Exploration of a mouse model (C57BL/6J) capable of demonstrating behavioral changes after adolescent social isolation that are consistent with prior findings may prove beneficial in later research. This study examined 2 proposed long-term effects of isolated housing (one mouse/cage), when compared to group housing (two mice/cage) during adolescence. Mice were placed in their respective housing conditions after weaning (PND 21) and remained in those conditions until PND 60. The same cohorts were used in both phases of the experiment. Phase 1 sought to confirm previous findings that showed increases in ethanol intake after adolescent social isolation using a 2-bottle preference Drinking-in-the-Dark (DID) design over a 4-day period (PND 64-PND 67.). Phase 2 sought to elucidate the effects present after adolescent social isolation, as measured using response inhibition capabilities demonstrated during fixed-minimum interval (FMI) trials (PND 81-PND 111). Findings in phase 1 of the experiment were non-significant, save a strong tendency for female mice in both housing conditions to drink more as a proportion of their bodyweight (g/kg). However, a trend of lower bodyweight in single housed mice did exist, which does suggest that detrimental stress was applied via the used of adolescent isolation in that housing condition. Findings in phase 2 showed little effect of adolescent social isolation on mean inter-response time (IRT) at any criterion used (FMI-0, FMI-4, FMI-6). Evaluation of mean interquartile range (IQR) of IRTs showed a significantly greater amount of variation in IRT responses within single housed mice at the highest criterion (FMI-6), and a trend in the same direction when FMI-4 and FMI-6 were tested concurrently. Taken as a whole, the findings of this experiment suggest that the effect of adolescent social isolation on ethanol intake is far less robust than the effect of sex and may be difficult to replicate in a low-power study. Additionally, adolescent social isolation may interfere with the ability of mice to show consistent accuracy during FMI tasks or a delay in recognition of FMI criterion change.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an international impact since the novel coronavirus first surfaced in late 2019. Since then, different countries have taken different approaches to try and limit transmissions and deaths. While this is seemingly unprecedented in modern day times, many pandemics, or plagues, have happened relatively frequently in history. This paper examines three historical plagues through the lens of social psychologist Geert Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions to distinguish between cultures: power distance, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and indulgence versus restraint. This paper then applies these dimensions to the modern day U.S. and South Korea, two countries who have had different success in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. Through these dimensions, this paper aims to explain a factor in why South Korea has had better results than the U.S. It also recognizes that Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are not the only factor to affect the pandemic, and explores political influences in America through the lens of Henry David Thoreau and John Dewey. Overall, this paper argues that the U.S. has been unsuccessful in taming the pandemic because of certain cultural dimensions, such as more an individualist and indulgent culture, and its unstable and divisive political climate. Given this, the United States has a hopeful, yet arduous path moving forward with COVID-19 and future pandemics.