ASU Scholarship Showcase

Background: A growing body of research recommends controlling alcohol availability to reduce harm. Various common approaches, however, provide dramatically different pictures of the physical availability of alcohol. This limits our understanding of the distribution of alcohol access, the causes and consequences of this distribution, and how best to reduce harm. The aim of this study is to introduce both a gravity potential measure of access to alcohol outlets, comparing its strengths and weaknesses to other popular approaches, and an empirically-derived taxonomy of neighborhoods based on the type of alcohol access they exhibit.

Methods: We obtained geospatial data on Seattle, including the location of 2402 alcohol outlets, United States Census Bureau estimates on 567 block groups, and a comprehensive street network. We used exploratory spatial data analysis and employed a measure of inter-rater agreement to capture differences in our taxonomy of alcohol availability measures.

Results: Significant statistical and spatial variability exists between measures of alcohol access, and these differences have meaningful practical implications. In particular, standard measures of outlet density (e.g., spatial, per capita, roadway miles) can lead to biased estimates of physical availability that over-emphasize the influence of the control variables. Employing a gravity potential approach provides a more balanced, geographically-sensitive measure of access to alcohol outlets.

Conclusions: Accurately measuring the physical availability of alcohol is critical for understanding the causes and consequences of its distribution and for developing effective evidence-based policy to manage the alcohol outlet licensing process. A gravity potential model provides a superior measure of alcohol access, and the alcohol access-based taxonomy a helpful evidence-based heuristic for scholars and local policymakers.

Significance: Modification of cysteine thiols dramatically affects protein function and stability. Hence, the abilities to quantify specific protein sulfhydryl groups within complex biological samples and map disulfide bond structures are crucial to gaining greater insights into how proteins operate in human health and disease. Recent Advances: Many different molecular probes are now commercially available to label and track cysteine residues at great sensitivity. Coupled with mass spectrometry, stable isotope-labeled sulfhydryl-specific reagents can provide previously unprecedented molecular insights into the dynamics of cysteine modification. Likewise, the combined application of modern mass spectrometers with improved sample preparation techniques and novel data mining algorithms is beginning to routinize the analysis of complex protein disulfide structures. Critical Issues: Proper application of these modern tools and techniques, however, still requires fundamental understanding of sulfhydryl chemistry as well as the assumptions that accompany sample preparation and underlie effective data interpretation. Future Directions: The continued development of tools, technical approaches, and corresponding data processing algorithms will, undoubtedly, facilitate site-specific protein sulfhydryl quantification and disulfide structure analysis from within complex biological mixtures with ever-improving accuracy and sensitivity. Fully routinizing disulfide structure analysis will require an equal but balanced focus on sample preparation and corresponding mass spectral dataset reproducibility.

Current research on criminal case processing typically examines a single decision-making point, so drawing reliable conclusions about the impact that factors such as defendants’ race or ethnicity exert across successive stages of the justice system is difficult. Using data from the New York County District Attorney's Office that tracks 185,275 diverse criminal cases, this study assesses racial and ethnic disparity for multiple discretionary points of prosecution and sentencing. Findings from multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrate that the effects of race and ethnicity vary by discretionary point and offense category. Black and Latino defendants were more likely than White defendants to be detained, to receive a custodial plea offer, and to be incarcerated—and they received especially punitive outcomes for person offenses—but were more likely to benefit from case dismissals. The findings for Asian defendants were less consistent but suggest they were the least likely to be detained, to receive custodial offers, and to be incarcerated. These findings are discussed in the context of contemporary theoretical perspectives on racial bias and cumulative disadvantage in the justice system.