Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection

Though schizophrenia was categorized as a mental illness over 100 years ago, there is a plethora of knowledge that continues to perplex the scientific and medical community alike. This tragic mental disorder affects approximately 1% of the general population, and many of these individuals are homeless if left untreated. Each schizophrenia patient has a different set of symptoms, so all of these patients experience a variety of positive and negative symptoms. Negative symptoms are called so as they are in absence, and some examples include apathy, anhedonia, lack of motivation, reduced social drive, and reduced cognitive functioning. Positive behavior, on the other hand, is a change in behavior or thoughts such as visual or auditory hallucinations, delusions, confused thoughts, disorganized speech, and trouble concentrating. Because schizophrenia patients do not share the exact same set of symptoms, research in schizophrenia requires a tremendous amount of medical resources. Over the last few years, new studies have started in the field of schizophrenia involving proteomics, or the study of proteins and their function. This new frontier gives doctors and scientists alike a new opportunity to improve the quality of life of schizophrenia patients by providing a potential method through which patients would receive individualized treatment based on their specific symptoms.

Brundtland’s definition of sustainability is the ability to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (IISD, 2021). But what if there are no future generations? Social sustainability, the sector of sustainability that foregrounds the well-being and livelihoods of people (and thereby continuation of humanity), is included in definitions within the sustainability field, but less developed in sustainability practice. In an effort to bridge this gap of knowledge, 14 U.S. cities and over 100 sustainability policies were analyzed for their social sustainability performance. An eight-item analytical framework that deals with differing areas of social equity guided the analysis. Results found that most cities’ sustainability departments fell short of truly addressing social sustainability concerns. Out of the eight items, the most frequently addressed were housing security and racial and gender equality whereas few, if any, cities addressed the more specific social concerns of immigration, technology and media, or arts/cultural preservation. Future research is recommended to gain a better understanding of the ways existing cities can improve in this area.

There does not appear to be a singular variable that determines where companies choose to place their distribution centers, however there are several underlying factors that may alter companies’ decisions on what countries they develop distribution networks in. There are many reasons companies choose a distribution centers’ location: infrastructure, trade barriers, and costs are often considered as well as the supply and demand markets for the product offerings. Countries can alter aspects to increase the number of businesses that operate within their bounds. When a distribution center is constructed local communities benefit from corporate initiatives and funding as well as jobs and access to cheaper products. Countries often utilize taxes and regulation to positively impact the environment when introducing distribution centers to their economy. The goal is to understand the weights of different factors that shape where distribution centers are located and inform decision makers on the aspects they should alter to get the greatest return on investment. The resulting data will display how large retailers have positioned their current warehouse to indicate likely expansions and the factors that are currently affecting location decisions. <br/><br/>The research project asks the following questions:<br/><br/>When determining the best location for distribution centers, what factors have the largest impact on business decisions? <br/>What role do governments play in developing space for companies to conduct business in (how do they update their infrastructure and customs methods including the impact on trade across industries)? <br/>How can governments and the community limit outsourcing and/or bring businesses (and thus distribution centers) closer to home? <br/><br/>When determining distribution center locations, most companies analyze the political and market structure to decide whether they will enter the market. Once companies have chosen the general region they are hoping to gain, infrastructure and costs are analyzed to find to maintain a competitive advantage in cost while maintaining relatively close locations to stores and consumers. Many companies utilize intermodal transportation on a macroscale, however in last mile logistics it is uncommon for large retailers such as Amazon and Walmart to use anything other than trucks (most commonly their own fleet). Governments have a clear role in gaining or limiting business, however, these factors are typically only considered upon entry or due to changes in major trade barriers therefore policy changes are less likely to encourage growth than investments in infrastructure or alterations in economic conditions such as taxes. Consumers and governments should work together to create an environment that fosters business growth in both new companies entering the market and existing companies expanding by creating unique policies that utilize taxes and business investments to invest in infrastructure.

Abortion is one of the most polarizing moral issues in our society today. This issue divides the country into two separate groups: Pro-choice or Pro-life. Our thesis analyzes published reviewed articles, media articles, policy papers, and perspective, opinion, and commentary pieces to discuss the ethical implications of selective abortion, specifically sex-selective abortion and genetic-selective abortion. Our thesis provides an overview of selective abortion, explores women’s bodily autonomy in the U.S., addresses the complexities of both sex-selective and genetic-selective abortion, and finally evaluates the U.S.’s regulation of selective abortion. Through these topics, we were able to determine the implications selective abortion has on the disabled community and how selective abortion is being used to ban abortion overall in the U.S.

Abortion is one of the most polarizing moral issues in our society today. This issue divides the country into two separate groups: Pro-choice or Pro-life. Our thesis analyzes published reviewed articles, media articles, policy papers, and perspective, opinion, and commentary pieces to discuss the ethical implications of selective abortion, specifically sex-selective abortion and genetic-selective abortion. Our thesis provides an overview of selective abortion, explores women’s bodily autonomy in the U.S., addresses the complexities of both sex-selective and genetic-selective abortion, and finally evaluates the U.S.’s regulation of selective abortion. Through these topics, we were able to determine the implications selective abortion has on the disabled community and how selective abortion is being used to ban abortion overall in the U.S.

Ankle monitors are not the bright, kind alternative to incarceration that they are made to be. Advocates propose them as a solution to overcrowded carceral sites and excessive federal expenditure on public corrections agencies. Their logic being we can release certain incarcerated people to reduce prison, jail, and detention center populations and require them to pay for their monitoring to reduce prison expenditures. While there is potential for ankle monitors to achieve these aspirations, it is necessary to recognize how and where they can produce harm. Rather than being an alternative to incarceration, ankle monitors are a method of incarceration. They serve the same functions and hold the same power as prisons and jails with a more elusive form. In the current implementation of ankle monitors, we see individual bodies being transformed into sources of data to be capitalized upon by the government and private companies. Along with this, there is a shift of the financial burden of incarceration from prisons to the person being punished. This acts to further perpetuate the cycles of poverty and financial oppression that are seen within traditional forms of incarceration. Ankle monitor advocates also claim ankle monitors allow incarcerated people to enjoy freedom beyond prison walls and reintegrate into society. In reality, this is an oversimplification of freedom. Individuals with ankle monitors find themselves to be limited in their freedoms by restricted movement and stigmatization. They are unable to live a “normal” life because their ankle monitors prevent them from doing so. These people cannot move as they please, they cannot find and hold employment, and they cannot interact with people like they normally would. Ankle monitor usage must be critically examined and altered if it is to be considered a meaningful, gentle alternative to incarceration.

This study looked at student’s perceptions of COVID-19 and differences in how universities handled COVID-19. It aimed to assess what measures made students feel safe and were the most effective in lessening spread. A risk-perception survey scored feelings of safety/risk, and semi-structured interviews provided context. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis showed mixed opinions on university measures, and interviews identified wearing masks, social distancing, isolating, and limiting social contacts as measures that were effective in curbing spread.

Developing a vaccine during the midst of a pandemic requires a careful balance between <br/>speed, safety, and efficacy. For the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. implemented Operation Warp Speed to accelerate the timeline for vaccine development. The FDA also imposed specific guidelines for granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). As of April 1st, 2021, Operation Warp Speed resulted in three different vaccines receiving EUA, all of which are currently being administered to the public. However, the rapid production and changes in the approval process intensified public scrutiny on the safety and efficacy of the vaccine. This thesis analyzes the differences in fast-tracking a vaccine, which consolidated the authorization process into months rather than years, and delineates the main concerns of the public regarding the COVID-19 vaccine through a media analysis. Although the EUA raised questions about the safety of the vaccine, polls indicate that most Americans would still be willing to receive the vaccine.