Open science, communal culture, and women's participation in the movement to improve science.

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.

"A threat on the ground": The consequences of witnessing stereotype-confirming ingroup members in interracial interactions.

OBJECTIVES: Three studies explored interpersonal consequences of engaging in interracial interactions after witnessing racial ingroup members' stereotypical behavior. METHOD: Study 1 used experience-sampling methodology to assess ethnic minority students' (n = 119) intergroup anxiety, metastereotypes, and anticipatory behaviors following one of three types of interpersonal interactions: (a) a White person and a racial ingroup member who had behaved stereotypically, (b) a White person and a nonstereotypical ingroup member, or (c) neither. Studies 2 (n = 273) and 3 (n = 379) experimentally examined whether witnessing an ingroup member's stereotypically negative behavior in interracial interactions, compared to stereotypically positive (Study 2) or nonstereotypically negative behavior (Study 3) differentially affected anxiety, metastereotypes, and anticipatory behaviors in interracial versus intraracial interactions among Black Americans. RESULTS: In Study 1, minorities reported greater anxiety, metastereotypes, and motivation to disprove stereotypes, but less interest in future interracial contact, following interracial interactions involving stereotype-confirming ingroup members compared to other interactions. In Studies 2 and 3, adverse interaction consequences were most severe when ingroup behavior was both negative and stereotypical compared to neutral, stereotypically positive, and nonstereotypically negative ingroup behavior. Additionally, metastereotypes (and, to a lesser degree, anxiety) mediated individuals' motivation to disprove stereotypes and desire future interactions with White witnesses following stereotypically negative ingroup behavior in interracial (vs. intraracial) interactions. CONCLUSIONS: This research highlights the emotional, metaperceptual, and motivational outcomes following ingroup members' stereotypical behavior in intergroup contexts that extend beyond dyadic encounters. (PsycINFO Database Record

What to Do? Predicting Coping Strategies Following Ingroup Members' Stereotypical Behaviors in Interracial Interactions.

The current studies examine how witnessing stereotype-confirming ingroup behavior affects black Americans' interactions with white Americans. Across three studies, black Americans indicated metaperceptual, emotional, and behavioral responses to witnessing a black person's stereotypically negative, stereotypically positive, or nonstereotypically neutral behavior during an interracial (vs. intraracial) interaction. Following an ingroup member's stereotypically negative (vs. stereotypically positive in Study 1, or nonstereotypically neutral in Studies 2-3) behavior during an interracial interaction, black Americans expressed greater metastereotypes, which increased intergroup anxiety, ultimately eliciting nuanced coping strategies: engagement/overcompensation, antagonism, freezing, or avoidance. Psychological resources attenuated anxiety's effect on engagement/overcompensation (Studies 2-3) and freezing (Study 3). Both patterns were stronger in interracial (vs. intraracial) interactions (Study 3). This research demonstrates the central role of metaperceptions in interracial interactions, highlighting how stereotypically negative behaviors of nearby ingroup members are impactful situational stressors that affect behavioral intentions in intergroup encounters.

"Two souls, two thoughts," two self-schemas: double consciousness can have positive academic consequences for African Americans.

African Americans can experience a double consciousness-the two-ness of being an American and an African American. The present research hypothesized that: (a) double consciousness can function as 2 self-schemas-an independent self-schema tied to mainstream American culture and an interdependent self-schema tied to African American culture, and (b) U.S. educational settings can leverage an interdependent self-schema associated with African American culture through inclusive multicultural practices to facilitate positive academic consequences. First, a pilot experiment and Studies 1 and 2 provided evidence that double consciousness can be conceptualized as 2 self-schemas. That is, African Americans shifted their behavior (e.g., cooperation) in schema-relevant ways from more independent when primed with mainstream American culture to more interdependent when primed with African American culture. Then, Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that incorporating African American culture within a university setting enhanced African Americans' persistence and performance on academic-relevant tasks. Finally, using the Gates Millennium Scholars dataset (Cohort 1), Study 5 conceptually replicated Studies 3 and 4 and provided support for one process that underlies the observed positive academic consequences. Specifically, Study 5 provided evidence that engagement with African American culture (e.g., involvement with cultural events/groups) on college campuses makes an interdependent self-schema more salient that increases African American students' sense of academic fit and identification, and, in turn, enhances academic performance (self-reported grades) and persistence (advanced degree enrollment in a long-term follow-up). The discussion examines double consciousness as a basic psychological phenomenon and suggests the intra- and intergroup benefits of inclusive multicultural settings.

Stereotype threat undermines academic learning.

Two experiments tested whether stereotype threat can undermine the acquisition of academic knowledge and thus harm performance even in nonthreatening settings. In Experiment 1, Black and White students studied rare words in either nonthreatening or threatening conditions. One to two weeks later, participants recalled word definitions, half in a nonthreatening "warm-up" and half in a threatening "test." Replicating past research, Black students performed worse on the test than on the warm-up. But importantly, Black students who had studied in the threatening rather than nonthreatening environment performed worse even on the warm-up. White students were unaffected. In Experiment 2, a value affirmation eliminated the learning-threat effect and provided evidence of psychological process. The results suggest that stereotype threat causes a form of "double jeopardy" whereby threat can undermine both learning and performance. The discussion addresses implications for the interpretation of group differences and for understanding how brief threat-reducing interventions can produce long-lasting benefits.