Online or in Person? Examining College Decisions to Reopen during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Fall 2020.

When coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) became a major impediment to face-to-face college instruction in spring 2020, most teaching went online. Over the summer, colleges had to make difficult decisions about whether to return to in-person instruction. Although opening campuses could pose a major health risk, keeping instruction online could dissuade students from enrolling. Taking an ecological approach, the authors use mixed modeling techniques and data from 87 percent of two- and four-year public and four-year private U.S. colleges to assess the factors that shaped decisions about fall 2020 instructional modality. Most notably, the authors find that reopening decisions about whether to return to in-person instruction were unrelated to cumulative COVID-19 infection and mortality rates. Politics and budget concerns played the most important roles. Colleges that derived more of their revenue from tuition were more likely to return to classroom instruction, as were institutions in states and counties that supported Donald Trump for president in 2016.

How and why have attitudes about cannabis legalization changed so much?

Since the late 1990s public opinion about cannabis legalization has become drastically more liberal, and some states have begun to legalize cannabis for recreational use. Why have attitudes changed so much? Prior research has considered a few of the reasons for this change, but this is the first comprehensive and empirically-based study to consider the wide range of potential causes for how and why this happened. We use data from the General Social Survey, National Study of Drug Use and Health, and word searches from the New York Times. We find that attitudes largely liberalized via intracohort changes. Most Americans developed more liberal views, regardless of their race and ethnicity, gender, education, religious or political affiliation, or religious engagement. Changes in cannabis use have had minimal effects on attitudes, and legalization of cannabis has not prompted attitude change in neighboring states. As to root causes, evidence suggests that a decrease in religious affiliation, a decline in punitiveness, and a shift in media framing all contributed to changing attitudes.

Effects of Geography on Mental Health Disparities on Sexual Minorities in New York City.

Gay and lesbian individuals have higher rates of psychological distress than do heterosexual individuals. The minority stress hypothesis attributes this disparity to adversity-related stress experienced by sexual minorities. In support of this idea, research in the U.S. has generally found that mental health disparities between sexual minorities and others are narrower in places where tolerance is relatively high. However, few studies have examined disparities between sexual minorities and others in neighborhoods where sexual minorities are most highly concentrated. Likewise, little research attention has been given to disparities for people who move to more tolerant places from less tolerant states and countries. Using data from the New York City Community Health Survey, we found some evidence that disparities between sexual minorities and others were lower in areas with higher concentrations of sexual minorities. However, disparities did not vary by the tolerance level of the state of birth among those born in the U.S. and were actually lower among those born in the least tolerant nations. These results complicate the idea that there is a dose-response relationship between tolerance and psychological distress among sexual minorities.

What can we learn from twin studies? A comprehensive evaluation of the equal environments assumption.

Twin studies are a major source of information about genetic effects on behavior, but they depend on a controversial assumption known as the equal environments assumption (EEA): that similarity in co-twins' environments is not predictive of similarity in co-twin outcomes. Although evidence has largely supported the EEA, critics have claimed that environmental similarity has not been measured well, and most studies of the EEA have focused on outcomes related to health and psychology. This article addresses these limitations through (1) a reanalysis of data from the most cited study of the EEA, Loehlin and Nichols (1976), using better measures, and through (2) an analysis of nationally representative twin data from MIDUS using more comprehensive controls on a wider variety of outcomes than previous studies. Results support a middle ground position; it is likely that the EEA is not strictly valid for most outcomes, but the resulting bias is likely modest.