Donald Trump won the American presidency in 2016 by overperforming expectations in upper Midwest states, surprising even Republican political elites. We argue that attitudes toward social change were an underappreciated dividing line between supporters of Trump and Hillary Clinton as well as between Republicans at the mass and elite levels. We introduce a concept and measure of aversion to (or acceptance of) social diversification and value change, assess the prevalence of these attitudes in the mass public and among political elites, and demonstrate its effects on support for Trump. Our research uses paired surveys of Michigan’s adult population and community of political elites in the Fall of 2016. Aversion to social change is strongly predictive of support for Trump at the mass level, even among racial minorities. But attitudes are far more accepting of social change among elites than the public and aversion to social change is not a factor explaining elite Trump support. If elites were as averse to social change as the electorate—and if that attitude mattered to their vote choice—they might have been as supportive of Trump. Views of social change were not as strongly related to congressional voting choices.

Objective Our goal was to illuminate associations between specific characteristics of under‐resourced neighborhoods (i.e., socioeconomic deprivation, danger) and specific aspects of parenting (e.g., parental praise, parental nurturance, harsh parenting, and parental control). Background Prior work has highlighted associations between level of neighborhood disadvantage and the parenting of its residents. However, this work has yet to clarify the specific characteristics of the neighborhood or the types of parenting involved. Method Exhaustive modeling analyses were conducted in a sample of 1030 families of twins (average age 8 years; 51% male, 49% female; the racial composition was 82% White, 10% Black, 1% Asian, 1% Indigenous, 6% multiracial) from the Twin Study of Behavioral and Emotional Development in Children. Neighborhood and parenting were assessed using multiple informants and assessment strategies (neighborhood informants, family informants, administrative data, and videotaped parent–child interactions). Results Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation (i.e., limited institutional and economic structural resources) demonstrated small but consistent negative associations with positive parenting behaviors and maternal control, but not with negative parenting behaviors. Neighborhood danger (i.e., recorded crime, fear of crime, exposure to community violence), by contrast, demonstrated weaker associations with parenting that dissipated once we controlled for overlap with socioeconomic deprivation. Conclusion Danger and socioeconomic deprivation do not function as interchangeable characteristics of under‐resourced neighborhoods, at least in terms of their association with positive parenting. Future studies should identify the specific mechanisms through which neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation is associated with less nurturing parenting.

Background: Youth experiencing socioeconomic deprivation may be exposed to disadvantage in multiple contexts (e.g., neighborhood, family, and school). To date, however, we know little about the underlying structure of socioeconomic disadvantage, including whether the 'active ingredients' driving its robust effects are specific to one context (e.g., neighborhood) or whether the various contexts increment one another as predictors of youth outcomes. Methods: The present study addressed this gap by examining the underlying structure of socioeconomic disadvantage across neighborhoods, families, and schools, as well as whether the various forms of disadvantage jointly predicted youth psychopathology and cognitive performance. Participants were 1,030 school-aged twin pairs from a subsample of the Michigan State University Twin Registry enriched for neighborhood disadvantage. Results: Two correlated factors underlay the indicators of disadvantage. Proximal disadvantage comprised familial indicators, whereas contextual disadvantage represented deprivation in the broader school and neighborhood contexts. Results from exhaustive modeling analyses indicated that proximal and contextual disadvantage incremented one another as predictors of childhood externalizing problems, disordered eating, and reading difficulties, but not internalizing symptoms. Conclusions: Disadvantage within the family and disadvantage in the broader context, respectively, appear to represent distinct constructs with additive influence, carrying unique implications for multiple behavioral outcomes during middle childhood.

Nach zweijähriger Pause konnte in diesem Jahr endlich wieder die Exkursion der Münchner Studierenden nach Düren mit der Firma Voith stattfinden. Am 08.06. machten wir uns mit dem Bus auf den Weg nach Düren. Im Gepäck hohe Erwartungen und Vorfreude auf die nächsten drei Tage, die, das kann man schon mal vorwegnehmen, auf jeden Fall erfüllt wurden. Autoren: Paulina Hahn, Moritz Goldbrunner, Simone Posch, Franziska Schindler, Nomi Fritsch, Erik Fett, Daniel Thaler, Anna Lexa, Mirna Bekic