Stigma Processes in the Context of Migration-Generated Diversity
Lawrence Yang, Bruce Link and Maureen A. Eger, Chairs
Myriad factors underpin migration, and multiple types of conflicts can arise when differences in ethnicity, race, language, religion, etc. interact with political institutions (e.g., legal status, citizenship, well-being of subsequent generations). Majority group reactions and migrant experiences vary widely across and within countries as well as over time. Though the origins of prejudice and patterns of social mobility among minority groups have been well studied, understanding is lacking on the empirical patterns of self-reported discrimination and the “integration paradox.” Why does inequality emerge in certain (but not all) second-generation immigrant groups, and how are specific behaviors or traditions selected to sanction a group over others? To address these issues, we need an integrative approach—one grounded in scholarship from the stigma and migration research communities. Collectively, this Forum will examine the relationships inherent to stigma and migration-generated diversity.
Stable social systems rely on humankind’s ability to realize sustainable methods of collaboration, understood as cooperation between agents toward mutually constructed goals. The need for a fundamental understanding of collaboration has become increasingly important given the critical challenges that we face at multiple levels. Technological and economical means of connecting people and societies, for instance, have replaced long-established patterns of interaction and may reshape collaboration in ways that are currently hard to predict or influence. Without a fundamental understanding of the mechanisms, processes, and boundary conditions of collaboration, our ability to evaluate potential scenarios is limited. This Forum will develop a theoretical framework to guide future research in its quest to understand collaboration across spatiotemporal scales and contexts.
Exploring and Exploiting Genetic Risk for Psychiatric Disorders
Joshua A. Gordon and Elisabeth Binder, Chairs
For decades, the genetic basis of psychiatric illnesses remained a mystery. After many failed attempts to hunt for psychiatric risk genes, we now realize that psychiatric disorders are polygenic. This understanding coupled with efforts to amass immense samples and characterize them through GWAS has revealed the genetic architecture of, e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, and autism. Hundreds of risk loci have been identified, most of which are common alleles of very small-effect sizes. Added to these, several dozen rare mutations of larger-effect sizes offer clues into the origins of psychiatric disease risk, but very little insight into the chain of events that lead to mental illness. To foster translation of this knowledge into clinically useful approaches, this Forum will identify areas in the translation of genomics to neurobiology where a systematic, consensus-based, and collaborative approach to experimental science can help reveal the key neurobiological mechanisms associated with genetic risk for mental illness.
Digital Ethology: From Individuals to Communities and Back
Tomas Paus and Hye-Chung Kum, Chairs
Dates of the Forum: September 19–24, 2021
Over the past decade, large-scale genomic studies have identified common genetic variations associated with complex traits in health and disease. Valuable insights have been gained into the molecular pathways that underlie complex traits, but inter-individual variability for a given trait is still poorly understood. Rare genetic variants may account for some variance, but it is now generally accepted that environmental influences play a much larger role. Measuring these influences on a large scale is challenging. Still, the ubiquitous presence of information technology in our lives has created a vast body of digital information and offers a detailed record of many human activities. This Forum will explore how “digital ethology” (the study of human behavior as captured by its digital footprint) can be used to quantify the human environment and to facilitate an understanding of its impact on health and well-being.