Genome-wide association study of lifetime cannabis use based on a large meta-analytic sample of 32330 subjects from the International Cannabis Consortium

Cannabis is the most widely produced and consumed illicit psychoactive substance worldwide. Occasional cannabis use can progress to frequent use, abuse and dependence with all known adverse physical, psychological and social consequences. Individual differences in cannabis initiation are heritable (40-48%). The International Cannabis Consortium was established with the aim to identify genetic risk variants of cannabis use. We conducted a meta-analysis of genome-wide association data of 13 cohorts (N=32 330) and four replication samples (N=5627). In addition, we performed a gene-based test of association, estimated single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based heritability and explored the genetic correlation between lifetime cannabis use and cigarette use using LD score regression. No individual SNPs reached genome-wide significance. Nonetheless, gene-based tests identified four genes significantly associated with lifetime cannabis use: NCAM1, CADM2, SCOC and KCNT2. Previous studies reported associations of NCAM1 with cigarette smoking and other substance use, and those of CADM2 with body mass index, processing speed and autism disorders, which are phenotypes previously reported to be associated with cannabis use. Furthermore, we showed that, combined across the genome, all common SNPs explained 13-20% (P&lt;0.001) of the liability of lifetime cannabis use. Finally, there was a strong genetic correlation (rg=0.83; P=1.85 × 10(-8)) between lifetime cannabis use and lifetime cigarette smoking implying that the SNP effect sizes of the two traits are highly correlated. This is the largest meta-analysis of cannabis GWA studies to date, revealing important new insights into the genetic pathways of lifetime cannabis use. Future functional studies should explore the impact of the identified genes on the biological mechanisms of cannabis use.</p

Building National Identity in Newborn Kosovo: Challenges of Integrating National Identity with Ethnic Identity Among Kosovar Albanians and Kosovar Serbs

We address intergroup relations in a post-conflict context, Kosovo—where the 2008 declaration of independence led to the creation of a new national Kosovar identity. However, Kosovars still identify primarily with the ethnic identity, central to historical tensions between two main ethnic groups: the Albanian majority (over 90 % of the population) and the Serb minority (5 %). Drawing upon social identity complexity and the common ingroup identity model, we show that the new superordinate Kosovar identity does not yet function as a conflict reducing mechanism as it is conflated with ethnic identity for Albanians, while being a non-identity for Serbs. Improving intergroup relations depends on different strategies: for Albanians a more complex and inclusive identity relates to more positive intergroup outcomes, whereas for Serbs, identification with the Kosovar national identity predicts more positive perceptions of Albanians. Findings are discussed in light of current inter-ethnic challenges and future prospects

Equal representation does not mean equal opportunity: Women academics perceive a thicker glass ceiling in social and behavioral fields than in the natural sciences and economics

In the study of women in academia, the focus is often particularly on women's stark underrepresentation in the math-intensive fields of natural sciences, technology, and economics (NTE). In the non-math-intensive of fields life, social and behavioral (LSB) sciences, gender issues are seemingly less at stake because, on average, women are well-represented. However, in the current study, we demonstrate that equal gender representation in LSB disciplines does not guarantee women's equal opportunity to advance to full professorship-to the contrary. With a cross-sectional survey among N  = 2,109 academics at mid-level careers (i.e., assistant and associate professors) in the Netherlands, we test the hypothesis that in LSB (more than NTE), female academics perceive to hit a "thicker" glass ceiling-that is, they see a sharper contrast between the high representation of women at the lower compared to the top levels. We test whether this predicts female academics' lower estimated chances to reach full professorship relative to men in LSB (but not NTE). We introduce a novel perceived glass ceiling index (GCI), calculated based on academics' perceptions of the share of women and men in their direct work environment minus their perceptions of gender ratio among full professors in their field. Results confirm that the perceived glass ceiling is thicker in the non-math-intensive LSB compared to math-intensive NTE fields. Furthermore, only in LSB (but not NTE), women perceived a thicker glass ceiling than men. Moreover, only among female academics, the thicker the perceived glass ceiling, the lower their estimated chances to become full professor 1 day. Combined, a moderated mediation showed that for women only, a thicker perceived glass ceiling in LSB compared to NTE disciplines predicted their lower estimated chances to advance to full professor level. No such mediation occurred for men. We conclude that women's higher numerical representation in LSB disciplines does not negate a male-dominant normative standard about academic leadership and success. Paradoxically, the perceived odds for female academics to reach the top of their field are lower in fields where they are relatively highly represented, and this may pose unique barriers to women's perceived opportunities for career success

Academics as Agentic Superheroes: Female academics’ lack of fit with the agentic stereotype of success limits their career advancement

Gender gaps in academia persist with women being less likely to attain leadership, earning lower salaries, and receiving less research funding and resources compared to their male peers. The current research demonstrates yet another, more intangible gender gap in academia called lack of fit, whereby compared to male academics, female academics perceive higher misfit between their professional self-concept and the agentic ‘superhero’ stereotype of the successful academic. The entire population of Dutch academics (i.e., assistant, associate, and full professors from 14 universities) was approached to participate in a nationwide survey. Results from this unique dataset (N = 3978) demonstrate that academics perceive agency (e.g., self-confident, self-focused, competitive) as more descriptive of the stereotypical successful academic than communality (e.g., team-oriented, good teacher, collegial). Importantly, early career female academics perceived highest lack of fit with this narrowly-defined agentic occupational stereotype, which was correlated with lower work engagement, professional identification and career efficacy, and higher work exhaustion and exit intentions. Thus, lack of fit seems yet another barrier contributing to pervasive gender gaps in academia. Implications for building more inclusive academic cultures, where not only agentic but also communal academic practice is recognized and rewarded are discussed

Lack of ambition or lack of support? Diverging career experiences of men and women explain the persistence of gender bias

In this study we explore possible causes for the differential career success of women in academia. We do this by testing the content of organizational narratives about plausible reasons why women are less likely than men to advance in their academic careers, against the self‐reported experiences and career choices of women and men in the organization. We compared content‐coded narratives (N = 84) with quantitative self‐report (N = 661) data. Both data sets were collected around the same time, taking care that different members of the organization contributed to each of these two data sources. First, we report the qualitative data (Study 1). These revealed the organizational narrative about gender differences in academic careers. On the one hand, people in the university acknowledged the sexist treatment of women, but on the other hand, they failed to note that this “chilly climate” might adversely impact the careers of women in the organization. We report the quantitative data in Study 2. This revealed no support for the validity of this narrative, which maintains the pervasive belief that women are less interested in, and prefer to “opt out” from, an academic career. Notably, we found no actual differences between female and male academics in their self‐reported motivations. However, women did report having made more difficult life choices and having received less support from the organization for their careers. Together, these findings reveal blind spots in organizational narratives and point to additional measures that can be taken to ensure equal career opportunities for all employee

Equal representation does not mean equal opportunity: Women academics perceive a thicker glass ceiling in social and behavioral fields than in the natural sciences and economics

In the study of women in academia, the focus is often particularly on women's stark underrepresentation in the math-intensive fields of natural sciences, technology, and economics (NTE). In the non-math-intensive of fields life, social and behavioral (LSB) sciences, gender issues are seemingly less at stake because, on average, women are well-represented. However, in the current study, we demonstrate that equal gender representation in LSB disciplines does not guarantee women's equal opportunity to advance to full professorship-to the contrary. With a cross-sectional survey among N  = 2,109 academics at mid-level careers (i.e., assistant and associate professors) in the Netherlands, we test the hypothesis that in LSB (more than NTE), female academics perceive to hit a "thicker" glass ceiling-that is, they see a sharper contrast between the high representation of women at the lower compared to the top levels. We test whether this predicts female academics' lower estimated chances to reach full professorship relative to men in LSB (but not NTE). We introduce a novel perceived glass ceiling index (GCI), calculated based on academics' perceptions of the share of women and men in their direct work environment minus their perceptions of gender ratio among full professors in their field. Results confirm that the perceived glass ceiling is thicker in the non-math-intensive LSB compared to math-intensive NTE fields. Furthermore, only in LSB (but not NTE), women perceived a thicker glass ceiling than men. Moreover, only among female academics, the thicker the perceived glass ceiling, the lower their estimated chances to become full professor 1 day. Combined, a moderated mediation showed that for women only, a thicker perceived glass ceiling in LSB compared to NTE disciplines predicted their lower estimated chances to advance to full professor level. No such mediation occurred for men. We conclude that women's higher numerical representation in LSB disciplines does not negate a male-dominant normative standard about academic leadership and success. Paradoxically, the perceived odds for female academics to reach the top of their field are lower in fields where they are relatively highly represented, and this may pose unique barriers to women's perceived opportunities for career success

The Queen Bee phenomenon in Academia 15 years after: Does it still exist, and if so, why?

Fifteen years ago, the British Journal of Social Psychology published a set of studies on male and female academics, documenting that female faculty members were more likely than male faculty members to express stereotyped views of women at the beginning of their academic careers (PhD candidates; Ellemers et al., 2004, Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 43, 3). At the same time, the self-descriptions of female faculty members were just as masculine as those of their male colleagues. Ellemers and colleagues (2004, Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 43, 3) referred to this combination of results as indicating the existence of a 'Queen Bee (QB) phenomenon' in academia. The present contribution investigates whether the QB phenomenon is also found among current generations of academics, investigating this in two recent samples of academic professionals (N = 462; N = 339). Our findings demonstrate that the phenomenon first documented in 2004 still exists: Advanced career female academics are more likely than their male counterparts to underestimate the career commitment of women at the beginning of their academic careers. At the same time, both male and female academics at advanced career stages describe themselves in more masculine terms than those at early career stages. We argue this indicates a response pattern in which successful women emulate the masculinity of the work environment. To indicate this, the term 'self-group distancing' might be more appropriate than 'Queen Bee effect'

Social contexts and personal moral motives reduce implicit prejudice: A direct comparison

The current research extends previous work (e.g., Blair, 2002; Lai et al., 2014; van Nunspeet, Ellemers, & Derks, 2015) by directly comparing the effectiveness of different contextual factors and personal motives on the reduction of implicit bias toward Muslim women in a 2 × 2 × 2 research design. Non-Muslim participants performed an implicit association test (IAT) for which the implications for their morality or competence were emphasized, and while their performance was evaluated by a minimal ingroup or outgroup member, who was either presented as a member of the devalued group (a woman with a headscarf) or not (a women without a headscarf). Study 1 revealed that performance monitoring by the evaluator with a headscarf resulted in significant bias reduction. Interestingly, in case of performance monitoring by an evaluator without a headscarf, emphasizing the moral implications of participant’s task performance was as effective. In Study 2, we replicated the first finding and found no significant bias toward Muslim women when participants’ IAT performance was evaluated by a woman with a headscarf. Additionally, the prolonged version of the IAT used in this study resulted in a further decrease in bias when the evaluator with a headscarf was presented as a minimal ingroup member. Important implications of the effectiveness of these contextual factors and personal motives are discussed with regard to their difference in level of applicability and implementation

Newcomers to Social Categories: Longitudinal Predictors and Consequences of Ingroup Identification

In the present article, we propose a dynamic model of the longitudinal predictors and consequences of ingroup identification among newcomers to a social category. We hypothesize a shift in the relative importance of intragroup affiliation as compared with intergroup differentiation for ingroup identification. Two longitudinal studies confirm the theoretical model assessing cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between ingroup identification and interpersonal attraction, self-prototypicality, and ingroup favoritism at three measurement points during the first 4 months of group membership in two different social categories. Results demonstrate that in the initial phases of group membership, ingroup identification is mainly determined by intragroup affiliation (interpersonal attraction) and that ingroup favoritism starts playing a relevant role later on, when category membership has been established