White dread dehumanization and low consideration Fatal combos regarding firing biases

This article examines how the emergence of mass incarceration in the United States affected public perceptions of its judicial institutions. Epacadostat Analyses of General Social Survey data collected between 1974 and 2018 indicate that the rising incarceration rate was associated with distinctive changes to Blacks' and Whites' views of courts. As the incarceration rate increased, Blacks' confidence in courts and the legal system fell while Whites' confidence grew. The rising incarceration rate was also associated with a growing Black-White fissure in confidence in the Supreme Court. Finally, although Blacks and Whites each became more likely to believe that courts are too punitive as incarceration increased, the change in these attitudes was twice as large among Blacks than Whites. Overall these results suggest that mass incarceration contributed to a rift in Blacks' and Whites' support for judicial institutions. This article also underscores the importance of macro-level institutional contexts for understanding individuals' perceptions of institutional authorities.Decades of research illuminates how status beliefs about socially significant characteristics, like gender, fundamentally alter expectations about individual's competence and worth. This process biases opportunity structures and resource distributions, thereby recreating social inequalities in a self-fulfilling fashion. Many social and organizational policies attempt to reduce inequality by increasing disadvantaged groups' access to valued rewards, such as prestigious alma maters, awards, and valued positions. In addition to meaningfully increasing resources, the status these rewards convey should also theoretically increase the status of the particular people who come to possess them. To know whether inversions to reward structures reduce social inequality, however, we must first demonstrate that the status value of rewards alone is an effective intervention. In an experimental test of interventions to gender status inequality, reward markers with relatively higher or lower status value were consistently or inconsistently associated with the gender of the participants' task partners. Results indicate that rewards intervened in the groups' gendered status hierarchy as participants were more likely to be influenced by their partners' rewards than their gender.Thousands of preventable deaths are attributed to obesity in the United States. However, the harmfulness of obesity varies across the population; individuals' education determines access to healthful resources and exposure to competing risks, dampening/amplifying obesity-associated mortality risk. Using restricted U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (N = 40,058; 1988-2015), this study estimates educational differences in mortality attributable to central obesity (waist-to-height ratio ≥0.5) - a dangerous form of abdominal adiposity. Over 30% of excess deaths are attributable to central obesity among college-educated adults, compared to 1-10% among their less-educated counterparts. This difference is larger for cardiometabolic-related mortality, as central obesity may explain 60-70% of excess deaths among college-educated adults. Decomposition analyses show differences are driven by greater obesity-associated risk among college-educated adults, rather than prevalence. Policies targeting health disparities should recognize central obesity as a key risk among highly-educated adults, but only one of many encountered by those with less education.This study examines the association between individuals' educational assortative mating and time spent on child care and housework. Focus is put on hypogamous couples, or couples in which wives have more education than their husbands. Relative resources and gender revolution frameworks are considered as contexts to explain why hypogamous couples may share their time differently than other couples. A series of ordinary least squares regressions with population and sampling weights are employed using American Time Use Survey data from 2003 to 2018. Three, separate analyses using relative education, gender, and all educational pairings as the independent variables of interest are presented with child care and housework as the dependent variables. The current findings show that men in hypogamous marriages perform about 10 min more of child care per day on average than their peers in hypergamous and homogamous marriages, and that this comes primarily from basic care activities. This accounts for approximately 43% of the difference between men and women in the average amount of time spent on child care. No clear pattern of significance is apparent comparing individuals' time spent on housework by relative education, suggesting that housework and child care have evolved differently in the context of gendered domestic responsibilities. Men in hypogamous marriages are more egalitarian in their sharing of child care. However, this is only true for couples in which men have at least a high school diploma and women are highly educated.In most mid- and high-income countries, there have been significant demographic, structural, and cultural changes in the past decades. However, we know little about how these changes have shaped women's work patterns during a key life stage the transition to motherhood. Using longitudinal data from Chile, covering over 30 years of employment histories and three periods of first births (1980-2010), I conduct sequence analysis to identify women's work-care trajectories during an eight-year period of the transition to motherhood. Over time, I find that continuous care work at home has declined, for which education plays a key role, while the chances of working continuously have not changed over time. Instead, I find an increasing trend of unsteady paths that combine paid work with either caretaking or unemployment. I discuss how these changes, as well as their association with education, have important implications for both gender and social inequality.Using nationally representative data from the High School Longitudinal Study (HSLS), I assess the oppositional culture explanation for Mexican students. First, I examine if there are differences between Mexican and White students in their academic behaviors, attitudes, and friends' academic orientation. Second, I examine if these measures account for the racial disparity in academic outcomes between Mexican and White students. The results show that there are few differences between Mexican and White students in measures of school-related behaviors, attitudes, and friends' academic orientation. The second part of the analysis suggests that, in general, these measures for behaviors, attitudes, and friends' academic orientation do not explain much of the differences in academic achievement between Mexican and White students. The findings from the study indicate that the oppositional culture explanation does not account for this disparity in achievement.