With over 500 mass shootings in the U.S. last year alone, these tragedies are no longer shocking—they’re expected. While the country remains stagnant in addressing one of its most urgent public health and social crises, media narratives, shaped by racial bias, fixate on the identity of the person who committed the shooting rather than the victims or the systemic issues fueling the violence. This study explores three key questions: (a) What sociological and psychological factors contribute to the radicalization and deviant behavior of individuals who commit mass shootings? (b) What factors do the media focus on in their coverage of mass shootings? (c) How do these media portrayals vary based on the race or ethnicity of the shooter? In answering these questions, this research draws from racial formation theory, framing theory, and general strain theory, while also considering adverse childhood experiences. Through an in-depth review of motives by the shooter and media narratives, this study seeks to provide a more comprehensive understanding of mass shootings. It critiques how the media portrays the intentions behind the shooting as well as the identity of the shooter, and shapes public perceptions of criminality. This study contributes to discussions on racial bias, policy reform, and the need for equitable approaches to crime prevention and public safety.

This study examined the relationship between heteronormative school environment and mental health of Chinese LGBTQ+ teenagers. An online questionnaire with 116 valid responses was used to compare mental health condition of LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ students, and one-on-one qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 LGBTQ+ participants on their school experiences. The results of the questionnaire data showed no significant difference between mental health of LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ respondents. For interviews, heteronormativity was showed to be present in various aspects at school, including peer interactions, sexuality education, textbook and teaching, school-based counseling services, dress code, school policies, and infrastructure. Both interviewees from traditional Chinese schools and international schools in China were involved, and a series of differences were found between the two types of schools. This study also provides suggestions for schools and policy makers to create a more inclusive school environment. Future research can further investigate the influence of different school types on heteronormativity.

In recent years, Americans’ dislike of the opposing party has increased—a phenomenon known as affective polarization (Iyengar et al. 2019). Although the consequences of this shift have been well-documented, it remains unclear whether affective polarization impacts attitudes and behaviors toward non-political groups. Drawing from the literature on social sorting, theories in cognitive-political psychology, and emerging work on parallel updating, I hypothesize that affective polarization spills over onto affect toward outparty-stereotypical groups. To test this hypothesis, I fielded a survey experiment to 1,250 American adults. Participants were randomly assigned to an increased polarization, decreased polarization, or control condition. I assessed both polarization and group affect using a series of feeling thermometers and conducted a mediation analysis to examine the treatment effect. Both Democrats and Republicans exhibited more positive attitudes toward groups associated with the opposing party when their levels of affective polarization were lowered. At elevated levels of affective polarization, respondents expressed more negative attitudes toward outparty-stereotypical groups, but these effects were imprecisely estimated. These results provide limited but encouraging evidence that addressing political polarization could reduce prejudice and bias against non-political groups. They also suggest a need for further research on how affective polarization impacts attitudes and behavior beyond an exclusively partisan context.

Amid increasing migration from Latin America to the U.S. over the past several decades, anti-immigrant sentiment fails to recognize the role economic hardship imposed by U.S. trade deals has been a contributing factor. They have clashed with Latin American governments’ ability to establish laws and regulations that benefit public interest. Through collaboration with the advocacy group Public Citizen, data was collected from the ICSID and UNCTAD databases on Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) cases levied against Mexico and Central America by the U.S. since the inception of NAFTA (1994) and CAFTA (2006). These cases were analyzed by comparing the total amounts claimed in ISDS lawsuits against each country with their GDP and government expenditure levels during corresponding periods. We compared the proportion of GDP targeted by ISDS claims to illustrate the economic impact relative to national capacity. I then synthesized the data through a historiographical analysis of U.S. relations with Latin America from major migration waves. The results revealed that suing Latin American countries through ISDS and trade-related provisions limited economic resources. Thus, a growing body of research is linking this data to an increase in migration for better economic opportunities. The findings shed light on how the U.S. benefits from low-wage labor abroad and domestically.

Background: It is often important for bystanders to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in cases of sudden cardiac arrest, and this is one of the most effective methods at potentially saving a life before paramedics arrive. However, access to CPR training is often not addressed and is an obstacle preventing more people from being adequately equipped with skills in cases of sudden cardiac arrest. Methods: This review was conducted as a part of the literature review process on literature found in Google Scholar and various other journals and platforms, such as MDPI, American Heart Association, National Library of Medicine: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), Science Direct, and more. Results: A study has found lower rates of bystander CPR performed in underserved communities compared to more well-off communities. The willingness to perform CPR does not seem to differ among people with different socioeconomic status, but those with a higher socioeconomic status may have better access to CPR training. As such, it’s suggested that targeted CPR training in non-white, low-education, and low-income neighborhoods can increase the rate of bystander CPR (BCPR) rates and improve out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) outcomes for patients. Significance: We looked at a knowledge gap targeting the access to CPR training. We hope by shedding light on this under-addressed issue, we can bring more attention in accessing training for this life-saving technique to all individuals in the community.