This thesis is comprised of three main parts: The Hermite-Hadamard inequality on discrete time scales, the fractional Hermite-Hadamard inequality, and Karush-Kuhn- Tucker conditions on higher dimensional discrete domains. In the first part of the thesis, Chapters 2 & 3, we define a convex function on a special time scale T where all the time points are not uniformly distributed on a time line. With the use of the substitution rules of integration we prove the Hermite-Hadamard inequality for convex functions defined on T. In the fourth chapter, we introduce fractional order Hermite-Hadamard inequality and characterize convexity in terms of this inequality. In the fifth chapter, we discuss convexity on n{dimensional discrete time scales T = T1 × T2 × ... × Tn where Ti ⊂ R , i = 1; 2,…,n are discrete time scales which are not necessarily periodic. We introduce the discrete analogues of the fundamental concepts of real convex optimization such as convexity of a function, subgradients, and the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions. We close this thesis by two remarks for the future direction of the research in this area.

Are health inequalities unjust, and if so, how should we measure and evaluate them? This thesis explores the central moral debates that underlie these sorts of questions about health inequalities, and it argues in support of one particular framework for measuring health inequalities. I begin by shedding light on the questions that need to be asked when attempting to determine which types of health inequalities are unjust. After explaining the complexities of several possible views of health inequity, I use these perspectives to inform my discussion of the debate about whether we ought to measure health inequalities in terms of individuals or groups. I evaluate the key tensions between these two opposing points of view. I then introduce a third possible view, which is Yukiko Asada’s idea that both individual and group-based measures of health inequality leave out important moral information, so it is therefore necessary to include both in order to get a full picture of a population’s health inequality. Next, I respond to objections that the proponents of using either a group or individual measurement of inequality on its own might make to the claim that neither measure is sufficient on its own. Finally, I propose some small changes to Asada’s measurement framework, which I believe will demonstrate why those opposed to her view actually ought to embrace it. I conclude that this approach is a promising solution to some of the difficulties defining health inequities that I have called attention to.

Numerous U.S. studio executives claim that the lack of on-screen racial diversity is a result of producers responding to discriminatory racial preferences of international audiences. To test these claims, this paper augments prior film financial success models by introducing measures of cast diversity to quantify the impact that actor race has on film revenue in the domestic and international market. Using OLS regressions, I examine and compare this effect within the domestic and aggregate movie market to investigate the underlying motivations for producers to not cast nonwhite actors. The findings support the claims made by studio heads that, on the whole, films with greater levels of diversity significantly underperform in the international box office, yet are not a strong determinant for domestic consumption. Although producers may be making assumptions about foreign demand when investing in films, the revenue regressions seem to support their assumptions. However, the results are ultimately difficult to interpret. Holding budget and other key film characteristics constant, more diverse films perform poorly relative to less diverse films in foreign markets, so the demographic disparities in films could be mostly driven by rational, profit-maximizing behavior from studios and producers.

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited / Reissued 5 May 2017 to correct misspelled Second Reader’s name on title page. / The number of disconnected youth, those ages 16 to 24 who are not in school and are not employed, has reached significant levels in the United States and Western Europe. This trend is coupled with the fact that more and more foreign fighters are joining Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Iraq and Syria. In particular, Western youth have been the target of radicalization by ISIS and other terrorist groups, and the appeal and lure of such groups seem unlikely to subside. A similar trend is also evident among youth in Muslim countries where the number of foreign fighters to terrorist groups seems unlikely to decrease. According to recent estimates, over 28,000 foreign fighters have joined ISIS in Syria and Iraq since 2011. The fact that so many youth have been radicalized to join terrorist groups is a cause for concern that requires closer scrutiny, understanding, and action by Western and other governments. The explanations and motivations as to why youth join terrorist groups abound; these include lack of education, poverty, religion discrimination, family background, and political and economic marginalization, among others. This research seeks to answer the question, are the youth in the United States, who are disconnected, more likely to become radicalized to terrorism? To answer this, various theoretical frameworks were researched and examined, such as relative deprivation, social movement theory, and psychological perspectives, to shed light on understanding this issue. / Director, Personnel Support Services and Benefits, Transportation Security Administration

Gentrification, a process conceived to result in displacement of lower-income urban residents, is difficult to measure quantitatively due to its qualitative, social impacts. Additionally, the phenomenon is a wicked problem, with no decisive definition or a set list of causes. Whereas researchers have instigated attempts to numerically measure gentrification, there is a lack of a systematic and universal approach to evaluate the concept. To investigate this issue, an iterative process took place using gentrification theory and explorative work. A test index was created using the inner boroughs of the UK’s capital, London, aiming to use data which should be available within all cities. Indicators for the index based on the two main theories of gentrification were attained for three different time periods from governmental and census records, creating a longitudinal study to establish how an area has changed, and whether gentrification has occurred. The technique presents evidence of increasing socio-economic status within many of London’s inner  boroughs, with evidence of rising employment rates, house prices and managerial role residents. The highest scoring boroughs were areas considered to be undergoing super-gentrification. From the index, the next borough to super-gentrify will be Hammersmith & Fulham. For first time gentrifying boroughs, their index changes sit within the middle of the borough rankings. It is believed that further analysis and advancements are required on the index to ensure prevention of data misuse, conclusive results, and further consideration of cultural, political or social changes, however new contributions have been made within this topic from considering gentrification from a wicked problem viewpoint.

The aim of this thesis was to analyse coexisting disadvantages in the older Swedish population. Coexisting disadvantages are those that occur simultaneously in various life domains. A person who simultaneously experiences several disadvantages may be particularly vulnerable and less well-equipped to manage daily life and may also need support from several different welfare service providers. Concerted actions may be needed for older people who experience not only physical health problems and functional limitations, but also other problems. Research that encompasses a wide range of living conditions provides a basis for setting political priorities and making political decisions. The studies in this thesis used data from two Swedish nationally representative surveys: the Level of Living Survey, which includes people aged 18 through 75, and the Swedish Panel Study of Living Conditions of the Oldest Old, which includes people aged 77 and older. Study I showed that the probability of experiencing coexisting disadvantages was higher in people 77 and older than in those aged 18 through 76. These age differences were partly driven by a high prevalence of physical health problems in older people. In all age groups, coexisting disadvantages were more common in women than men. The longitudinal analyses in Study II indicated that coexisting disadvantages in old age persist in some people but are temporary in others. Moreover, the results suggested a pattern of accumulating disadvantages: reporting one disadvantage in young old age (in particular, psychological health problems) increased the probability of reporting coexisting disadvantages in late old age.   Study III showed that physical health problems were a central component of coexisting disadvantages. The results also showed that being older; female; previously employed as a manual labourer; and divorced/separated, widowed or never married were associated with an increased probability of experiencing coexisting disadvantages. However, the experience of coexisting disadvantages differed: the groups associated with coexisting disadvantages tended to report different combinations of disadvantage. Study IV showed that the prevalence of coexisting disadvantages in those 77 and older increased slightly between 1992 and 2011. Physical health problems became more common over time, whereas limited ability to manage daily activities (ADL limitations), limited financial resources and limited political resources became less common. Associations between different disadvantages were found in all survey years, but certain associations changed over time. The results suggest that in general, the composition of coexisting disadvantages in the older population may have altered over time. In sum, results showed that coexisting disadvantages were associated with specific demographic and socio-economic groups. Physical health problems and psychological health problems were of particular importance to the accumulation and coexistence of disadvantages in old age. / <p>At the time of the doctoral defense, the following papers were unpublished and had a status as follows: Paper 3: Manuscript. Paper 4: Manuscript.</p><p> </p>

Mit der Querschnittsstudie „Wir und die Anderen – Gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit im organisierten Sport in Sachsen“ wurde erstmals das Syndrom Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit im organisierten Sport untersucht. Das Konzept der Gruppenbezogenen Menschenfeindlichkeit – ausgehend von einer Ideologie der Ungleichwertigkeit – wurde von Prof. Wilhelm Heitmeyer (Universität Bielefeld) entwickelt. Die Ergebnisse ermöglichen explizite Aussagen über Ausmaß und Ursachen Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit für den gesellschaftlichen Bereich des Sports. Die Studie wurde im vereinsorgansierten Sport im Bundesland Sachsen durchgeführt. Insgesamt wurden 1.502 Sportlerinnen und Sportler in der ersten Hälfte des Jahres 2012 befragt. In der Stichprobe spiegeln 147 Sportvereine mit 38 Sportarten die Vielfalt der Sportpraxis wider. Es wird der Frage nachgegangen, wie Menschen im Sport auf Grund ihres Geschlechts, ihrer sexuellen Identität, Religion oder ihrer kulturellen und ethnischen Herkunft wahrgenommen werden und ob diese Merkmale mit feindseligen Mentalitäten im Sport einhergehen können. Vorurteile gegenüber Menschen mit diesen bestimmten Gruppenzugehörigkeiten teilen einen gemeinsamen Kern, der sich auch im Gesellschaftsbereich Sport als Ideologie der Ungleichwertigkeit empirisch identifizieren lässt. Das Syndrom der Gruppenbezogenen Menschenfeindlichkeit setzt sich in dem vorliegenden Bericht aus den Elementen Fremdenfeindlichkeit, Islamfeindlichkeit, der Abwertung von Homosexuellen (Homophobie), Rassismus, Antisemitismus, Sexismus und der Abwertung von Menschen mit Behinderung zusammen. Die untersuchten Vorurteile hängen empirisch eng miteinander zusammen. Im Ergebnis zeichnen sich zwar Fremdenfeindlichkeit, Rassismus, Islamfeindlichkeit und die Abwertung von Homosexuellen im organisierten Sport als vorrangig handlungsrelevante Dimensionen ab, gleichwohl lässt sich feststellen, dass Sporttreibende, die einer bestimmten Gruppe gegenüber feindselige Mentalitäten haben, auch häufiger dazu neigen, andere Gruppen wie Frauen, Juden/Jüdinnen oder Menschen mit Behinderung abzuwerten. Das Ausmaß Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit lässt sich teilweise durch soziodemografische und strukturelle Faktoren (Alter, Geschlecht, Bildung, Einkommen, Gemeindegröße) und (sport-) spezifische Faktoren wie Nationalismus, Demokratiekritik und -feindlichkeit, Autoritarismus und Gewaltbilligung erklären. / The cross-sectional study “Us and Them – Group-Focused Enmity in Organized Sports in Saxony” is the first study to investigate the syndrome of group-focused enmity in organized sports. The concept of group-focused enmity, at the heart of which is an ideology of inequality, was developed by Prof. Wilhelm Heitmeyer at the University of Bielefeld, Germany. The findings now put us in a position to make substantiated statements about the extent and causes of group-focused enmity in the social domain of sports. The study was conducted in organized club sports in the German state of Saxony. A total of 1,502 athletes were surveyed in the first half of 2012. The sample includes respondents from 147 sports clubs and covers 38 different sports so as to reflect the diversity of everyday sports. The study pursues the question of how people are perceived in sports in terms of gender, sexual identity, religion, or cultural and ethnic background and whether these attributes are associated with hostile mentalities in sports. Prejudice towards people belonging to these groups shares as its common core an ideology of inequality, which can be identified empirically also in the social sphere of sports. The syndrome of group-focused enmity addressed in this report consists of the elements of xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia, racism, anti-Semitism, sexism, and the devaluation of handicapped persons. These prejudices are closely interconnected. Although we do see that xenophobia, racism, islamophobia, and homophobia are the primary motives that are ultimately translated into action, athletes who harbor a hostile mentality toward a particular group frequently tend to express prejudice against other groups such as women, Jews, or people with handicaps as well. The extent of group-focused enmity can be explained, in part, by socio-demographic and structural factors (age, gender, education, income, size of the municipality) and (sports-)specific factors such as nationalism, criticism of democracy and anti-democratic sentiment, authoritarianism, and acceptance of violence.

Mit der Querschnittsstudie „Wir und die Anderen – Gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit im organisierten Sport in Sachsen-Anhalt“ wurde das Syndrom Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit im organisierten Sport untersucht. Das Konzept der Gruppenbezogenen Menschenfeindlichkeit – ausgehend von einer Ideologie der Ungleichwertigkeit – wurde von Prof. Wilhelm Heitmeyer (Universität Bielefeld) entwickelt. Die Ergebnisse ermöglichen explizite Aussagen über Ausmaß und Ursachen Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit für den gesellschaftlichen Bereich des Sports. Die Studie wurde im vereinsorgansierten Sport im Bundesland Sachsen-Anhalt durchgeführt. Insgesamt wurden 1.720 Sportlerinnen und Sportler in den letzten drei Monaten des Jahres 2013 befragt. In der Stichprobe spiegeln 185 Sportvereine mit 41 Sportarten die Vielfalt der Sportpraxis wider. Es wird der Frage nachgegangen, wie Menschen im Sport auf Grund ihres Geschlechts, ihrer sexuellen Identität, Religion oder ihrer kulturellen und ethnischen Herkunft wahrgenommen werden und ob diese Merkmale mit feindseligen Mentalitäten im Sport einhergehen können. Vorurteile gegenüber Menschen mit diesen bestimmten Gruppenzugehörigkeiten teilen einen gemeinsamen Kern, der sich auch im Gesellschaftsbereich Sport als Ideologie der Ungleichwertigkeit empirisch identifizieren lässt. Das Syndrom der Gruppenbezogenen Menschenfeindlichkeit setzt sich in dem vorliegenden Bericht aus den Elementen Fremdenfeindlichkeit, Islamfeindlichkeit, der Abwertung von Homosexuellen (Homophobie), Rassismus, Antisemitismus, Sexismus und der Abwertung von Menschen mit Behinderung zusammen. Die untersuchten Vorurteile hängen empirisch eng miteinander zusammen. Im Ergebnis zeichnen sich zwar Fremdenfeindlichkeit, Islamfeindlichkeit und die Abwertung von Homosexuellen im organisierten Sport als vorrangig handlungsrelevante Dimensionen ab, gleichwohl lässt sich feststellen, dass Sporttreibende, die einer bestimmten Gruppe gegenüber feindselige Mentalitäten haben, auch häufiger dazu neigen, andere Gruppen wie Frauen, Juden/Jüdinnen oder Menschen mit Behinderung abzuwerten. Das Ausmaß Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit lässt sich teilweise durch soziodemografische Faktoren (Alter, Geschlecht, Bildung) und (sport-) spezifische Faktoren wie Nationalismus, Demokratiekritik, Autoritarismus und Gewaltbilligung erklären. / The cross-sectional study „Us and Them – Group-Focused Enmity in Organized Sports in Saxony-Anhalt“ is the study to investigate the syndrome of group-focused enmity in organized sports. The concept of group-focused enmity, at the heart of which is an ideology of inequality, was developed by Prof. Wilhelm Heitmeyer at the University of Bielefeld, Germany. The findings now put us in a position to make substantiated statements about the extent and causes of group-focused enmity in the social domain of sports. The study was conducted in organized club sports in the German state of Saxony-Anhalt. A total of 1,720 athletes were surveyed during the past three month of 2013. The sample includes respondents from 185 sports clubs and covers 41 different sports so as to reflect the diversity of everyday sports. The study pursues the question of how people are perceived in sports in terms of gender, sexual identity, religion, or cultural and ethnic background and whether these attributes are associated with hostile mentalities in sports. Prejudice towards people belonging to these groups shares as its common core an ideology of inequality, which can be identified empirically also in the social sphere of sports. The syndrome of group-focused enmity addressed in this report consists of the elements of xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia, racism, anti-Semitism, sexism, and the devaluation of handicapped persons. These prejudices are closely interconnected. Although we do see that xenophobia, islamophobia, and homophobia are the primary motives that are ultimately translated into action, athletes who harbor a hostile mentality toward a particular group frequently tend to express prejudice against other groups such as women, Jews, or people with handicaps as well. The extent of group-focused enmity can be explained, in part, by socio-demographic factors (age, gender, education) and (sports-)specific factors such as nationalism, criticism of democracy, authoritarianism, and acceptance of violence.

Mit der Querschnittsstudie "Wir und die Anderen – Gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit im organisierten Sport in Brandenburg" wurde das Syndrom Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit im organisierten Sport untersucht. Das Konzept der Gruppenbezogenen Menschenfeindlichkeit – ausgehend von einer Ideologie der Ungleichwertigkeit – wurde von Prof. Wilhelm Heitmeyer (Universität Bielefeld) entwickelt. Die Ergebnisse ermöglichen explizite Aussagen über Ausmaß und Ursachen Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit für den gesellschaftlichen Bereich des Sports. Die Studie wurde im vereinsorgansierten Sport im Bundesland Brandenburg durchgeführt. Insgesamt wurden 1.760 Sportlerinnen und Sportler von Oktober 2014 bis Januar 2015 befragt. In der Stichprobe spiegeln 175 Sportvereine mit 44 Sportarten die Vielfalt der Sportpraxis wider. Es wird der Frage nachgegangen, wie Menschen im Sport auf Grund ihres Geschlechts, ihrer sexuellen Identität, Religion oder ihrer kulturellen und ethnischen Herkunft wahrgenommen werden und ob diese Merkmale mit feindseligen Mentalitäten im Sport einhergehen können. Vorurteile gegenüber Menschen mit diesen bestimmten Gruppenzugehörigkeiten teilen einen gemeinsamen Kern, der sich auch im Gesellschaftsbereich Sport als Ideologie der Ungleichwertigkeit empirisch identifizieren lässt. Das Syndrom der Gruppenbezogenen Menschenfeindlichkeit setzt sich in dem vorliegenden Bericht aus den Elementen Fremdenfeindlichkeit, Islamfeindlichkeit, der Abwertung von Homosexuellen (Homophobie), Rassismus, Antisemitismus, Sexismus und der Abwertung von Menschen mit Behinderung zusammen. Die untersuchten Vorurteile hängen empirisch eng miteinander zusammen. Im Ergebnis zeichnen sich zwar Fremdenfeindlichkeit, Rassismus, Islamfeindlichkeit und die Abwertung von Homosexuellen im organisierten Sport als vorrangig handlungsrelevante Dimensionen ab, gleichwohl lässt sich feststellen, dass Sporttreibende, die einer bestimmten Gruppe gegenüber feindselige Mentalitäten haben, auch häufiger dazu neigen, andere Gruppen wie Frauen, Juden/Jüdinnen oder Menschen mit Behinderung abzuwerten. Das Ausmaß Gruppenbezogener Menschenfeindlichkeit lässt sich teilweise durch soziodemografische und strukturelle Faktoren (Alter, Geschlecht, Bildung, Gemeindegröße) und (sport-) spezifische Faktoren wie Nationalismus, Demokratiekritik, Autoritarismus und Gewaltbilligung erklären. / The cross-sectional study "Us and Them – Group-Focused Enmity in Organized Sports in Brandenburg" is the study to investigate the syndrome of group-focused enmity in organized sports. The concept of group-focused enmity, at the heart of which is an ideology of inequality, was developed by Prof. Wilhelm Heitmeyer at the University of Bielefeld, Germany. The findings now put us in a position to make substantiated statements about the extent and causes of group-focused enmity in the social domain of sports. The study was conducted in organized club sports in the German state of Brandenburg. A total of 1,760 athletes were surveyed during October 2014 until January 2015. The sample includes respondents from 175 sports clubs and covers 44 different sports so as to reflect the diversity of everyday sports. The study pursues the question of how people are perceived in sports in terms of gender, sexual identity, religion, or cultural and ethnic background and whether these attributes are associated with hostile mentalities in sports. Prejudice towards people belonging to these groups shares as its common core an ideology of inequality, which can be identified empirically also in the social sphere of sports. The syndrome of group-focused enmity addressed in this report consists of the elements of xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia, racism, anti-Semitism, sexism, and the devaluation of handicapped persons. These prejudices are closely interconnected. Although we do see that xenophobia, racism, islamophobia, and homophobia are the primary motives that are ultimately translated into action, athletes who harbor a hostile mentality toward a particular group frequently tend to express prejudice against other groups such as women, Jews, or people with handicaps as well. The extent of group-focused enmity can be explained, in part, by socio-demographic and structural factors (age, gender, education, size of the municipality) and (sports-)specific factors such as nationalism, criticism of democracy, authoritarianism, and acceptance of violence.

No description available.