New IPR Research: June 2025
Get all our news
This month’s new research from our faculty experts examines the turning point in U.S. drug overdose deaths and how structural racism in Chicago neighborhoods impacts pregnancy outcomes. It also looks at whether the assassination attempt on President Donald Trump changed public opinion and how often interest groups scored votes at odds with party leadership.
Health Inequalities
August 2023 Marked a Turning Point in U.S. Drug Overdose Deaths
After two decades of rising drug overdose deaths in the U.S., a new study shows that the tide has turned—but not for all populations. In a study in JAMA Network Open, researchers including demographer and epidemiologist Lori Ann Post and sociologist Maryann Mason—both IPR associates—analyze over 800,000 overdose deaths between 2015 and 2024. They find that national death rates began a sustained decline in August 2023, falling for 15 straight months through October 2024. Opioid-related deaths, which have driven much of the crisis, declined more sharply than those related to stimulants like methamphetamine and cocaine. The decline also varied by region: the Northeast, Midwest, and South began to see drops in overdose deaths as early as 2022, while the West lagged by a year. Despite this national progress, overdose deaths continued to rise among some groups, including adults 55 and older, and American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, Hispanic, and multiracial populations. Though these increases were slowing—suggesting a possible turning point—the disparities reflect independent drug epidemics. The researchers stress the need for targeted support and continued observation to address inequities and improve outcomes for communities still at the highest risk.
How Structural Racism Impacts Pregnancy Outcomes
In the United States, racial inequality affects the health outcomes of Black Americans throughout their lives. For example, Black women are 50% more likely to deliver their babies prematurely than White women. Obstetrician, gynecologist, and IPR associate Ann Borders and IPR health psychologist Gregory Miller investigate these disparities in a study published in Social Science & Medicine by looking at the link between structural racism and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Using the electronic health records of 96,326 pregnant patients at six Chicago-area hospitals between 2008 and 2018, they linked birth outcomes with patients’ exposure to 22 kinds of experiences of structural racism in their neighborhoods. These experiences fell into six categories that other researchers have identified as particularly relevant to Black women: law enforcement, housing, medical care, employment, education, and community infrastructure. Just over half of the patients in the sample were White, roughly a quarter were Hispanic, 7.2% were Asian, and 16.7% were Black. After adjusting for neighborhood socioeconomic status, the researchers show that Black patients living in neighborhoods with challenges around law enforcement—such as higher rates of incarceration and police violence—and education—such as schools with inexperienced teachers and disproportionate rates of punishment for Black students—were more likely to deliver preterm babies. These findings suggest that policy interventions, like reducing incarceration rates or improving policing practices, can reduce racial inequalities in birth outcomes.
Policy Discourse and Decision Making
How Did the Assassination Attempt on Donald Trump Change Public Opinion?
Unexpected shocks like assassination attempts can cause dramatic changes in public opinion. New research by IPR computational linguist Rob Voigt and his colleagues investigates how the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump during his campaign in July 2024 affected online discourse and public sentiment toward Trump. The researchers analyzed more than 120,000 posts containing the keyword “Trump” collected from X using Brandwatch, a data retrieval tool, one week before and after the assassination attempt. The team then used large language models to analyze the posts across states, placing them in one of three categories based on their message about Trump: positive, neutral, or negative. The reactions were largely sympathetic to Trump, showing little difference across regions and political affiliations. The biggest change that researchers saw in online discussion of Trump was a surge in posts mentioning “Assassination” and “Pray for Trump,” especially in red states, while mentions of “Trump Controversies” decreased significantly across all states. The findings demonstrate a broad increase in sympathy for Trump across states, showing that acts of violence against leaders can increase public solidarity, at least in the short term in online discussions. The researchers suggest that future research should look at other social media platforms or news networks, examine a longer time period, and apply more advanced natural language processing techniques.
How Often Interest Groups Scored Votes at Odds with Party Leadership
While political party leaders and ideologically aligned interest groups are on the same political side, they do not always have the same policy positions. In a new study in Legislative Studies Quarterly, IPR political scientist Laurel Harbridge-Yong and Warren Snead of Swarthmore College examine how often and under what conditions party-aligned interest groups oppose the positions of party leadership and whether these disagreements lead to more conflict within the party. The researchers analyzed the scorecards of 14 prominent interest groups, which identify key positions taken by interest groups, alongside measures of how legislators voted on issues the interest groups took a position for or against, from 2007–18. Half of the interest groups were aligned politically with Democrats and the other half were aligned with Republicans. The researchers compare each group’s legislative scorecard with the voting records of party leaders and the party as a whole. They find there was disagreement between interest groups and party leaders on 10%–15% of the votes scored by the interest groups. It was more common for interest groups in the majority party to disagree compared to the minority party and for Republican-aligned groups to disagree versus Democratic groups. Disagreement was also linked to more conflict within the party. This research sheds light on the dynamics within political parties and how internal conflict within parties, which has received more attention in recent years, is shaped by the policy demands of interest groups.
Photo credit: iStock
Published: June 24, 2025.
