Department of Sociology, UCLA

This article demonstrates-based on an interpretive discourse analysis of three types of memes (Rabid Feminists, Women's Bodies, Policy Ideas) and secondary thread discourse on 4chan's "Politically Incorrect" discussion board-two key findings: (1) the existence of a gendered hate based scientific discourse, "science fan fiction," in online spaces and (2) how gender "science fan fiction" is an outcome of the male supremacist cosmology, by producing and justifying resentment against white women as being both inherently untrustworthy (politically, sexually, intellectually) and dangerous. This perspective-which combines hatred and distrust of women with white nationalist anxieties about demographic shifts, racial integrity, and sexuality-then motivates misogynist policy ideas including total domination of women or their removal. 4chan users employ this discourse to "scientifically" substantiate claims of white male supremacy, the fundamental untrustworthiness of white women, and to argue white women's inherent threat to white male supremacist goals.

Abstract: Research Summary: We use a novel longitudinal dataset, constructed from 16 downloads of VentureXpert records collected over 20 years, to characterize the international migration of venture‐capital‐backed startups. We find that: (i) 1078 firms in our sample (1.4%) migrate; (ii) countries with high levels of in‐migration also have high levels of out‐migration; (iii) migrating firms move to places with more investors; (iv) pre‐move investors and their connections most strongly predict migration patterns; and (v) movers raise more money than non‐movers, primarily from investors at their destinations. Overall, these patterns appear inconsistent with those expected if startups move primarily in search of talent or customers. Instead, the flows across countries look more like international trade, with startups seeking capital, and social connections between investors defining the shipping lanes. Managerial Summary: Although many high‐profile startups have relocated their headquarters from one country to another, systematic information on this phenomenon has been scarce. How frequently do these moves happen? Why do startups move? Over 20 years, we have built a database that can begin to answer these questions. International moves appear rare. When startups do move, they tend to move to places with more venture capital, particularly when their existing investors have connections in those places. Movers, moreover, raise more money than non‐movers, mostly from investors in their destination countries. Capital availability, rather than access to talent or proximity to customers, appears to be the strongest predictor of startup migration.

When people want to conduct a transaction, but doing so would be morally disreputable, they can obfuscate the fact that they are engaging in an exchange while still arranging for a set of transfers that are effectively equivalent to an exchange. Obfuscation through structures such as gift-giving and brokerage is pervasive across a wide range of disreputable exchanges, such as bribery and sex work. In this article, we develop a theoretical account that sheds light on when actors are more versus less likely to obfuscate. Specifically, we report a series of experiments addressing the effect of trust on the decision to engage in obfuscated disreputable exchange. We find that actors obfuscate more often with exchange partners high in loyalty-based trustworthiness, with expected reciprocity and moral discomfort mediating this effect. However, the effect is highly contingent on the type of trust; trust facilitates obfuscation when it is loyalty-based, but this effect flips when trust is ethics-based. Our findings not only offer insights into the important role of relational context in shaping moral understandings and choices about disreputable exchange, but they also contribute to scholarship on trust by demonstrating that distinct forms of trust can have diametrically opposed effects.

In pediatric medical visits, parents may assume the role of co-caregiver with clinicians. At times, parents challenge physicians' authority to determine diagnoses and treatments for their children. The present study uses conversation analysis to examine parents' accounts for their intrusions on medical authority in a corpus of 35 video-recorded pediatric neurology visits for overnight video-electroencephalogram monitoring. I show how parents can exploit their legitimate role as carers to challenge medical authority. Through invoking uncertainty in contexts where they have somehow challenged medical authority, parents can account for their conduct in ways that elide direct conflict with physicians and thereby minimize damage to the physician-family partnership.

In this study, we provide an assessment of data accuracy from the 2020 Census. We compare block-level population totals from a sample of 173 census blocks in California across three sources: (1) the 2020 Census, which has been infused with error to protect respondent confidentiality; (2) the California Neighborhoods Count, the first independent enumeration survey of census blocks; and (3) projections based on the 2010 Census and subsequent American Community Surveys. We find that, on average, total population counts provided by the U.S. Census Bureau at the block level for the 2020 Census are not biased in any consistent direction. However, subpopulation totals defined by age, race, and ethnicity are highly variable. Additionally, we find that inconsistencies across the three sources are amplified in large blocks defined in terms of land area or by total housing units, blocks in suburban areas, and blocks that lack broadband access.

Experiences of discrimination are associated with adverse health outcomes, including obesity. However, the mechanisms by which discrimination leads to obesity remain unclear. Utilizing multi-omics analyses of neuroimaging and fecal metabolites, we investigated the impact of discrimination exposure on brain reactivity to food images and associated dysregulations in the brain-gut-microbiome system. We show that discrimination is associated with increased food-cue reactivity in frontal-striatal regions involved in reward, motivation and executive control; altered glutamate-pathway metabolites involved in oxidative stress and inflammation as well as preference for unhealthy foods. Associations between discrimination-related brain and gut signatures were skewed towards unhealthy sweet foods after adjusting for age, diet, body mass index, race and socioeconomic status. Discrimination, as a stressor, may contribute to enhanced food-cue reactivity and brain-gut-microbiome disruptions that can promote unhealthy eating behaviors, leading to increased risk for obesity. Treatments that normalize these alterations may benefit individuals who experience discrimination-related stress.

There is growing attention to how unfounded beliefs about biological differences between racial groups affect biomedical research and health care, in part, through race adjustment in clinical tools. We develop a case study of the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8)'s 2014 Evidence-Based Guideline for the Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults, which recommends a distinct initial hypertension treatment for Black versus nonblack patients. We analyze the historical context, study design, and racialized findings of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) that informed development of the guideline. We argue that ALLHAT's racialized outcomes emanated from a poor and artificial study design and analysis weakened by implicit assumptions about race as biological. We show that the acceptance and utilization of ALLHAT for race correction arises from its historical context within the "inclusion-and-difference paradigm" and its indication of the inefficacy of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors for Black patients, which follows from the enduring, yet, refuted slavery hypertension hypothesis. We demonstrate that the JNC 8 guideline displays the self-fulfilling process of racial reasoning: presuppositions about racial differences inform the design and interpretation of research, which then conceptually reinforce ideas about racial differences leading to differential medical treatment. We advocate for the abolition of race adjustment and the integration of structural competency, biocritical inquiry, and race-conscious medicine into biomedical research and clinical medicine to disrupt the use of race as a proxy for ancestry, environment, and social treatment and to address the genuine determinants of racialized disparities in hypertension.