Drawing on power resources theory and life course theories of cumulative advantage, this article examines the wealth returns to a unionized career. Using longitudinal data on the working lives of US Baby Boomers and comprehensive measures of wealth at midlife, I find that the average wealth returns to unionized careers are substantial, exceeding $130,000 for marketable wealth. The average returns to a unionized career are even larger when defined benefit pension ($378,000) and Social Security benefits ($361,000) are included in net worth. Higher cumulative lifetime earnings, enhanced job security, and greater access to employer-provided benefits partially account for the wealth returns to unionized careers. The wealth returns to unionized careers are concentrated among men, workers without a college degree, and those who worked in contexts where unions were more powerful. Results support arguments that labor market institutions bolster workers’ financial security by facilitating wealth accumulation.
{"title":"The wealth returns to a unionized career","authors":"Alec P Rhodes","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf129","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf129","url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on power resources theory and life course theories of cumulative advantage, this article examines the wealth returns to a unionized career. Using longitudinal data on the working lives of US Baby Boomers and comprehensive measures of wealth at midlife, I find that the average wealth returns to unionized careers are substantial, exceeding $130,000 for marketable wealth. The average returns to a unionized career are even larger when defined benefit pension ($378,000) and Social Security benefits ($361,000) are included in net worth. Higher cumulative lifetime earnings, enhanced job security, and greater access to employer-provided benefits partially account for the wealth returns to unionized careers. The wealth returns to unionized careers are concentrated among men, workers without a college degree, and those who worked in contexts where unions were more powerful. Results support arguments that labor market institutions bolster workers’ financial security by facilitating wealth accumulation.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144919281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Courtney E Boen, Elizabeth F Bair, Hedwig Lee, Atheendar S Venkataramani
While state incarceration policies have received much attention in research on the causes of mass incarceration in the United States, their roles in shaping population health and health disparities remain largely unknown. Merging data on state incarceration policies to vital statistics birth records from 1984 to 2004, we examine the impacts of two signature state incarceration policies adopted during the “tough on crime” era of the 1990s—three strikes and truth-in-sentencing—on Black and White birth outcomes. Using a difference-in-differences event study research design that models the dynamic impacts of these policies over time, we find that these policies had opposing effects on birth outcomes. Birth weight outcomes—including mean birth weight and low birth weight—for Black infants worsened markedly in the year three strikes policies were adopted. By contrast, birth outcomes for Black and White infants gradually improved after truth-in-sentencing policies were adopted. The discordant findings point to distinct, countervailing mechanisms by which sentencing policies can affect population health. We provide suggestive evidence that three strikes policies adversely impacted Black birth outcomes through affective mechanisms, by inducing highly racialized, stigmatizing, and criminalizing public discourse around the time of policy adoption. Our results indicate that truth-in-sentencing likely impacted birth outcomes via material mechanisms, by gradually reducing community incarceration and crime rates. Altogether, these findings point to the need to further interrogate state criminal legal system policies for their impacts on population health, considering whether, how, and for whom these policies result in health impacts.
{"title":"Heterogeneous and racialized impacts of state incarceration policies on birth outcomes in the United States","authors":"Courtney E Boen, Elizabeth F Bair, Hedwig Lee, Atheendar S Venkataramani","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf127","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf127","url":null,"abstract":"While state incarceration policies have received much attention in research on the causes of mass incarceration in the United States, their roles in shaping population health and health disparities remain largely unknown. Merging data on state incarceration policies to vital statistics birth records from 1984 to 2004, we examine the impacts of two signature state incarceration policies adopted during the “tough on crime” era of the 1990s—three strikes and truth-in-sentencing—on Black and White birth outcomes. Using a difference-in-differences event study research design that models the dynamic impacts of these policies over time, we find that these policies had opposing effects on birth outcomes. Birth weight outcomes—including mean birth weight and low birth weight—for Black infants worsened markedly in the year three strikes policies were adopted. By contrast, birth outcomes for Black and White infants gradually improved after truth-in-sentencing policies were adopted. The discordant findings point to distinct, countervailing mechanisms by which sentencing policies can affect population health. We provide suggestive evidence that three strikes policies adversely impacted Black birth outcomes through affective mechanisms, by inducing highly racialized, stigmatizing, and criminalizing public discourse around the time of policy adoption. Our results indicate that truth-in-sentencing likely impacted birth outcomes via material mechanisms, by gradually reducing community incarceration and crime rates. Altogether, these findings point to the need to further interrogate state criminal legal system policies for their impacts on population health, considering whether, how, and for whom these policies result in health impacts.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144899017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The racial segregation of schools and neighborhoods are mutually reinforcing because school districts assign students to schools based on residential address and parents account for this link when deciding where to live. Parents cite a desire for the “package deal” of a good neighborhood with a good local school. Yet, in studying how race shapes parents’ preferences, scholars typically examine these contexts in isolation. Using an original stated choice experiment, I propose and test two theoretical frameworks for how the package deal influences parents’ joint preferences for schools and neighborhoods. I find that school and neighborhood preferences are interactive, meaning that neighborhood characteristics shape the effects of school characteristics on parents’ decisions and school characteristics shape the effects of neighborhood characteristics, and the nature of this interaction varies by parent race. I find that White parents’ preferences for Whiter schools and neighborhoods are magnified across contexts, such that White parents prefer racial isolation in both their schools and neighborhoods. Latino parents also prefer greater Latino representation in both neighborhoods and schools, but these preferences are only activated in majority Latino contexts. In contrast, Black parents prefer to avoid being a racial minority in both schools and neighborhoods but are satisfied when just one context is majority Black. These intertwined, interactive preferences mean that our understanding of how parents decide where to live and where to send their children to school must account for the relationship between these contexts.
{"title":"Understanding the “package deal”: disentangling parents’ intertwined preferences for schools and neighborhoods","authors":"Elly Field","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf104","url":null,"abstract":"The racial segregation of schools and neighborhoods are mutually reinforcing because school districts assign students to schools based on residential address and parents account for this link when deciding where to live. Parents cite a desire for the “package deal” of a good neighborhood with a good local school. Yet, in studying how race shapes parents’ preferences, scholars typically examine these contexts in isolation. Using an original stated choice experiment, I propose and test two theoretical frameworks for how the package deal influences parents’ joint preferences for schools and neighborhoods. I find that school and neighborhood preferences are interactive, meaning that neighborhood characteristics shape the effects of school characteristics on parents’ decisions and school characteristics shape the effects of neighborhood characteristics, and the nature of this interaction varies by parent race. I find that White parents’ preferences for Whiter schools and neighborhoods are magnified across contexts, such that White parents prefer racial isolation in both their schools and neighborhoods. Latino parents also prefer greater Latino representation in both neighborhoods and schools, but these preferences are only activated in majority Latino contexts. In contrast, Black parents prefer to avoid being a racial minority in both schools and neighborhoods but are satisfied when just one context is majority Black. These intertwined, interactive preferences mean that our understanding of how parents decide where to live and where to send their children to school must account for the relationship between these contexts.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144766107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Previous research on legislation that targets nongovernmental organizations working on human rights issues (HR NGOs) has mostly focused on state actors in authoritarian regimes. In this study, we theorize the role of nonstate actors in political repression in a relatively more democratic setting, that of Israel. We conducted a systematic content analysis of thousands of legal documents, parliamentary archives, and media reports, complementing these with ethnographic work in several NGOs and in-depth interviews with NGO staffers. In contrast with theoretical views that see legislative processes as merely window dressing, we found that the Israeli legislative process has had a profound impact on Israeli HR NGOs, entailing a significant loss of public and political support, legitimacy, and scarce resources. We argue that scholars of political repression must pay greater attention to the crucial role played by nonstate actors in advancing and enforcing repressive legislation and to the entire legislative process—rather than only its formal legal results.
{"title":"Legislative processes, nonstate actors, and political repression: the case of human rights NGOs in Israel","authors":"Ina Filkobski, Eran Shor","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf111","url":null,"abstract":"Previous research on legislation that targets nongovernmental organizations working on human rights issues (HR NGOs) has mostly focused on state actors in authoritarian regimes. In this study, we theorize the role of nonstate actors in political repression in a relatively more democratic setting, that of Israel. We conducted a systematic content analysis of thousands of legal documents, parliamentary archives, and media reports, complementing these with ethnographic work in several NGOs and in-depth interviews with NGO staffers. In contrast with theoretical views that see legislative processes as merely window dressing, we found that the Israeli legislative process has had a profound impact on Israeli HR NGOs, entailing a significant loss of public and political support, legitimacy, and scarce resources. We argue that scholars of political repression must pay greater attention to the crucial role played by nonstate actors in advancing and enforcing repressive legislation and to the entire legislative process—rather than only its formal legal results.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144719680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Laura Tach, Emily Parker, Alexandra Cooperstock, Samuel Dodini
This paper assesses the growth and spatial distribution of federal place-based policies in the United States. Using a novel dataset of federal place-based policies from 1990 to 2019, we show how the dual forces of fiscalization and financialization have fueled a substantial increase in federal place-based funding to communities via competitive tax credit and grant programs. We consider whether federal place-based funding has been distributed in a compensatory way by prioritizing more disadvantaged communities or whether it has compounded neighborhood inequalities by prioritizing more advantaged communities. We find that federal place-based funding has gone overwhelmingly to communities experiencing economic disadvantage, as intended, but at the same time such policies have compounded other forms of spatial inequality via disproportionate investment in areas with more nonprofit organizations and stronger housing markets. Economically disadvantaged neighborhoods that are spatially embedded within counties with strong housing markets and robust nonprofit sectors received the most federal place-based funding. These organizational and housing market inequities are strongest for tax credit and competitive grant programs, precisely the forms of funding that have grown most over this period. The funding trends reveal a pattern of cumulative advantage, as poor communities with initial funding advantages in the 1990s went on to receive the vast majority of federal place-based funding in the subsequent decades, leading to growing divergence among high-poverty communities in the distribution of federal place-based resources over time.
{"title":"Federal place-based policy and the geography of inequality in the United States, 1990-2019.","authors":"Laura Tach, Emily Parker, Alexandra Cooperstock, Samuel Dodini","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf098","DOIUrl":"10.1093/sf/soaf098","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper assesses the growth and spatial distribution of federal place-based policies in the United States. Using a novel dataset of federal place-based policies from 1990 to 2019, we show how the dual forces of fiscalization and financialization have fueled a substantial increase in federal place-based funding to communities via competitive tax credit and grant programs. We consider whether federal place-based funding has been distributed in a compensatory way by prioritizing more disadvantaged communities or whether it has compounded neighborhood inequalities by prioritizing more advantaged communities. We find that federal place-based funding has gone overwhelmingly to communities experiencing economic disadvantage, as intended, but at the same time such policies have compounded other forms of spatial inequality via disproportionate investment in areas with more nonprofit organizations and stronger housing markets. Economically disadvantaged neighborhoods that are spatially embedded within counties with strong housing markets and robust nonprofit sectors received the most federal place-based funding. These organizational and housing market inequities are strongest for tax credit and competitive grant programs, precisely the forms of funding that have grown most over this period. The funding trends reveal a pattern of cumulative advantage, as poor communities with initial funding advantages in the 1990s went on to receive the vast majority of federal place-based funding in the subsequent decades, leading to growing divergence among high-poverty communities in the distribution of federal place-based resources over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12674005/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145679080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the United States, most mental health services are provided by independent helping professionals, individually deciding where to operate, whom to treat, and in which insurance networks to participate. In making such decisions, these market actors often navigate conflicts between financial, professional, and prosocial considerations. This article investigates the phenomenon of psychiatrist opt-out from Medicaid and Medicare, aiming to elucidate how social contexts influence such decisions. Assembling a census of all licensed Georgia psychiatrists and, assisted by a telephone audit, leveraging granular data about the environments in which clinicians operate, findings show that limits to helping in the form of opt-out from public insurance systematically correspond to the social ecologies in which psychiatrists are embedded—with their prospective clientele and local peers. Evidence of alignment between insurance participation and population needs, when financially justified, and of spatially dependent monopolistic and competition-curbing behavior point at the power of these ecologies in shaping the balance actors negotiate between local economic and normative pressures. Theoretically, findings support the argument that meso-level conditions mediate countervailing social forces and their translation to action—here, spatially configuring how markets and morals interact. In the context of the mental health crisis, where demand for care far exceeds supply, understanding how spatial conditions ultimately shape the pressures that helping professionals face and their opt-out decisions is crucial. In aggregate, these individually decided yet ecologically conditioned limits to helping impact the availability of mental health services to some of society’s most disadvantaged populations, thus shaping the contours of the crisis.
{"title":"Limits to helping in a helping profession: the social context of psychiatrist opt-out from public insurance","authors":"Daniel Tadmon","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf107","url":null,"abstract":"In the United States, most mental health services are provided by independent helping professionals, individually deciding where to operate, whom to treat, and in which insurance networks to participate. In making such decisions, these market actors often navigate conflicts between financial, professional, and prosocial considerations. This article investigates the phenomenon of psychiatrist opt-out from Medicaid and Medicare, aiming to elucidate how social contexts influence such decisions. Assembling a census of all licensed Georgia psychiatrists and, assisted by a telephone audit, leveraging granular data about the environments in which clinicians operate, findings show that limits to helping in the form of opt-out from public insurance systematically correspond to the social ecologies in which psychiatrists are embedded—with their prospective clientele and local peers. Evidence of alignment between insurance participation and population needs, when financially justified, and of spatially dependent monopolistic and competition-curbing behavior point at the power of these ecologies in shaping the balance actors negotiate between local economic and normative pressures. Theoretically, findings support the argument that meso-level conditions mediate countervailing social forces and their translation to action—here, spatially configuring how markets and morals interact. In the context of the mental health crisis, where demand for care far exceeds supply, understanding how spatial conditions ultimately shape the pressures that helping professionals face and their opt-out decisions is crucial. In aggregate, these individually decided yet ecologically conditioned limits to helping impact the availability of mental health services to some of society’s most disadvantaged populations, thus shaping the contours of the crisis.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144715296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While copious research documents that early grades in college are fateful for persistence in STEM fields, social scientists have seldom considered how grading systems themselves might influence STEM progress. Drawing on university-wide transcript data and longitudinal interview data from a cohort of undergraduates moving through an elite university, I show that a university-wide transition from A–F to pass/fail grades during the COVID-19 pandemic substantially influenced student decisions to enroll in mathematics courses. Female-identified students from minoritized ethno-racial groups were substantially more likely to enroll in their first math courses than demographically similar students in prior years. Interviews reveal that pass/fail grades gave these students a sense of safety with a subject they perceived as difficult. Integrating these findings with insights from the sociology of quantification, I theorize that grading systems—the specific scales used to assign final course grades (e.g., A–F grading or pass/fail)—may have independent effects on demographic segmentation and stratification in undergraduate education.
{"title":"Offering safe passage: grading systems and gendered enrollment patterns in undergraduate mathematics","authors":"Monique H Harrison","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf103","url":null,"abstract":"While copious research documents that early grades in college are fateful for persistence in STEM fields, social scientists have seldom considered how grading systems themselves might influence STEM progress. Drawing on university-wide transcript data and longitudinal interview data from a cohort of undergraduates moving through an elite university, I show that a university-wide transition from A–F to pass/fail grades during the COVID-19 pandemic substantially influenced student decisions to enroll in mathematics courses. Female-identified students from minoritized ethno-racial groups were substantially more likely to enroll in their first math courses than demographically similar students in prior years. Interviews reveal that pass/fail grades gave these students a sense of safety with a subject they perceived as difficult. Integrating these findings with insights from the sociology of quantification, I theorize that grading systems—the specific scales used to assign final course grades (e.g., A–F grading or pass/fail)—may have independent effects on demographic segmentation and stratification in undergraduate education.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144669682","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite the common understanding that armed civil conflict increases women’s vulnerability, scholarly debate suggests that women’s status in society improves after violence ends. This study sheds light on post-conflict institutional transformation using popular attitudes toward gender roles and relations. By focusing on the significantly overlooked displacement of nearly 5 million civilians in the former Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan, this study presents powerful new survey data painstakingly gathered to assess the effects of this social upheaval on people’s attitudes regarding gender equality. The results suggest that individuals who experience displacement express greater support for gender equality in the conflict’s aftermath than if they do not experience it. Wartime displacement not only disrupts civilian activity but also exposes people to an external society. By interacting with out-groups, the displaced learn and benefit from ideas about gender roles and relations that contrast with long-standing patriarchal norms. Although gender norms are often persistent in a cultural setting, the empirical evidence suggests that being an internally displaced person is an acute event for civilians to amend their prior views on gender roles and relations.
{"title":"Internal displacement and post-conflict gender attitudes: evidence from northwestern Pakistan","authors":"Yuichi Kubota","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf105","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the common understanding that armed civil conflict increases women’s vulnerability, scholarly debate suggests that women’s status in society improves after violence ends. This study sheds light on post-conflict institutional transformation using popular attitudes toward gender roles and relations. By focusing on the significantly overlooked displacement of nearly 5 million civilians in the former Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan, this study presents powerful new survey data painstakingly gathered to assess the effects of this social upheaval on people’s attitudes regarding gender equality. The results suggest that individuals who experience displacement express greater support for gender equality in the conflict’s aftermath than if they do not experience it. Wartime displacement not only disrupts civilian activity but also exposes people to an external society. By interacting with out-groups, the displaced learn and benefit from ideas about gender roles and relations that contrast with long-standing patriarchal norms. Although gender norms are often persistent in a cultural setting, the empirical evidence suggests that being an internally displaced person is an acute event for civilians to amend their prior views on gender roles and relations.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"679 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144639669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rodolfo Disi Pavlic, Rodrigo M Medel, Matías Bargsted, Nicolás M Somma
We examine the relationship between proximity to actively policed protest events and people’s willingness to justify violence against police forces. Focusing on the Chilean social uprising, a series of massive protests between 2019 and 2020, this study highlights the significant implications of law enforcement issues on government legitimacy and the potential for protest policing to escalate violence. To conduct our research, we use a difference-in-differences design that combines survey data with georeferenced data on protests that experienced active policing near survey respondents. Our results show that spatial and temporal proximity to such protests significantly increases people’s willingness to justify violence. Additionally, this effect is not uniform across all ideological groups. Exposure to protests with active policing strongly affects centrists, whereas it is negligible for leftists, rightists, and independents. Different robustness checks largely support a causal link between proximity to actively policed protests and justification of violence against the police. These insights contribute to our understanding of how mass mobilizations and state responses influence public attitudes, emphasizing the nuanced impact of protest policing on different ideological segments of society.
{"title":"Justification of violence, ideological preferences, and exposure to protests: causal evidence from the 2019 Chilean social unrest","authors":"Rodolfo Disi Pavlic, Rodrigo M Medel, Matías Bargsted, Nicolás M Somma","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf102","url":null,"abstract":"We examine the relationship between proximity to actively policed protest events and people’s willingness to justify violence against police forces. Focusing on the Chilean social uprising, a series of massive protests between 2019 and 2020, this study highlights the significant implications of law enforcement issues on government legitimacy and the potential for protest policing to escalate violence. To conduct our research, we use a difference-in-differences design that combines survey data with georeferenced data on protests that experienced active policing near survey respondents. Our results show that spatial and temporal proximity to such protests significantly increases people’s willingness to justify violence. Additionally, this effect is not uniform across all ideological groups. Exposure to protests with active policing strongly affects centrists, whereas it is negligible for leftists, rightists, and independents. Different robustness checks largely support a causal link between proximity to actively policed protests and justification of violence against the police. These insights contribute to our understanding of how mass mobilizations and state responses influence public attitudes, emphasizing the nuanced impact of protest policing on different ideological segments of society.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144586318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The latter half of the 20th century was marked by a massive expansion of higher educational systems in many Western countries. This development provided greater educational opportunities, resulted in a marked increase in educational attainment, and has been attributed as an important factor behind increased intergenerational educational mobility. Most previous studies of these developments are based on analyses of aggregate trends in educational attainment and mobility and overlook the geographical dimension of educational expansions. The geographic location of colleges and the local availability of higher educational institutions may have had important impacts on local patterns of intergenerational educational mobility. We study the impacts of major educational expansion reforms that took place between 1969 and 1993 in Norway and resulted in a massive decentralization of higher educational opportunities. Combining recent developments in differences-in-differences methodology, detailed data on the establishment and upgrading of such institutions, and population-wide register data on social origins and educational attainment, we study the effects of the establishment and upgrading of local colleges on educational mobility. Results suggest that these improvements in local educational opportunities had little to no impact on intergenerational educational mobility locally. We discuss our findings in light of the Norwegian welfare state context.
{"title":"Educational expansion reforms and intergenerational educational mobility in Norway","authors":"Adrian Farner Rogne, Siri Frisli","doi":"10.1093/sf/soaf101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaf101","url":null,"abstract":"The latter half of the 20th century was marked by a massive expansion of higher educational systems in many Western countries. This development provided greater educational opportunities, resulted in a marked increase in educational attainment, and has been attributed as an important factor behind increased intergenerational educational mobility. Most previous studies of these developments are based on analyses of aggregate trends in educational attainment and mobility and overlook the geographical dimension of educational expansions. The geographic location of colleges and the local availability of higher educational institutions may have had important impacts on local patterns of intergenerational educational mobility. We study the impacts of major educational expansion reforms that took place between 1969 and 1993 in Norway and resulted in a massive decentralization of higher educational opportunities. Combining recent developments in differences-in-differences methodology, detailed data on the establishment and upgrading of such institutions, and population-wide register data on social origins and educational attainment, we study the effects of the establishment and upgrading of local colleges on educational mobility. Results suggest that these improvements in local educational opportunities had little to no impact on intergenerational educational mobility locally. We discuss our findings in light of the Norwegian welfare state context.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"266 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144594477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：