Race and the Victim: An Examination of Capital Sentencing and Guilt Attribution Studies

This article examines the effect of the race of the victim on legal decision making in capital and non-capital criminal cases. A large body of research on race and capital sentencing indicates that the crime victim\u27s race affects the prosecutor\u27s decision to seek, and the jury\u27s decision to recommend, the death penalty. The most well known of these is undoubtedly the Baldus study, which provided the data underlying the defendant\u27s challenge to the Georgia death penalty regime in McCleskey v. Kemp. Less well known are empirical analyses conducted since the Supreme Court rejected McCleskey\u27s challenge. The article reviews several of these studies, virtually all of which find the victim\u27s race continues to matter to death penalty sentencing. The author also reviews the results of experiments on jury decisionmaking in non-capital cases, which reach conflicting results on the significance of juror-victim racial similarity and guilt attribution. Although an experimental design allows researchers to hold constant every variable other than race, the juries in these experiments often differ significantly from real world juries, thereby limiting the confidence one may have in the applicability of those results outside the laboratory. The article concludes by noting where additional study would be useful

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on irritable bowel syndrome

Background: Gastrointestinal manifestations of the COVID-19 pandemic may mimic Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), and social distancing measures may affect IBS patients negatively. We aimed to study the impact of COVID-19 on respondents with IBS. Methods: We conducted an anonymised survey using MySurvey platform from May to June 2020 in 35 countries. The general public's knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding personal hygiene and social distancing during this COVID-19 pandemic and the psychological impact of COVID-19 were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the differences in well-being and compliance to social distancing measures between IBS and non-IBS respondents. Factors associated with worsening of IBS symptoms were evaluated. For newly developed IBS-like symptoms, subjects must fulfill ROME IV criteria. Results: Out of 2704 respondents, 2024 (74.9%) did not have IBS, 305 (11.3%) had IBS and 374 (13.8%) did not know what IBS was. Respondents with IBS reported significantly worse emotional, social and psychological well-being compared to non-IBS respondents and were less compliant to social distancing (28.2% vs 35.3%, p=0.029, table 1). Of the non-IBS respondents, 96 (4.7%) developed new IBS-like symptoms. Among IBS respondents, the majority reported no change in symptom severity (61.6%), while 26.6% reported improvement and 11.8% reported worsening in IBS symptoms. A higher proportion of respondents with no change in the severity of IBS symptoms was willing to practice social distancing indefinitely compared to those who deteriorated (74.9% vs 51.4%, p=0.016, table 2). In multivariate analysis (table 3), willingness to continue social distancing for only another 2–3 weeks was significantly associated with higher odds of worsening IBS while better emotional well-being was associated with lower odds. Conclusions: Our study showed differences in well-being and compliance to social distancing between IBS and non-IBS respondents, and these factors influence the worsening in severity of IBS. Further research will focus on how occupational stress and dietary changes may influence IBS symptoms