word embeddings, each distinct vocabulary is associated with a particular point in a high-dimensional feature space. Words with similar meanings are represented by nearby points.”

“In essence,” Dr. Skiena continued, “our paper asks how the vocabulary of languages distributed in this feature space, and what kind of mathematical process would create a similar distribution.”

[...] The challenge was producing a model that captured how real languages evolve. “We wanted to prove that certain mathematical models generated embedding spaces that look very much like real natural languages,” Dr. Skiena said. “But what do real natural languages look like?”

“We had to develop a set of four surprising laws/principles that govern the structure of real languages,” Dr. Skiena added, “and then prove that our favored mathematical model generates embedding spaces that also had these unusual properties.”

“I think of cultural influences as the force that shapes the evolution of languages, but it is clear that the brain shapes these cultural influences,” Dr. Skiena said, regarding the similarities the researchers found among different languages. Co-author Dr. Sergiy Verstyuk added, in a conversation with The Debrief, that although there are potential connections between their work and neuroscience studies, that was not the direct aim of their work.

Among the commonalities the researchers discovered was that popular words were often clustered with other popular words in specific regions of the mathematical space. Additionally, the hierarchy of this type of clustering was quite similar between many languages. Word creation usually occurred in bursts, with recent words surrounding other recent words, as new concepts entered the vernacular, similar to the periodicity of rapid change in biological evolution... (MORE - missing details)]]> <![CDATA[Orange County residents take pragmatic view on immigration]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20313.html Tue, 28 Apr 2026 16:12:34 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20313.html Of course, what's hilarious here is the continued conflation of legal immigration (processed influx) with unauthorized migration (the latter being the actual crux of conflict). The absurdity of academicians lacking the conceptual capacity to distinguish between the two categories merely highlights that tendency's origin in political tactics rather than actual neutral examination, interpretation, and description.
- - - - - - - - - - -

Orange County residents take pragmatic view on immigration
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1125846

INTRO: New UCI-OC Poll reveals broad support for immigration’s benefits, selective enforcement backing, sharp partisan divides
Reports and Proceedings

ddA new poll released today by UC Irvine's School of Social Ecology finds that Orange County residents hold broadly positive but carefully qualified views on immigration, reflecting the county’s deep ties to immigrant communities and its status as one of the nation’s most politically balanced — or “purple” — counties.

The UCI–OC Poll, conducted in partnership with TrueDot from March 24–31, surveyed 1,202 Orange County adults in English and Spanish. The survey says:

Nearly 40% of Orange County residents were raised by two foreign-born parents, and more than one-third report personally knowing someone who is undocumented.
More residents say immigration helps the country (44%) than hurts it (27%) while 21% say its effects balance out.
Large majorities say immigration fills essential low-wage jobs (76%), enriches civic life (67%), attracts high-skilled workers (56%), and creates new businesses and jobs (53%).
By more than a 2:1 margin, Independents believe the benefits of immigration outweigh the costs.

“What we see in Orange County is a public that resists simple characterization,” said Jon B. Gould, dean of the UCI’s School of Social Ecology and director of the UCI-OC Poll. “Residents broadly recognize the benefits of immigration and support integrating many undocumented immigrants into society, but they also draw clear lines around enforcement and policy design. This is a pragmatic county.”[/list]
On policy, residents favor a measured approach:

A clear majority (67%) supports a pathway to legal status for undocumented immigrants over deportation, while 72% support automatic deportation for those convicted of violent crimes.
Support for deportation drops sharply for non-violent offenders (23%), the unemployed (16%), and recent arrivals (11%).

Nearly 40% of Orange County residents were raised by two foreign-born parents, and more than one-third report personally knowing someone who is undocumented.
More residents say immigration helps the country (44%) than hurts it (27%) while 21% say its effects balance out.
Large majorities say immigration fills essential low-wage jobs (76%), enriches civic life (67%), attracts high-skilled workers (56%), and creates new businesses and jobs (53%).
By more than a 2:1 margin, Independents believe the benefits of immigration outweigh the costs.

A clear majority (67%) supports a pathway to legal status for undocumented immigrants over deportation, while 72% support automatic deportation for those convicted of violent crimes.
Support for deportation drops sharply for non-violent offenders (23%), the unemployed (16%), and recent arrivals (11%).

There is broad cross-partisan agreement that U.S. veterans who are undocumented should never be deported, according to the poll. Views diverge, however, on DACA recipients, employed individuals, and parents of U.S. citizens, with Democrats and Independents more likely than Republicans to extend those protections...(MORE - no ads)]]> <![CDATA[To improve social and political dialogue, tell people what you're against]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20245.html Tue, 21 Apr 2026 20:37:38 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20245.html https://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/news-even...ou-oppose/

PRESS RELEASE: In a world that feels like it's growing more negative by the day it may be a surprise that talking about what we're against has its value, at least when it comes to engaging people who disagree with us.

Over a series of studies with nearly 6,000 people, researcher Rhia Catapano tested what happened when participants were presented with viewpoints they disagreed with and how open they were to them when those viewpoints were expressed in support terms instead of oppositional ones. Think of "I support abortion rights," versus "I'm against making abortion illegal."

Turns out, those two ways of expressing the same idea can land very differently with someone else. And we're really good at getting that wrong.

"It’s often difficult to meaningfully take the perspective of someone who we disagree with," explains Catapano, an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management. She conducted the research with Stanford University's Zakary L. Tormala.

"When people want to understand what will make others receptive, they think about what would make themselves receptive," says Prof. Catapano. "Unfortunately, people who disagree with us are frequently not receptive to the same things we are."

Study participants generally believed that other people with opposing viewpoints to their own would be more open when the viewpoint was expressed in a pro-support way. But that is not how they responded when the shoe was on the other foot.

Whether the topic was abortion, gun control or taxing the rich, participants reported being less open to a different viewpoint when it was presented using pro-support language. They also tended to believe the holder of that viewpoint was more certain and extreme in their position. Participants shown simulated Reddit posts with perspectives that did not match their own were more likely to keep reading if the post talked about what the poster was against instead of what they were for.

That was not the case though when two parties agreed on an issue. There, engagement was better when the argument was framed in a pro-support way.

The mechanism behind those nuanced dynamics, the researchers found, is our perception of how our values line up with someone else's. When someone uses pro-support language to express a perspective we disagree with, we tend to see them as more out of step with our own values than when they talk about what they're against.

Still, when it comes to the public square, "almost every cause identifies itself based on what it supports," says Prof. Catapano, which ultimately may alienate those the cause most wishes to engage.

And while her findings don't offer a panacea to the polarization we find ourselves in, she believes that they point to simple changes that may help, even in a world of division. "A person doesn’t need to change their mindset, or even the arguments that they’re making -- they just have to change the framing of their arguments," the researcher says. "The hope is that by using many small levers, we can improve dialogues little by little."

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.]]> https://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/news-even...ou-oppose/

PRESS RELEASE: In a world that feels like it's growing more negative by the day it may be a surprise that talking about what we're against has its value, at least when it comes to engaging people who disagree with us.

Over a series of studies with nearly 6,000 people, researcher Rhia Catapano tested what happened when participants were presented with viewpoints they disagreed with and how open they were to them when those viewpoints were expressed in support terms instead of oppositional ones. Think of "I support abortion rights," versus "I'm against making abortion illegal."

Turns out, those two ways of expressing the same idea can land very differently with someone else. And we're really good at getting that wrong.

"It’s often difficult to meaningfully take the perspective of someone who we disagree with," explains Catapano, an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management. She conducted the research with Stanford University's Zakary L. Tormala.

"When people want to understand what will make others receptive, they think about what would make themselves receptive," says Prof. Catapano. "Unfortunately, people who disagree with us are frequently not receptive to the same things we are."

Study participants generally believed that other people with opposing viewpoints to their own would be more open when the viewpoint was expressed in a pro-support way. But that is not how they responded when the shoe was on the other foot.

Whether the topic was abortion, gun control or taxing the rich, participants reported being less open to a different viewpoint when it was presented using pro-support language. They also tended to believe the holder of that viewpoint was more certain and extreme in their position. Participants shown simulated Reddit posts with perspectives that did not match their own were more likely to keep reading if the post talked about what the poster was against instead of what they were for.

That was not the case though when two parties agreed on an issue. There, engagement was better when the argument was framed in a pro-support way.

The mechanism behind those nuanced dynamics, the researchers found, is our perception of how our values line up with someone else's. When someone uses pro-support language to express a perspective we disagree with, we tend to see them as more out of step with our own values than when they talk about what they're against.

Still, when it comes to the public square, "almost every cause identifies itself based on what it supports," says Prof. Catapano, which ultimately may alienate those the cause most wishes to engage.

And while her findings don't offer a panacea to the polarization we find ourselves in, she believes that they point to simple changes that may help, even in a world of division. "A person doesn’t need to change their mindset, or even the arguments that they’re making -- they just have to change the framing of their arguments," the researcher says. "The hope is that by using many small levers, we can improve dialogues little by little."

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.]]> <![CDATA[AI makes granular pricing easier, but consumer psychology may make it less profitable]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20223.html Sat, 18 Apr 2026 21:12:17 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20223.html https://www.informs.org/News-Room/INFORM...Profitable

PRESS RELEASE: Big data, artificial intelligence and advanced pricing algorithms make it easier than ever for companies to fine-tune prices for individual products to closely reflect their unique value and cost. The conventional wisdom is straightforward: better data, better algorithms and sharper segmentation should produce better profits. But new research suggests that the most profitable answer isn’t always more fine-grained pricing across a product line. In fact, it is fewer, better-chosen price points.

The study, titled “Consumer-Driven Class Pricing,” is by Zuhui Xiao from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Class pricing is a surprisingly widespread feature of everyday markets: the practice of assigning a small number of price points to a much larger assortment of related products. Think of a bar menu with many draft beers but only three price points, or a supermarket aisle with hundreds of SKUs but a dozen distinct shelf prices. Similar patterns extend to fast-moving consumer goods, restaurants, toys, discount stores, convenience retail, budget travel, books and car rentals.

The rationale for class pricing is not just operational simplicity; it is consumer psychology. Consumers do not evaluate prices in isolation. Rather, they form price expectations across the products in front of them and compare what they pay with what they expected to pay for nearby alternatives. Paying more than expected is perceived as a psychological loss, while paying less than expected is perceived as a psychological gain.

Xiao finds that the key driver of class pricing is “loss aversion,” the well-established tendency for people to be more sensitive to perceived losses than to equivalent gains. In this context, consumers feel the pain of paying more than expected more intensely than they appreciate the pleasure of paying less than expected.

“When firms introduce more granular pricing, it triggers consumers’ direct comparison of prices,” said Xiao. “Consumers perceive higher-priced items as losses relative to cheaper alternatives and tend to resent higher prices more than they reward lower ones. As a result, the price disadvantage of higher-priced items is psychologically amplified, making them look worse than the underlying price difference alone would suggest.”

Because of this amplified price disadvantage, even when higher-priced products carry greater prestige, better taste or higher quality, firms cannot fully translate that stronger appeal into sufficiently higher willingness to pay. At the same time, they must keep lower-priced products cheap enough to attract additional demand. The result is an asymmetry: firms give up more on the lower-priced products than they can recover on the higher-priced ones, reducing total profit.

“This asymmetry can reduce consumers’ total willingness to pay across the assortment and outweigh the benefits of differentiating prices based on cost or value,” added Xiao. “That is why adding more price points can actually backfire.”

As a result, expanding the number of price points may reduce total profitability. The findings challenge the assumption that more data and better algorithms should always lead to more precise pricing.

“Even with advanced technologies, firms should be cautious,” Xiao explained. “More pricing flexibility does not necessarily translate into higher profits. In many cases, simpler pricing structures are more effective.”

Read the full study here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2023.0133]]> https://www.informs.org/News-Room/INFORM...Profitable

PRESS RELEASE: Big data, artificial intelligence and advanced pricing algorithms make it easier than ever for companies to fine-tune prices for individual products to closely reflect their unique value and cost. The conventional wisdom is straightforward: better data, better algorithms and sharper segmentation should produce better profits. But new research suggests that the most profitable answer isn’t always more fine-grained pricing across a product line. In fact, it is fewer, better-chosen price points.

The study, titled “Consumer-Driven Class Pricing,” is by Zuhui Xiao from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Class pricing is a surprisingly widespread feature of everyday markets: the practice of assigning a small number of price points to a much larger assortment of related products. Think of a bar menu with many draft beers but only three price points, or a supermarket aisle with hundreds of SKUs but a dozen distinct shelf prices. Similar patterns extend to fast-moving consumer goods, restaurants, toys, discount stores, convenience retail, budget travel, books and car rentals.

The rationale for class pricing is not just operational simplicity; it is consumer psychology. Consumers do not evaluate prices in isolation. Rather, they form price expectations across the products in front of them and compare what they pay with what they expected to pay for nearby alternatives. Paying more than expected is perceived as a psychological loss, while paying less than expected is perceived as a psychological gain.

Xiao finds that the key driver of class pricing is “loss aversion,” the well-established tendency for people to be more sensitive to perceived losses than to equivalent gains. In this context, consumers feel the pain of paying more than expected more intensely than they appreciate the pleasure of paying less than expected.

“When firms introduce more granular pricing, it triggers consumers’ direct comparison of prices,” said Xiao. “Consumers perceive higher-priced items as losses relative to cheaper alternatives and tend to resent higher prices more than they reward lower ones. As a result, the price disadvantage of higher-priced items is psychologically amplified, making them look worse than the underlying price difference alone would suggest.”

Because of this amplified price disadvantage, even when higher-priced products carry greater prestige, better taste or higher quality, firms cannot fully translate that stronger appeal into sufficiently higher willingness to pay. At the same time, they must keep lower-priced products cheap enough to attract additional demand. The result is an asymmetry: firms give up more on the lower-priced products than they can recover on the higher-priced ones, reducing total profit.

“This asymmetry can reduce consumers’ total willingness to pay across the assortment and outweigh the benefits of differentiating prices based on cost or value,” added Xiao. “That is why adding more price points can actually backfire.”

As a result, expanding the number of price points may reduce total profitability. The findings challenge the assumption that more data and better algorithms should always lead to more precise pricing.

“Even with advanced technologies, firms should be cautious,” Xiao explained. “More pricing flexibility does not necessarily translate into higher profits. In many cases, simpler pricing structures are more effective.”

Read the full study here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2023.0133]]> <![CDATA[Economic hardship tied to increased violence across California]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20197.html Wed, 15 Apr 2026 20:53:23 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20197.html Why would it be experiencing economic hardship and have mental health issues? It's in the top five of progressive states and consistently votes for the Democratic Party. Has a plethora of psychiatric facilities and abundant welfare and assistance programs. "...Despite significant investments in prevention... half have experienced physical violence in their lifetime..." So not just the mere middle of the year that the survey was conducted.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Economic hardship tied to increased violence across California
https://today.ucsd.edu/story/economic-ha...california

PRESS RELEASE: Economic instability – including job loss, food insecurity, eviction and homelessness – is strongly associated with higher rates of violence among California adults, according to a new statewide survey led by the University of California San Diego.

The findings come from the 2025 California Violence Experiences Survey (CalVEX). The new report provides a comprehensive picture of how violence is experienced across the state, including forms of violence that often go unreported in official data.

Adults who experienced economic shocks in the past year were significantly more likely to report physical, sexual and intimate partner violence. For example, Californians who experienced homelessness were about five times more likely to report physical violence in the past year, while those facing food insecurity were about four times more likely. Similar patterns were observed for sexual violence (16% vs 7%) and intimate partner violence (15% vs 4%).

“Violence is not occurring in isolation,” said Jakana Thomas, co-principal investigator of CalVEX and holder of the MacArthur Foundation Chair in International Justice and Human Rights in the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego. “It is closely tied to whether people have stable housing, enough food and the basic conditions needed to get by.”

The CalVEX survey, fielded in May and June 2025, includes responses from more than 4,000 adults across California.

Overall, the data show that violence remains widespread. More than half of California adults have experienced physical violence in their lifetimes, and an estimated 7% – more than 2 million people – experienced physical violence in the past year. Levels of violence remain elevated statewide.

Gender-based violence also remains a significant concern. About 1 in 11 Californians experienced sexual violence in the past year, and 1 in 17 experienced intimate partner violence. Gender non-conforming individuals faced the highest rates across multiple measures, with 49% reporting sexual violence in the past year.

“Despite significant investments in prevention, we’re not seeing substantial declines,” said Thomas, who is a professor both in UC San Diego’s School of Global Policy and Strategy and the Department of Political Science in the School of Social Sciences. “These findings point to the need to look more closely at the underlying conditions – including economic instability – that continue to put people at risk.”

The findings also highlight the broader impacts of violence on health and well-being. Individuals who experienced violence in the past year were significantly more likely to report depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts and substance use.

“Vulnerability to violence is connected to the broader conditions in which people live,” said co-PI Anita Raj, executive director of the Newcomb Institute at Tulane University. “Addressing it requires a public health approach that considers not just individual behavior, but the economic and social environments shaping people’s lives.”

The full report is available on the VEXData website, along with related briefs.]]> Why would it be experiencing economic hardship and have mental health issues? It's in the top five of progressive states and consistently votes for the Democratic Party. Has a plethora of psychiatric facilities and abundant welfare and assistance programs. "...Despite significant investments in prevention... half have experienced physical violence in their lifetime..." So not just the mere middle of the year that the survey was conducted.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Economic hardship tied to increased violence across California
https://today.ucsd.edu/story/economic-ha...california

PRESS RELEASE: Economic instability – including job loss, food insecurity, eviction and homelessness – is strongly associated with higher rates of violence among California adults, according to a new statewide survey led by the University of California San Diego.

The findings come from the 2025 California Violence Experiences Survey (CalVEX). The new report provides a comprehensive picture of how violence is experienced across the state, including forms of violence that often go unreported in official data.

Adults who experienced economic shocks in the past year were significantly more likely to report physical, sexual and intimate partner violence. For example, Californians who experienced homelessness were about five times more likely to report physical violence in the past year, while those facing food insecurity were about four times more likely. Similar patterns were observed for sexual violence (16% vs 7%) and intimate partner violence (15% vs 4%).

“Violence is not occurring in isolation,” said Jakana Thomas, co-principal investigator of CalVEX and holder of the MacArthur Foundation Chair in International Justice and Human Rights in the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego. “It is closely tied to whether people have stable housing, enough food and the basic conditions needed to get by.”

The CalVEX survey, fielded in May and June 2025, includes responses from more than 4,000 adults across California.

Overall, the data show that violence remains widespread. More than half of California adults have experienced physical violence in their lifetimes, and an estimated 7% – more than 2 million people – experienced physical violence in the past year. Levels of violence remain elevated statewide.

Gender-based violence also remains a significant concern. About 1 in 11 Californians experienced sexual violence in the past year, and 1 in 17 experienced intimate partner violence. Gender non-conforming individuals faced the highest rates across multiple measures, with 49% reporting sexual violence in the past year.

“Despite significant investments in prevention, we’re not seeing substantial declines,” said Thomas, who is a professor both in UC San Diego’s School of Global Policy and Strategy and the Department of Political Science in the School of Social Sciences. “These findings point to the need to look more closely at the underlying conditions – including economic instability – that continue to put people at risk.”

The findings also highlight the broader impacts of violence on health and well-being. Individuals who experienced violence in the past year were significantly more likely to report depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts and substance use.

“Vulnerability to violence is connected to the broader conditions in which people live,” said co-PI Anita Raj, executive director of the Newcomb Institute at Tulane University. “Addressing it requires a public health approach that considers not just individual behavior, but the economic and social environments shaping people’s lives.”

The full report is available on the VEXData website, along with related briefs.]]> <![CDATA[The double-edged sword of punishment in group cooperation]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20154.html Thu, 09 Apr 2026 22:19:23 +0000 C C]]> https://www.scivillage.com/thread-20154.html http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aeb5280

PRESS RELEASE: Punishing freeloaders in public good games (PPGs) – experimental models used to analyze the social dilemma between individual self-interest and group cooperation – can boost cooperation, but whether punishment helps or harms the groups’ outcomes depends heavily on context, according to a study involving over 7,000 human participants. The findings reveal when, rather than whether, punishment works. Human societies routinely confront so-called “social dilemmas” – situations in which individual incentives clash with the collective good.

These scenarios can arise in contexts ranging from public health to environmental policy. When they occur, cooperation – or prioritizing shared benefit over personal gain – is both essential and difficult to sustain. PPGs offer a simplified model for examining these dynamics. Although the group benefits most when everyone contributes fully, individuals can maximize their personal gain by contributing nothing.

One widely studied solution to this problem is costly peer punishment, where individuals penalize those who fail to contribute. While this mechanism can discourage selfish behavior, it comes at a cost to both punisher and punished. Past studies have shown that, in some cases, the burden of punishment outweigh its benefits. However, despite this body of research, the conditions under which punishment best promotes cooperation remains unclear.

To better understand these dynamics, Mohammed Alsobay and colleagues conducted a large integrative experiment, systematically varying 14 features of PPGs (e.g. communication, group structure, incentives) across 360 conditions, analyzing more than 147,000 decisions from 7,100 participants. According to Alsobay et al., the experimental design allowed them to precisely identify when punishment helps or hinder shared outcomes, which factors matter most, and how they interact.

The authors found that punishment consistently increased cooperation, but its effect on collective welfare varied dramatically – from a 43% improvement to a 44% reduction – depending on context. According to the study, communication was the most influential factor and was roughly three times more consequential than any other variable. Other important elements include how contributions are framed, the structure of contribution choices, the duration of the interaction, and the visibility of others’ outcomes.

Notably, the findings show that these factors do not operate in isolation but interact in complex ways. For example, longer interactions only enhance the effectiveness of punishment when communication is possible. The authors also used the data to develop and train a predictive model that was able to outperform humans when predicting whether punishment would help or harm welfare in new experiments.]]> http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aeb5280

PRESS RELEASE: Punishing freeloaders in public good games (PPGs) – experimental models used to analyze the social dilemma between individual self-interest and group cooperation – can boost cooperation, but whether punishment helps or harms the groups’ outcomes depends heavily on context, according to a study involving over 7,000 human participants. The findings reveal when, rather than whether, punishment works. Human societies routinely confront so-called “social dilemmas” – situations in which individual incentives clash with the collective good.

These scenarios can arise in contexts ranging from public health to environmental policy. When they occur, cooperation – or prioritizing shared benefit over personal gain – is both essential and difficult to sustain. PPGs offer a simplified model for examining these dynamics. Although the group benefits most when everyone contributes fully, individuals can maximize their personal gain by contributing nothing.

One widely studied solution to this problem is costly peer punishment, where individuals penalize those who fail to contribute. While this mechanism can discourage selfish behavior, it comes at a cost to both punisher and punished. Past studies have shown that, in some cases, the burden of punishment outweigh its benefits. However, despite this body of research, the conditions under which punishment best promotes cooperation remains unclear.

To better understand these dynamics, Mohammed Alsobay and colleagues conducted a large integrative experiment, systematically varying 14 features of PPGs (e.g. communication, group structure, incentives) across 360 conditions, analyzing more than 147,000 decisions from 7,100 participants. According to Alsobay et al., the experimental design allowed them to precisely identify when punishment helps or hinder shared outcomes, which factors matter most, and how they interact.

The authors found that punishment consistently increased cooperation, but its effect on collective welfare varied dramatically – from a 43% improvement to a 44% reduction – depending on context. According to the study, communication was the most influential factor and was roughly three times more consequential than any other variable. Other important elements include how contributions are framed, the structure of contribution choices, the duration of the interaction, and the visibility of others’ outcomes.

Notably, the findings show that these factors do not operate in isolation but interact in complex ways. For example, longer interactions only enhance the effectiveness of punishment when communication is possible. The authors also used the data to develop and train a predictive model that was able to outperform humans when predicting whether punishment would help or harm welfare in new experiments.]]>