A pharmacist wearing a white coat working at their lab station. Image by Polina Tankilevitch under Pexels license.

Over 500,000 Americans have died as a result of opioid overdose since 1999. Policymakers, police, and medical professionals are all trying to understand and prevent overdose. For example, pharmacists now use computer programs that track how often patients refill their prescriptions called ‘Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs’ (PDMPs). 

Because these prescription tracking programs were designed for law enforcement, some worry they might be subtly pressuring pharmacists to be more focused on policing than providing patients with care. Supporters of these PDMPs say they can eliminate biases by automating decisions about prescription eligibility and giving pharmacists a formal justification to turn patients away.

Elizabeth Chiarello interviewed 118 community-placed pharmacists to learn how the new PDMP databases affected their work routines and relationships with other professionals.  

Chiarello found that as pharmacists used the PDMPs, they reoriented their work around crime and the legal system, rather than health care logics. This shifted their treatment of prescription misuse from a rehabilitative one to a more punitive one. She therefore describes PDMPs as ‘Trojan Horse Technologies,’ based on the classic story of the soldiers hidden inside the giant horse that the Greeks gifted to the Trojans; 

“Whereas the Greeks leapt out of the horse to massacre their enemies,” Chiarello writes, “the criminal-legal logics embedded in the PDMP emerge slowly as pharmacists use PDMPs in daily practice,” which gradually transforms the pharmacy field.  

Pharmacists are now expected to act as an extension of law enforcement, reporting patients and restricting their ability to access medicine rather than helping them get the treatment they need. 

Through the adoption of PDMPs, law enforcement may have subtly deputized pharmacists to criminalize prescription misuse. Although pharmacists have historically resisted this role, PDMPs have become systematized and made pharmacists more comfortable policing their patients. Chiarello concludes that pharmacists would be less inclined to police patients, and more inclined to care for them, if they had access to different treatment tools, such as the ability to provide medications for substance use treatment under a physician’s supervision. 

A vinyl record store. Image by Darya Sannikova under Pexels license.

How can you tell if a song is popular?

Two important measures of musical success in the US are Billboard magazine’s charts, which compare the current popularity of songs and albums, and the Recording Industry Association of America’s certification program, which aims to measure total sales. The RIAA awards the famous gold and platinum records.

Changes in technology often change these calculations. In a new article, Vincent Carter of Emory University showed how one change helped shape the development of R&B and hip-hop music.

Before the 1990s, Billboard magazine measured record sales by calling up record stores and asking for their sales numbers. This changed with SoundScan, which automatically recorded data using point-of-sale scanners. This is often praised for making charts more accurate. However, especially in the early days, not all stores had scanner technology. This was especially true of stores that served predominantly Black customers, the core audience for hip-hop and R&B music.

Carter argues that this technological disparity affected which R&B and hip-hop songs charted. To test this idea, he used data from two sources: Billboard’s charts, and the RIAA’s certification program. The Billboard charts are a relative measure of a song’s popularity at a specific time, either overall or in a specific category (in this case, R&B/Hip-Hop). The RIAA certification program is an absolute measure of how successful a song has been over time. Therefore, Carter used certification as a measure of a song’s success over time, while the charts are more short-term. In this study, Billboard’s Pop chart was used to measure a song’s mainstream popularity, while the R&B/Hip-Hop chart measured a song’s genre-specific popularity.

Before SoundScan, #1 songs that stayed for a longer time on the R&B/Hip-Hop chart and the more general “Pop” chart were more likely to be certified. After SoundScan, however, this relationship changed. Under the new system, songs that went to #1 on the R&B/Hip-Hop chart but stayed for a shorter period of time were more likely to be certified.but stayed for a shorter period of time were more likely to be certified. However, certified songs were still more likely to spend longer on the Pop chart.

With this change, stores that served Black African-American customers had less impact on the sales numbers, though they still drove genre-specific chart performance. The overall influence of Black consumers on the chart therefore declined thanks to SoundScan’s technological disparity. The R&B/Hip-Hop charts were still measuring a song’s performance on R&B and hip-hop radio, better capturing Black audiences’ taste. Over time, genre-specific chart performance became “decoupled” or split off from the sales numbers.

Carter argues that this disempowered Black audiences, affecting which artists became successful and which types of music were made.

A woman holding a phone, with a black and empty screen. Image by Tirachard Kumtanom under Pexels license.

In a world where a connection is just a click away, many are looking for love online. While digital dating platforms have made dating more accessible for all, they are not without risk. Due to the anonymous nature of the internet, scammers and fraudsters have infiltrated the online dating world and taken advantage of vulnerable people. And new research from Timothy Dickinson and Fangzhou Wang helps unravel how these fraudsters manipulate their victims into sending them money. 

Dickinson and Wang sent a set of scripted emails where they posed as fictitious victims to 87 real online romance fraudsters. They then analyzed these exchanges and looked for patterns. What they found was that fraudsters encouraged their victims to overcome or “neutralize” their hesitancy about sending money in four different ways.

First, fraudsters say that they need money for something important, such as bills or rent, which casts the victim into the role of “caregiver” or “supporter.” Second, they appealed to the intimate nature of the romantic relationship by making statements such as “You are the person I will spend the rest of my life with” or “I promise to love you more and more with every passing day and be there by your side till my last breath.” This helps them reframe the monetary transaction as something that is normal to do in a real relationship. Third, the fraudsters “deny susceptibility” by persuading victims that they hold more power in the relationship. This can be done subtly through language such as “it’s up to you” or “if you want to”. Fourth and lastly, they report that some fraudsters appeal to religious duty since most major religions emphasize helping those in need. 

This research shows how the vulnerability within dating makes room for fraudsters to manipulate and scam victims, and to be wary of the above 4 fraud tactics.

An overwhelmed woman in gray scrubs resting on a gray couch. Image by Cedric Fauntleroy under Pexels license.

In the United States, women on average earn less than men in their lifetimes (the gender pay gap). One of the various explanations for this pay gap is that women tend to do tasks that involve nurturing or helping others, and these tasks often don’t lead to promotions (or higher pay). Scholars argue that such labor is integral to organizations even though it doesn’t lead to promotions and is undervalued. But do such patterns hold in the medical field? 

To see if women doctors do more of the unrewarded but crucial work of nurturing others, Laura Nelson and her colleagues used data from an app used by doctors to evaluate students in residency (medical school). Their study examined 33,456 evaluations of 359 resident physicians by 285 attending physicians across eight U.S. hospitals. Within the app, doctors were required by their employers to at least leave a numerical rating of the students’ performance, however, reviewers could go beyond what was required and leave comments for the student. The researchers were specifically interested in this comment option and wanted to see if women were more likely to make comments to students within the app.

They found that women doctors do more work that involves helping or nurturing medical students than men.women doctors do more work that involves helping or nurturing medical students than men. Women provided more written feedback to medical students in residency, whereas men were over twice as likely to give only numerical evaluations, without adding written feedback. Furthermore, comments written by women often provided targeted and specific feedback, including reassurance to residents who made mistakes. 

This research confirms that one of the causes of the gender pay gap is that women do tasks, such as going above and beyond in training medical students, that don’t lead to them getting promoted. This research also encourages people to not just think about time spent at work but also think about who is doing more caring and nurturing tasks at work.

A group of people building a sidewalk with wet concrete. Image by Rodolfo Quirós under Pexels license.

A new study by Netta Kahana highlighted the shifting public opinions about combining travel with volunteering activities–practices, known widely as volunteer tourism or sometimes “voluntourism”. This practice typically emphasizes community work in developing countries and in recent years has come under scrutiny for being self-serving, exploitative, ineffective, and even harmful. Such concerns result from the fact volunteers can be unskilled and that the infrastructure these volunteers build is typically not self-sustainable without ongoing supplies or labor. Despite these critiques, volunteer tourism remains popular for ambitious and affluent young people and Kahana wanted to understand why. 

The study gauged 48 volunteer tourists from Israel and their self-perception, self-worth, and motivations.48 volunteer tourists from Israel and their self-perception, self-worth, and motivations. The interviewees were all in their twenties, from middle-class backgrounds, and had volunteered in either Nepal or India. Many of the study participants acknowledged recent public criticisms of voluntourism. However, they also saw volunteerism aligned with travel as a morally worthy action, serving the common good.

Kahana’s analysis documented three main justifications for these sentiments. The first involved the selection of a “proper” or reputable organization. As one volunteer explained:

• “You need to carefully check what their mission statements are because when you are in a hostel and they offer you to volunteer in an orphanage, it is for money. It totally hurts the children, so inquire, inquire, inquire, inquire, and investigate. You do not volunteer without talking with an alumnus. Like I did.”

The second justification had to do with providing locals with beneficial tools. Another volunteer put it like this:

• “The issue was about making them [the locals] understand they have more options to make money through tourism, and they can rebuild themselves financially. Because it’s very difficult there. It’s crazy poverty.”

The third justification volunteers offered was about being socially proactive:

• “I don’t say it [volunteering] is the best but if you come with good intentions and you want to help [then] come and do your best…. If you will do good, then it is great. If I look on the positive vs. the negative, then it is more positive. Hence, I volunteered. It is not a zero-sum game or 50-50, it is more 80-20.”

In other words, volunteers believe their good works contribute to net-positive outcomes.

positive self-evaluations of volunteer tourists’ characters and are used to dispel perceived judgments from society These interviews reveal the positive self-evaluations of volunteer tourists’ characters and are used to dispel any perceived judgements from society that might be raised about their participation. Kahana hopes her article will inform guidelines to ensure that the good intentions of volunteers will materialize as this sector of tourism continues to develop and grow.

A hospital room with three empty beds. Image by Pixabay under Pexels license.

People who cough or sneeze in public may receive disgusted glares. Addiction recovery programs are often anonymous. And many types of patients face isolation, negative stereotypes, and even verbal or physical abuse. All of these are examples of disease stigma, the negative meanings or stereotypes that we associate with a disease. Such stigmatization can lead to discrimination against people with health conditions. It can also cause people with health conditions to “self-stigmatize,” internalizing negative beliefs about themselves and their disease. Understanding how these processes work can help us create more effective ways to reduce stigma and its impact.

A recent study by Rachel Kahn Best and Alina Areseniev-Koehler aimed to understand why some diseases are more stigmatized by analyzing how different diseases were discussed in American media from 1980 to 2018. why some diseases are more stigmatized by analyzing how different diseases were discussed in American media from 1980 to 2018. Media can reveal stereotypes that are widely recognized and publicly discussed. Even when individuals do not believe these stereotypes, they are likely aware of them and may be influenced by them. Best and Areseniev-Koehler used word embedding (a computational text analysis method) to examine 4.7 million newspaper articles and transcripts from TV and radio programs. The study considered 106 different diseases, including behavioral health conditions (addictions, eating disorders, and mental illnesses), infectious diseases (sexually transmitted infections, influenza, hepatitis, malaria, etc.), and chronic conditions (cancers, autoimmune diseases, genetic diseases, hypertension, etc.).

Previous research on disease stigma suggests that there are two main drivers of stigma: contagion avoidance and norm enforcement. Contagion avoidance happens when people, in an effort to stay healthy, avoid other people who look sick. Norm enforcement happens when a disease becomes associated with a personality trait or behavior that society views as deviant or as a violation of social norms. For example, some may view addictions as a sign of weakness and sexually transmitted infections as a sign of promiscuity. Over time, however, advocacy efforts can help to reduce both types of stigma. 

Testing out these theories, Best and Areseniev-Koehler find that behavioral health conditions generate the most judgmental language in the media, connected to discussions of immorality and negative personality traits.behavioral health conditions generate the most judgmental language in the media, connected to discussions of immorality and negative personality traits. Among the infectious diseases, sexually transmitted infections generated the most judgment. Overall, infectious diseases were connected to meanings of disgust. These results support the idea that norm enforcement and contagion avoidance drive stigma. Best and Areseniev-Koehler also found that overall disease stigma has declined over time, but only for chronic physical illnesses. Stigma remains high for behavioral conditions and infectious diseases. 

Best and Areseniev-Koehler observed a somewhat lower stigma for diseases connected to stronger advocacy efforts. However, further research is needed to determine whether such advocacy causes a decrease in stigma. 

A group of young adults working at a coffee shop patio. Image by Helena Lopes under Pexels license.

The notion of a pan-ethnic Asian American identity first emerged in the United States during the civil rights movement but has become increasingly tied into a monolithic narrative that lumps Asian ethnic groups together. Lost in this process is the diversity of history, culture, languages, and political views different Asian American ethnic groups have. New research by sociologists looking at survey data examines the differences between ethnic groups in their views towards affirmative action and how, depending on their understanding of the Supreme Court’s views toward affirmative action, their responses may change. 

Ji-won Lee and W. Carson Byrd conducted an experiment using data from the 2016 National Asian American Survey, a national survey of over 3,600 Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Filipino, Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Hmong people throughout the US about their views on race-conscious college admissions. 

Around half of the participants gave their views on race-conscious college admissions; the rest received information about the 2016 SCOTUS ruling before they provided their opinions. The “split ballot” design was intended to assess the effect knowledge of the Supreme Court upholding affirmative action in Fisher v. University of Texas had on Asian Americans’ views towards affirmative action, and this brought out some important ethnic variations.

Lee and Byrd found that for the group without information about the SCOTUS ruling, attitudes towards race-conscious admissions varied widely depending on ethnicity. Over 50% of Koreans, Bangladeshis, Filipinos, and Cambodians were in favor or strongly in favor of race-conscious admissionsOver 50% of Koreans, Bangladeshis, Filipinos, and Cambodians were in favor or strongly in favor of race-conscious admissions followed closely by Japanese, Indian, and Pakistani respondents. Chinese, Vietnamese, and Hmong respondents were the least likely to be in favor of affirmative action and more likely to be opposed to it. In this sample, Asian Americans focused mostly on how they would benefit from affirmative action and the discrimination they face.  

In the sample where participants did have prior knowledge of the SCOTUS ruling, the researchers found that support for race-conscious admissions attitudes decreased. When they had prior knowledge of SCOTUS-affirming race-conscious admissions, Asian Americans’ attitudes centered around their ethnoracial identities and political support for immigrants, a group identity Asian Americans are more likely to take on. The framing of the SCOTUS rulings thus demonstrates the complex relationships between Asian Americans and other racial groups. Asian Americans who embrace the idea that their interests align closer with white people end up supporting or even opposing affirmative action by considering if they could be victims of such admissions policies. 

The author’s findings demonstrate the diversity in Asian American ethnic groups’ views towards affirmative action as well as the differences in how their views shift within the context of Asian American racialization in relation to other racial groups and the US legal system. Although there is a wide-held perception of Asian Americans being the same, different ethnic groups have different histories and experiences of their race and ethnicity within the US and its higher education system. By looking deeper into different groups, Lee and Byrd show how we see that different ethnic groups have different attitudes toward affirmative action. However, these findings can extend beyond affirmative action to dismantle the assumption that Asian Americans all hold the same interests, values, and cultures.

A patient signing a form in a doctor’s office. Image by SHVETS production under Pexels license.

Reproductive rights are considered a hot-button topic by many, but different groups can face different pressures in exercising these rights. Moreover, rights around fertility-affecting operations like the removal of one’s uterus (hysterectomies), are often left out of the discussion. To shed light on these issues, recent research examines how gender and race affect those seeking a hysterectomy, usually seen as the most extreme birth control option. 

Andréa Becker, a postdoctoral researcher and instructor at the University of California San Francisco conducted 100 in-depth interviews with a diverse set of individuals who have undergone or are considering a hysterectomy. These operations were sought in many cases to remedy painful reproductive conditions like endometriosis, uterine tumors, or for gender-affirming care. 

She discovered that while white cisgender (cis) women are routinely blocked from accessing desired hysterectomies, cis women of color are pressured into having hysterectomies by medical professionals they are relying on for responsive treatment. Even in cases where a woman of color desires to preserve her fertility, she may experience unwanted pressure to have her uterus removed instead of seeking other treatments for painful reproductive conditions. For example, here’s how a Black woman named Kat described her struggle to preserve her fertility despite the medical establishment’s pressure.

“Every time I had a physical exam, every time I had a vaginal exam, every time I had a pelvic exam every time, it was like “hysterectomy, hysterectomy, hysterectomy,” it was it was definitely pushed.”

Women who did not have or intend to have a male partner or desire kids also experienced differential treatment when seeking a hysterectomy. One lesbian woman even described how medical practitioners did not consider her wishes on the matter at all and were more concerned with the fertility wishes of a fictitious future husband.

Perhaps surprisingly, trans men and non-binary patients reported having a comparatively easy experience getting a premenopausal hysterectomy if they wanted one and were readily offered the procedure or even directed to it as it reinforced societal gender norms.

The study clearly shows a systematic disregard for women’s agency by the medical community, especially that of women of color. The pressure exerted by practitioners to sterilize women of color, even when it contradicts their wishes and goals, has links to a much longer history of medical abuse of such patients. These findings reinforce the need for medical institutions and practitioners to understand and address how racial prejudice and other forms of discrimination affect their treatment of patients.

A bare prison cell with a bunk bed, metal chair, and toilet. Image from RDNE Stock project under Pexels license.

Gender segregation is a core feature of American prisons, with men and women separated out into separate facilities. So how do gender nonconforming prisoners fit into this system? 

In a study of California men’s prisons from 1941 to 2018, Joss Greene finds that the response to gender-nonconforming prisoners varied historically. As attitudes towards both punishment and gender changed over time, prison administrators shifted their approach to managing gender-nonconforming prisoners. 

1941-1954: Segregation

Beginning in the early 1940s, California promoted prisons as sites of rehabilitation. However, from 1941 to 1954, prison administrators viewed gender nonconformity as a contagion that threatened both the overall health of the prison and the prison’s rehabilitation efforts. Prisoners who were identified as “effeminate homosexuals” were segregated from the rest of the prison population, stigmatized, and excluded from educational and work opportunities.

1955-1981: Treatment

From 1955 to 1981, prison administrators approached gender-nonconforming prisoners as “medicalized subjects”, meaning that their homosexuality or gender expression was considered a psychiatric or medical condition. 

Gender-nonconforming prisoners were subjected to psychological studies and “treatment” (in the form of harsh medical experimentation) at a newly constructed California prison medical facility. However, many prisoners were able to use their new medical label as leverage to demand access to some gender-affirming care.

1982-1998: Risk Management

In the late 1970s, California’s “tough on crime” approach led to a historic rise in prison populations. To increase efficiency, prison administrators classified prisoners into four risk levels, based on their sentence, behavioral record, and other factors. Those classified as high-risk were subject to harsher punishment. Under this system, all “known homosexuals” were automatically classified as a Level 3 risk (the second-highest level). They were grouped in with individuals convicted of more serious crimes, faced increased restrictions within the prison, and were frequently targets of violence. Victims of violence often increased their risk score by defending themselves, as the system did not distinguish between the risk of harm to the prisoner and the risk of the prisoner harming others.

1999-2018: Legal Status

Finally, from 1999-2018, there were growing social movements opposing mass incarceration, and “transgender” became a recognized legal status. Prison administrators, seeking to avoid legal battles, created a “transgender” prisoner category and expanded their medical services, including gender-affirming hormone treatments.

Despite these legal advances, most transgender prisoners have been unable to access hormone treatments and still face widespread suffering in prisons. They remain a protected group in name, but not in reality.

Advancing Rights

Greene’s work highlights how institutions (and their underlying logic and resources) can shape how gender boundaries are defined, reproduced, and changed over time. In California prisons, views on crime and punishment, incarceration rates, prison resources, and anti-incarceration social movements all shifted gender boundaries within prisons. These historical shifts should provide hope for some trans rights advocates, who view changing prison policies as an opportunity to provide relief for transgender prisoners. That said, fully addressing the suffering of gender-nonconforming prisoners will require more fundamental changes to both societal gender boundaries and the nature of prisons themselves.

A woman wearing a hard hat and safety glasses working on an engine. Image from Chevanon Photography under Pexels license.

Unionizing and strikes continue to maintain headlines, but labor unions and strikes have been intertwined with American industry for decades. That said, many of these historic strikes have been by unions representing traditionally male-dominated positions, whereas today women are increasingly taking on unionizing challenges. This changing gender balance was recently highlighted by Margarita Torre in her recent study.

Torre analyzed the General Social Survey data from 2002-2021 and found that supportive attitudes around labor unions have increased across the board. Younger women, women with less than a high school education level, and those in female-dominated occupations were even more favorable towards unions compared to other groups of women. 

There are good reasons for this. Historically, as Torre writes, women have “tended to work in a much narrower range of occupations than men and are overrepresented in low-paying, part-time, and temporary jobs with fewer opportunities for advancement.” Unions provide greater benefits (healthcare or retirement plans) and higher wages which can help reduce gender inequality in the workforce, especially in labor markets that offer a wider range of job opportunities and hours compared to previous decades. 

Race is also a big part of the story. About 11% of Black women in the U.S. are part of unions, higher than both White and Hispanic women.11% of Black women in the U.S. are part of unions, higher than both White and Hispanic women. Women and people of color stand to benefit greatly from joining a union as particularly vulnerable groups. 

While only about 4% of 24-year-olds and younger express their intention of joining a union when entering the workforce, Torre explains that the favorability of unions among young women may increase as more women enter the workforce and begin to see the benefits of unionization.