Search results

To examine the race making experiences of multiracial men in carceral facilities.

I interviewed 58 incarcerated multiracial males.

Officially, multiracial incarcerated people are ascribed monoracial labels. They describe the variables used by those who racially categorize them and how their expectations about how others see them influence their racial self-identity. It is possible, they report, to maintain a multiracial self-identity, even if it is unofficially. They also describe interacting with men outside their racial category, behavior that supports the color-blind ideology.

Previous work on race making in carceral facilities has been collected in California; the present data were collected in the northeast. In addition, this research is the first study to consider the experiences of race making among incarcerated multiracial people.

This study examines chronic illness, disability and social inequality within an exposure-vulnerabilities theoretical framework.

Using the National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), a preeminent source of national behavioral health estimates of chronic medical illness, stress and disability, for selected sample years 2005–2014, we construct and analyze two foundational hypotheses underlying the exposure-vulnerabilities model: (1) greater exposure to stressors (i.e., chronic medical illness) among racial/ethnic minority populations yields higher levels of serious psychological distress, which in turn increases the likelihood of medical disability; (2) greater vulnerability among minority populations to stressors such as chronic medical illness exacerbates the impact of these conditions on mental health as well as the impact of mental health on medical disability.

Results of our analyses provided mixed support for the vulnerability (moderator) hypothesis, but not for the exposure (mediation) hypothesis. In the exposure models, while Blacks were more likely than Whites to have a long-term disability, the pathway to disability through chronic illness and serious psychological distress did not emerge. Rather, Whites were more likely than Blacks and Latinx to have a chronic illness and to have experienced severe psychological distress (both of which themselves were related to disability). In the vulnerability models, both Blacks and Latinx with chronic medical illness were more likely than Whites to experience serious psychological distress, although Whites with serious psychological distress were more likely than these groups to have a long-term disability.

Several possibilities for understanding the failure to uncover an exposure dynamic in the model turn on the potential intersectional effects of age and gender, as well as several other covariates that seem to confound the linkages in the model (e.g., issues of stigma, social support, education).

This study (1) extends the racial/ethnic disparities in exposure-vulnerability framework by including factors measuring chronic medical illness and disability which: (2) explicitly test exposure and vulnerability hypotheses in minority populations; (3) develop and test the causal linkages in the hypothesized processes, based on innovations in general structural equation models, and lastly; (4) use national population estimates of these conditions which are rarely, if ever, investigated in this kind of causal framework.

This chapter examines the implications of career achievement for divorce, and whether they differ for men and women. Consistent with theory suggesting that women’s workplace achievement violates traditional expectations of gender and marriage, therefore creating domestic strain, the authors predict that career achievement is associated with a greater risk of divorce for women, but not for men. Using data from the Academy Awards, the authors find that for women, a sudden shift in achievement from winning an Oscar increases their risk of divorce compared to Best Actress nominees. There was no difference in the risk of divorce between Best Actor winners and nominees. The authors additionally examine two potential mitigating factors: whether the actor was already successful at the time of their marriage, and whether their spouse was comparably successful. For Best Actress winners, but not for Best Actor winners, the authors find evidence for the latter, indicating that women’s marriages are more stable when spouses are equally successful, or when relative achievement within the couple aligns with broadly-held norms of traditional marriage.

The Wikipedia (2008) entry for mathematical sociology cites four books with ‘mathematical sociology’ in the title: Coleman (1964), Fararo (1973), Leik and Meeker (1975) and Bonacich (2008). Fararo (1973, pp. 764–766) provides a guide to the literature in mathematical sociology covering journals, bibliographies, reviews and expository essays, readers, texts, original monographs and research papers. Many of the references are either broader than mathematical sociology, for example, concerning the behavioural sciences in general, or narrower, dealing with a particular topic within sociology, or concerning a related field such as social psychology. Three classical original monographs are identified: Dodd (1942), Zipf (1949) and Rashevsky (1951). Included in a second generation of monographs is Coleman's (1964) ‘An Introduction to Mathematical Sociology’. Could it be that this is the first use of the phrase ‘mathematical sociology’?

In this chapter, the authors provide an introspective account of how teachers in mainstream classrooms can use questioning to more effectively differentiate literacy instruction for English learners across subject areas. The authors offer a rationale for constructively responsive questioning and share tools and strategies for adapting levels of questioning to students’ English proficiency and grade levels with the goal of strengthening instruction and promoting student engagement in learning.

Assistive technology can support and enhance the learning, independence, and daily living skills of students with disabilities, including students with intellectual disability (ID). Assistive technology is not generally disability dependent; however, for students with ID we decided to focus on assistive technology across two areas: instructional aids – with a focus on reading, writing, and mathematics – and transition and independence. Throughout our focus on these two categories of assistive technology, we discuss low-tech, mid-tech, and high-tech options to support students with ID.