Reimagining LGBTIQ+ research – Acknowledging differences across subpopulations, methods, and countries

Inequalities and discrimination based on gender identity, sexual orientation, and sex characteristics remain pervasive worldwide. Scholars have collaborated to address structural and social barriers in LGBTIQ+ research, creating a substantial literature base. However, much of this work focuses on specific segments of the population, overlooks resilience‐ and strengths‐based approaches, and is predominantly conducted in the U.S. and other Western countries. In this introduction article, we discuss how this special issue extends previous research by uniting scholars globally to collaboratively reimagine the lens through which scientists conduct LGBTIQ+ research. By exploring diverging needs across subgroups of LGBTIQ+ people, discussing the (dis)advantages of various methodological choices, and offering a better understanding of how unique legal and social landscapes affect LGBTIQ+ individuals globally, this special issue aims to provide a comprehensive picture of the current state of research combined with concrete directions for redress. Given that barriers to conducting LGBTIQ+ research differ significantly by nation, we conclude this introductory article by calling for a research community that is more aware of unequal power dynamics within academia, willing to take action to reduce disparities in the global academic system, and inclusive of voices from underrepresented groups

Need satisfaction in intergroup contact:A multinational study of pathways toward social change

none43siFinanziamenti esterni a vari co-autoriWhat role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups.mixedHässler, Tabea; Ullrich, Johannes; Sebben, Simone; Shnabel, Nurit; Bernardino, Michelle; Valdenegro, Daniel; Van Laar, Colette; González, Roberto; Visintin, Emilio Paolo; Tropp, Linda R; Ditlmann, Ruth K; Abrams, Dominic; Aydin, Anna Lisa; Pereira, Adrienne; Selvanathan, Hema Preya; von Zimmermann, Jorina; Lantos, Nóra Anna; Sainz, Mario; Glenz, Andreas; Kende, Anna; Oberpfalzerová, Hana; Bilewicz, Michal; Branković, Marija; Noor, Masi; Pasek, Michael H; Wright, Stephen C; Žeželj, Iris; Kuzawinska, Olga; Maloku, Edona; Otten, Sabine; Gul, Pelin; Bareket, Orly; Corkalo Biruski, Dinka; Mugnol-Ugarte, Luiza; Osin, Evgeny; Baiocco, Roberto; Cook, Jonathan E; Dawood, Maneeza; Droogendyk, Lisa; Loyo, Angélica Herrera; Jelić, Margareta; Kelmendi, Kaltrina; Pistella, JessicaHässler, Tabea; Ullrich, Johannes; Sebben, Simone; Shnabel, Nurit; Bernardino, Michelle; Valdenegro, Daniel; Van Laar, Colette; González, Roberto; Visintin, Emilio Paolo; Tropp, Linda R; Ditlmann, Ruth K; Abrams, Dominic; Aydin, Anna Lisa; Pereira, Adrienne; Selvanathan, Hema Preya; von Zimmermann, Jorina; Lantos, Nóra Anna; Sainz, Mario; Glenz, Andreas; Kende, Anna; Oberpfalzerová, Hana; Bilewicz, Michal; Branković, Marija; Noor, Masi; Pasek, Michael H; Wright, Stephen C; Žeželj, Iris; Kuzawinska, Olga; Maloku, Edona; Otten, Sabine; Gul, Pelin; Bareket, Orly; Corkalo Biruski, Dinka; Mugnol-Ugarte, Luiza; Osin, Evgeny; Baiocco, Roberto; Cook, Jonathan E; Dawood, Maneeza; Droogendyk, Lisa; Loyo, Angélica Herrera; Jelić, Margareta; Kelmendi, Kaltrina; Pistella, Jessic

A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size—and at times, direction—of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change—willingness to work in solidarity— that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members

Clinicogenomic factors of biotherapy immunogenicity in autoimmune disease: A prospective multicohort study of the ABIRISK consortium

BACKGROUND: Biopharmaceutical products (BPs) are widely used to treat autoimmune diseases, but immunogenicity limits their efficacy for an important proportion of patients. Our knowledge of patient-related factors influencing the occurrence of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) is still limited. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The European consortium ABIRISK (Anti-Biopharmaceutical Immunization: prediction and analysis of clinical relevance to minimize the RISK) conducted a clinical and genomic multicohort prospective study of 560 patients with multiple sclerosis (MS, n = 147), rheumatoid arthritis (RA, n = 229), Crohn's disease (n = 148), or ulcerative colitis (n = 36) treated with 8 different biopharmaceuticals (etanercept, n = 84; infliximab, n = 101; adalimumab, n = 153; interferon [IFN]-beta-1a intramuscularly [IM], n = 38; IFN-beta-1a subcutaneously [SC], n = 68; IFN-beta-1b SC, n = 41; rituximab, n = 31; tocilizumab, n = 44) and followed during the first 12 months of therapy for time to ADA development. From the bioclinical data collected, we explored the relationships between patient-related factors and the occurrence of ADAs. Both baseline and time-dependent factors such as concomitant medications were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard regression models. Mean age and disease duration were 35.1 and 0.85 years, respectively, for MS; 54.2 and 3.17 years for RA; and 36.9 and 3.69 years for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). In a multivariate Cox regression model including each of the clinical and genetic factors mentioned hereafter, among the clinical factors, immunosuppressants (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.408 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.253-0.657], p < 0.001) and antibiotics (aHR = 0.121 [0.0437-0.333], p < 0.0001) were independently negatively associated with time to ADA development, whereas infections during the study (aHR = 2.757 [1.616-4.704], p < 0.001) and tobacco smoking (aHR = 2.150 [1.319-3.503], p < 0.01) were positively associated. 351,824 Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) and 38 imputed Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) alleles were analyzed through a genome-wide association study. We found that the HLA-DQA1*05 allele significantly increased the rate of immunogenicity (aHR = 3.9 [1.923-5.976], p < 0.0001 for the homozygotes). Among the 6 genetic variants selected at a 20% false discovery rate (FDR) threshold, the minor allele of rs10508884, which is situated in an intron of the CXCL12 gene, increased the rate of immunogenicity (aHR = 3.804 [2.139-6.764], p < 1 × 10-5 for patients homozygous for the minor allele) and was chosen for validation through a CXCL12 protein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) on patient serum at baseline before therapy start. CXCL12 protein levels were higher for patients homozygous for the minor allele carrying higher ADA risk (mean: 2,693 pg/ml) than for the other genotypes (mean: 2,317 pg/ml; p = 0.014), and patients with CXCL12 levels above the median in serum were more prone to develop ADAs (aHR = 2.329 [1.106-4.90], p = 0.026). A limitation of the study is the lack of replication; therefore, other studies are required to confirm our findings. CONCLUSION: In our study, we found that immunosuppressants and antibiotics were associated with decreased risk of ADA development, whereas tobacco smoking and infections during the study were associated with increased risk. We found that the HLA-DQA1*05 allele was associated with an increased rate of immunogenicity. Moreover, our results suggest a relationship between CXCL12 production and ADA development independent of the disease, which is consistent with its known function in affinity maturation of antibodies and plasma cell survival. Our findings may help physicians in the management of patients receiving biotherapies

Gender Gap in Parental Leave Intentions: Evidence from 37 Countries

Despite global commitments and efforts, a gender-based division of paid and unpaid work persists. To identify how psychological factors, national policies, and the broader sociocultural context contribute to this inequality, we assessed parental-leave intentions in young adults (18–30 years old) planning to have children (N = 13,942; 8,880 identified as women; 5,062 identified as men) across 37 countries that varied in parental-leave policies and societal gender equality. In all countries, women intended to take longer leave than men. National parental-leave policies and women’s political representation partially explained cross-national variations in the gender gap. Gender gaps in leave intentions were paradoxically larger in countries with more gender-egalitarian parental-leave policies (i.e., longer leave available to both fathers and mothers). Interestingly, this cross-national variation in the gender gap was driven by cross-national variations in women’s (rather than men’s) leave intentions. Financially generous leave and gender-egalitarian policies (linked to men’s higher uptake in prior research) were not associated with leave intentions in men. Rather, men’s leave intentions were related to their individual gender attitudes. Leave intentions were inversely related to career ambitions. The potential for existing policies to foster gender equality in paid and unpaid work is discussed