Millions of people move within the U.S. each year. We propose that people function as proxies for their locations, bringing the culture of their previous residence to their new homes. As a result, migration might systematically influence regional biases across geographic units over time. Using county-to-county migration data from the U.S. census and county-level racial attitude estimates from Project Implicit, the present research examined the impact of people relocating from one U.S. county to another on racial attitudes in their new county. Consistent with our prediction, the bias brought by the migrants positively predicts county-level racial bias after migration, even after controlling for county-level racial bias before migration. This finding remains robust across various sample inclusion criteria and spans three time periods (2006-2010, 2011-2015, and 2016-2020). These results highlight the significant role of migration in spreading and shaping regional racial attitudes, emphasizing the importance of considering macro-societal processes such as migration when studying changes in regional racial attitudes.

The present research investigates whether benevolent and hostile sexist attitudes are differentially directed toward Black and White women by Black and White people. Participants (N = 2,775) reported on their sexist attitudes while thinking about Black women, White women, or women in general. Although Black participants reported higher levels of benevolent and hostile sexism overall, participant race and target race interacted to produce unique patterns of sexist attitudes. More specifically, Black perceivers thinking of White women reported higher levels of hostile sexism than those thinking of Black women. White perceivers reported similar amounts of hostile sexism while thinking of White and Black women. Benevolent sexism showed a different pattern, with both Black and White participants reporting higher levels of benevolent sexism toward Black than White women. The results also revealed similar levels of sexism reported while thinking of White women and while thinking of women in general, suggesting that sexism research that does not specifically address target race may reflect an understanding of sexist attitudes about White women that may not generalize to other racial groups.

Science is undergoing rapid change with the movement to improve science focused largely on reproducibility/replicability and open science practices. This moment of change-in which science turns inward to examine its methods and practices-provides an opportunity to address its historic lack of diversity and noninclusive culture. Through network modeling and semantic analysis, we provide an initial exploration of the structure, cultural frames, and women's participation in the open science and reproducibility literatures (n = 2,926 articles and conference proceedings). Network analyses suggest that the open science and reproducibility literatures are emerging relatively independently of each other, sharing few common papers or authors. We next examine whether the literatures differentially incorporate collaborative, prosocial ideals that are known to engage members of underrepresented groups more than independent, winner-takes-all approaches. We find that open science has a more connected, collaborative structure than does reproducibility. Semantic analyses of paper abstracts reveal that these literatures have adopted different cultural frames: open science includes more explicitly communal and prosocial language than does reproducibility. Finally, consistent with literature suggesting the diversity benefits of communal and prosocial purposes, we find that women publish more frequently in high-status author positions (first or last) within open science (vs. reproducibility). Furthermore, this finding is further patterned by team size and time. Women are more represented in larger teams within reproducibility, and women's participation is increasing in open science over time and decreasing in reproducibility. We conclude with actionable suggestions for cultivating a more prosocial and diverse culture of science.