Published Papers
Published Papers
Keywords: Open science; Transparency; Data sharing; Computational Reproducibility; Sociology
Abstract: Public sharing of data and analysis code enables independent verification of published findings. While audit studies have examined data and code sharing in psychology, economics and political science, comparable evidence for sociology remains limited. We examine 730 empirical articles published between January 2019 and June 2024 in three leading general-interest journals: American Sociological Review (ASR), American Journal of Sociology (AJS) and Social Forces (SF). For each article, we record whether a publicly accessible replication package is available and, when materials are shared, attempt to computationally reproduce the main-text tables and figures. Overall, 9.9% of articles provide replication packages (12.2% among quantitative articles), with substantial variation across journals (5.2–22.9%) and research types (0% for qualitative studies, 30% for experiments). These rates fall well below those reported for political science and economics. Of the 72 packages examined in detail, more than half cannot be verified owing to missing or incomplete materials. At the same time, no article is wholly non-reproducible and 22% are fully or largely reproducible. Sociology is not unusually prone to errors when materials are shared and runnable—it simply shares them far less often. We discuss implications for journal policies and transparency standards that reflect the field's methodological diversity.
Keywords: Racial inequality beliefs; Diversity and inclusion; Popular culture; Quasi-experiment
Abstract: This study examines how heightened racial representation shapes beliefs about the causes of racial inequality. To explore this, it focuses on the unprecedented diverse racial representation in the 2016 Tony Awards, a prominent American entertainment award celebrating excellence in Broadway theater. Leveraging the 2016 General Social Survey data in a quasi-experimental setting, the analysis investigates the change in beliefs among respondents interviewed before and after the Tony Awards. The results indicate that individuals are less likely to perceive discrimination as the primary cause of African Americans' social disadvantage after the Awards. This effect is heterogeneous across demographic and social groups, particularly impacting white individuals and Republicans. This study suggests that engagement with cultural products highlighting progress toward diverse racial representation may lead to a temporary underestimation of persistent racial discrimination, even in the presence of enduring inequality.
Keywords: Racial segregation; Ethnic diversity; Population growth; Rank
Abstract: As the United States undergoes demographic shifts where multiple racial and ethnic groups increasingly coexist, understanding how these changing compositions affect residential segregation is crucial. We demonstrate that segregation responds to the rank of racial minority groups by population size---not only their absolute group population sizes. We use U.S. census data from 1990, 2000, and 2010 to show that segregation follows rank-triggered tipping: segregation increases when the relative ranking of minority groups changes. Holding group population shares constant, both across groups within the same county and within the same group over time, a higher rank is associated with higher segregation. Ranks concentrate neighborhood change in specific locations: White flight and minority clustering intensify in census tracts where the higher-ranked group already has a substantial presence. Our findings reveal that residential sorting operates through two complementary mechanisms: traditional share-based tipping (driven by absolute population sizes) and rank-triggered tipping (driven by relative group size). These findings help explain the persistence of segregation across different minority groups and temporal variation in segregation within the same locations, advancing our understanding of how demographic diversity translates into segregation.
Manuscript available upon request
Keywords: Immigration; Group identity; Boundary; Asian Americans
Abstract: This study examines how contemporary Asian immigration to the United States shapes whether race or nativity becomes the salient dimension of social identity in relations between Asians and White Americans. Linking measures of interracial marriage and a large-scale attitudinal survey to the Asian immigrant share of metropolitan areas, instrumented using a shift-share design, I test whether Asian immigrant inflows reinforce the racial boundary separating Asians from White Americans or instead increase the salience of the nativity boundary separating U.S.-born Asian Americans from Asian immigrants. I find that greater local Asian immigration increases White Americans' marriage with U.S.-born Asian Americans but not with Asian immigrants, while leaving their marriage with Black and Hispanic Americans largely unchanged. Greater Asian immigration also increases White Americans' favorability toward Asian Americans and weakens their explicit belief that Asian Americans are less American than European Americans. These findings suggest that immigration can make nativity, rather than race, the operative boundary within an existing racial category: as the Asian immigrant population grows, White Americans and U.S.-born Asian Americans converge, while the distinction between U.S.-born and foreign-born Asians becomes more salient.
Manuscript available upon request
Keywords: Affirmative action; Ethnic majority; Talent allocation; Malaysia
Abstract: Affirmative action research has focused almost exclusively on policies targeting disadvantaged ethnic minorities, leaving open how such policies operate when they instead target the majority. We study Malaysia's New Economic Policy (NEP, 1971–1990), which granted the Malay majority preferential access to university admissions, public-sector employment, and corporate ownership. Using a cohort-based difference-in-differences design, we find that Malay cohorts exposed to the NEP acquired more years of education and were more likely to enter skilled occupations. Applying a structural model, we estimate that improved talent allocation during the NEP period raised GDP per capita by around 10%, driven primarily by reduced frictions in human capital accumulation rather than in the labor market. Our findings suggest that affirmative action targeting the majority can shift talent allocation, with implications for economic growth.
Manuscript available upon request
* Previously titled as "#MeToo and Beyond: Addressing Gender Inequality in the Workplace"
Keywords: Sexual harassment; Workplace; Gender inequality; Social movement
Abstract: Sexual harassment is a key factor perpetuating gender inequality in the workplace, disproportionately affecting women and imposing substantial economic costs. This paper examines whether social movements raising awareness of sexual harassment can influence women's workplace outcomes. Focusing on the #MeToo movement, I exploit temporal variation around its onset and geographic variation in local engagement, measured by Google search intensity across the United States using a difference-in-differences design. I first document an increase in workplace sex crime reporting among female victims in higher-engagement areas, with no corresponding change in incidents outside the workplace, consistent with the movement having shifted the broader workplace environment. I then document downstream economic effects: in higher-engagement areas, women's labor force participation and earnings increase modestly but measurably, with little change in hours worked. These findings suggest that local engagement raised the visibility and cost of harassment, facilitating gains in women's labor market outcomes.
“Drawing the Boundary: Institutional Protection and Political Conflict within and across Groups” (with Shuko Harada)