Hispanic-White Differences in Lifespan Variability in the United States

This study is the first to investigate whether and, if so, why Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites in the United States differ in the variability of their lifespans. Although Hispanics enjoy higher life expectancy than whites, very little is known about how lifespan variability—and thus uncertainty about length of life—differs by race/ethnicity. We use 2010 U.S. National Vital Statistics System data to calculate lifespan variance at ages 10 and older for Hispanics and whites, and then decompose the Hispanic-white variance difference into cause-specific spread, allocation, and timing effects. In addition to their higher life expectancy relative to whites, Hispanics also exhibit 7 % lower lifespan variability, with a larger gap among women than men. Differences in cause-specific incidence (allocation effects) explain nearly two-thirds of Hispanics’ lower lifespan variability, mainly because of the higher mortality from suicide, accidental poisoning, and lung cancer among whites. Most of the remaining Hispanic-white variance difference is due to greater age dispersion (spread effects) in mortality from heart disease and residual causes among whites than Hispanics. Thus, the Hispanic paradox—that a socioeconomically disadvantaged population (Hispanics) enjoys a mortality advantage over a socioeconomically advantaged population (whites)—pertains to lifespan variability as well as to life expectancy. Efforts to reduce U.S. lifespan variability and simultaneously increase life expectancy, especially for whites, should target premature, young adult causes of death—in particular, suicide, accidental poisoning, and homicide. We conclude by discussing how the analysis of Hispanic-white differences in lifespan variability contributes to our understanding of the Hispanic paradox

Physiological Correlates of Volunteering

We review research on physiological correlates of volunteering, a neglected but promising research field. Some of these correlates seem to be causal factors influencing volunteering. Volunteers tend to have better physical health, both self-reported and expert-assessed, better mental health, and perform better on cognitive tasks. Research thus far has rarely examined neurological, neurochemical, hormonal, and genetic correlates of volunteering to any significant extent, especially controlling for other factors as potential confounds. Evolutionary theory and behavioral genetic research suggest the importance of such physiological factors in humans. Basically, many aspects of social relationships and social activities have effects on health (e.g., Newman and Roberts 2013; Uchino 2004), as the widely used biopsychosocial (BPS) model suggests (Institute of Medicine 2001). Studies of formal volunteering (FV), charitable giving, and altruistic behavior suggest that physiological characteristics are related to volunteering, including specific genes (such as oxytocin receptor [OXTR] genes, Arginine vasopressin receptor [AVPR] genes, dopamine D4 receptor [DRD4] genes, and 5-HTTLPR). We recommend that future research on physiological factors be extended to non-Western populations, focusing specifically on volunteering, and differentiating between different forms and types of volunteering and civic participation

Trends in Global Gender Inequality (Forthcoming, Social Forces).

This study investigates trends in gender inequality for the world as a whole. Using data encompassing a large majority of the world's population, we examine world trends over recent decades for key indicators of gender inequality in education, mortality, political representation, and economic activity. We find that gender inequality is declining in virtually all major domains, that the decline is occurring across diverse religious and cultural traditions, and that population growth is slowing the decline because populations are growing faster in countries where there is the greatest gender inequality.This is a manuscript of an article published as Dorius, Shawn F., and Glenn Firebaugh. "Trends in global gender inequality." Social Forces 88, no. 5 (2010): 1941-1968. doi: 10.1353/sof.2010.0040. Posted with permission

Seven Rules for Social Research

Seven Rules for Social Research teaches social scientists how to get the most out of their technical skills and tools, providing a resource that fully describes the strategies and concepts no researcher or student of human behavior can do without. Glenn Firebaugh provides indispensable practical guidance for anyone doing research in the social and health sciences today, whether they are undergraduate or graduate students embarking on their first major research projects or seasoned professionals seeking to incorporate new methods into their research. The rules are the basis for discussions of a broad range of issues, from choosing a research question to inferring causal relationships, and are illustrated with applications and case studies from sociology, economics, political science, and related fields. Though geared toward quantitative methods, the rules also work for qualitative research. Seven Rules for Social Research is ideal for students and researchers who want to take their technical skills to new levels of precision and insight, and for instructors who want a textbook for a second methods course. The Seven Rules: (1) There should be the possibility of surprise in social research. (2) Look for differences that make a difference, and report them. (3) Build reality checks into your research. (4) Replicate where possible. (5) Compare like with like. (6) Use panel data to study individual change and repeated cross-section data to study social change. (7) Let method be the servant, not the master.social research, health sciences, human behavior, quantitative methods