Marcel Roman
LightNews LightNews
banner
mfroman.bsky.social
Marcel Roman
@mfroman.bsky.social
350 followers 310 following 59 posts
Assistant professor of Government @ Harvard. Studies identity, race, and immigration.
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
mfroman.bsky.social
Marcel Roman @mfroman.bsky.social · Aug 6
🚨NEW PAPER 🚨 Are police more right-wing and biased against marginalized groups than the general public? If so, why? My new article in
@pnas.org w/ @tylerreny.bsky.social, Newman, and Sears provides some answers. 🧵1/n
Reposted by Marcel Roman
thomaszimmer.bsky.social
Among white people, the correlation between racial resentment and their voting decision is much, much stronger than between educational attainment and political alignment.

In fact, if you control for racial resentment, education polarization basically disappears.
November 27, 2025 at 2:21 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
motorres.bsky.social
“The consequences of a coordinated smear campaign by [Epstein and] elite members of media and academia were dire for Mearsheimer and Walt… Other institutions that previously welcomed them to speak now insisted that any appearance be ‘balanced’ by an opposing speaker who was sympathetic to Israel.“
Jeffrey Epstein Aided Alan Dershowitz’s Attack on Mearsheimer and Walt’s “Israel Lobby”
Epstein and Alan Dershowitz collaborated on smear campaigns against Mearsheimer, Walt, and an underage assault victim making allegations against Epstein—in the same week.
www.dropsitenews.com
November 25, 2025 at 9:19 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
boonfalleur.bsky.social
Happy to share our latest study published in PNAS.

Using data from 274,316 French students, we find that lower-SES students are less likely to wait for better university offers, even when waiting would lead to more prestigious or better-fit programs.
www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
Waiting time during admission procedures increases social inequalities in higher education | PNAS
Many domains in life require people to wait to access better outcomes, such as waiting in line to access prized tickets for a show, waiting to obta...
www.pnas.org
November 26, 2025 at 9:27 AM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
jinxungoh.bsky.social
Submitted two papers today and the last of 2025. This semester has been rough… 10/10 do not recommend. Gonna cry and vomit from exhaustion. Wake me up when it’s 2026.
November 25, 2025 at 8:12 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
andrewifethompson.bsky.social
My piece has been published in PNAS today!!! "The importance of local racial demographic changes in democratic erosion in the mass American public" www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10....

A few takeaways...
PNAS
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) - an authoritative source of high-impact, original research that broadly spans...
www.pnas.org
November 25, 2025 at 9:46 PM
mfroman.bsky.social
Interesting new PNAS article showing increasing the salience of non-white population growth = support for eroding Democratic norms + support for political violence among whites www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
PNAS
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) - an authoritative source of high-impact, original research that broadly spans...
www.pnas.org
November 25, 2025 at 8:06 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
iansociologo.bsky.social
www.pewresearch.org/race-and-eth...
Majorities of Latinos Disapprove of Trump and His Policies on Immigration, Economy
78% of Hispanics say Trump’s policies harm their group, but views of the president and policies differ widely by how they voted in 2024.
www.pewresearch.org
November 25, 2025 at 2:59 AM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
kevintmorris.bsky.social
As we all wait for Callais to come down, our piece showing that Shelby County increased the racial turnout gap in most of the covered parts of the country has cleared the replication check and is incoming at JOP.

Gutting the VRA was bad, actually.
November 24, 2025 at 12:47 AM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
haasvioleta.bsky.social
Happy that our paper with @bogatyrev.bsky.social, @tabouchadi.bsky.social, @heikekluever.bsky.social, and @lstoetze.bsky.social found a home at @thejop.bsky.social. You can read it here 👇

www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/...

Thanks to all the fantastic people giving feedback and supporting us
November 22, 2025 at 7:27 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
christinajcross.bsky.social
I found that once barriers to entry were taken into account, family structure explained only a small fraction of the racial gap in young adult outcomes. When we ignore barriers to marriage, we overestimate family structure’s role in maintaining racial inequality.
November 12, 2025 at 9:53 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
christinajcross.bsky.social
My latest article was recently published in Ethnic & Racial Studies. A 🧵:

www.tandfonline.com/eprint/9WABN...
Through the looking glass: reexamining family structure’s contribution to racial inequality in life chances
Black–white differences in rates of marriage, two-parent families, and single parenthood have long been regarded as a fundamental cause of U.S. racial inequality. Nonetheless, this perspective over...
www.tandfonline.com
November 12, 2025 at 9:52 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
cambup-polsci.cambridge.org
#OpenAccess from @apsrjournal.bsky.social -

The Impact of Welfare on Intergroup Relations: Caste-Based Social Insurance and Social Integration in India - https://cup.org/3X3DtWb

- AKSHAY GOVIND DIXIT

#FirstView
Banner featuring the hashtag #OpenAccess on a green background, below which is the text "American Political Science Review" on a blue background.
November 20, 2025 at 1:20 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
tntrummel.bsky.social
Over the summer I published the first article of my dissertation!

In this paper, I study how state immigrant policies affect Latino immigrant linked fate.

Drawing on a large sample of Latino immigrants (LINES 2016), I use co-ethnic and immigrant linked fate as the DVs.

See more⬇️🧵 (1/5)
November 20, 2025 at 6:16 AM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
jakemgrumbach.bsky.social
The Eric Schickler essay in Larry Bartel's symposium on "What Trump Has Taught Us About Political Science" is one of the most insightful pieces I've read in 2025.

US institutions turned out to be weak, and we have to rethink conventional wisdom.

open access: academic.oup.com/psq/advance-...
November 19, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
farrahbostic.bsky.social
Happy to report that @crosstabspodcast.com is back, and last week's episode with @lauren-goldstein.bsky.social was conversation about strategy, what sticks, and what we ought to measuring in polls. A little taste here:
November 19, 2025 at 5:42 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
miriamposner.com
WE JUST KEEP WINNING. (UC President's Postdoctoral Fellowship Program RESTORED!!!!)
On official UC letterhead: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA James B. Milliken President Office of the President 1111 Franklin Street Oakland, CA 94607 universityofcalifornia.edu CAMPUSES Berkeley Davis Irvine UCLA Merced Riverside San Diego San Francisco Santa Barbara Santa Cruz MEDICAL CENTERS Davis Irvine UCLA San Diego San Francisco NATIONAL LABORATORIES Lawrence Berkeley Lawrence Livermore Los Alamos DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES November 18, 2025 Dear Chancellors: I'm writing with regard to the President's Postdoctoral Fellowship Program (PPFP) and the program's associated faculty hiring incentive. As you know, for more than 40 years, PPFP has provided postdoctoral research fellowships, professional development, and faculty mentoring to scholars in all fields whose research, teaching, and service advance the academic and research missions of the University of California. Since 2003, UC campuses that hire current and former PPFP fellows into ladder-rank positions have been eligible for a hiring incentive funded by the University that provides support for newly hired fellows for five years. Since the creation of the incentive, more than $162 million has been invested by the University to support PPFP faculty hires. This commitment has enabled our campuses to successfully recruit and retain outstanding faculty across a range of disciplines. Given the myriad challenges currently facing UC - including disruptions to billions of dollars in annual federal support, as well as uncertainty around the state budget- reasonable questions were raised in recent months about whether the University could maintain the commitment to current levels of incentive funding. After considering a recommendation to sunset the incentive program due to these significant fiscal constraints, I consulted with all of you as well as faculty and campus academic administrators and systemwide Academic Senate leadership. [continued on next image] After learning more about the history and success of the program and weighing the thoughtful perspectives that have been shared, I have concluded that barring extraordinary financial setbacks, the PPFP faculty hiring incentive program will continue while the University continues to assess the program's structure as well as its long-term financial sustainability. As a result of our continuing consultation and review, there may be consideration of some changes to elements of the program including the total number of incentives supported, a number that has fluctuated significantly over the years, and how the awards are distributed among campuses. In the meantime, the University will continue to fund the PPFP faculty hiring incentive program and campuses may continue to take advantage of these incentives. We will have an opportunity to discuss any potential changes prior to adoption. As we look to the future, I will continue to engage with faculty leaders, program stakeholders, and UC community members about this important program. I especially appreciate the thoughtful perspectives shared in recent weeks by Academic Council Chair Palazoglu and Vice Chair Scott, the Council of Graduate Deans, UC faculty members, and you as our campus leaders. Sincerely, James B. Milliken President
November 18, 2025 at 10:34 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
kellyzvobgo.bsky.social
Hey y’all, it’s my birthday! 🎉

If care about #transitionaljustice, #humanrights and #globalgovernance, or you just want to celebrate my 33 revolutions around the sun, you can pre-order my first book, GOVERNING TRUTH, out with @oxfordunipress.bsky.social in Feb.

See global.oup.com/academic/pro...
November 18, 2025 at 3:41 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
jinxungoh.bsky.social
Another reminder that if you got students who wanna do a social psych PhD focusing on identities (specifically Asian, Latine, MENA Americans), I’m recruiting! I’m hustling hard here so pls send people my way 😅
see website for details www.pbandjlab.com
jinxungoh.bsky.social Jin X. Goh | 吴晋勋 @jinxungoh.bsky.social · 10d
Starting the week strong with a newly accepted paper in Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, co-authored with postdoc @lizsnoland.bsky.social and Sohad Murrar! We merged two largely independent research lines to call for data disaggregation of Asian Americans and MENA Americans
psyarxivbot.bsky.social PsyArXivBot @psyarxivbot.bsky.social · 10d
Unpacking Broad Racial Labels: The Disaggregation of Data on Race and Ethnicity: https://osf.io/eyv7b
November 18, 2025 at 4:34 AM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
markarianga.bsky.social
Our new @apsrjournal.bsky.social is out! We study whether policy and congresspeople are more responsive to White Americans than racial minorities, matching individual level opinion to policy outcomes and roll call votes on 134 issues using 500K survey responses from 2016-2022. 1/n
November 12, 2025 at 4:02 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
rooneyinstitute.bsky.social
Congratulations to the RPL Lab on their BJPS publication, supported by the Rooney Institute! The study examines how state legislators were held accountable for actions challenging the 2020 election, finding only Jan. 6 participation led to consequences. doi.org/10.1017/S000...
The Consequences of Elite Action Against Elections | British Journal of Political Science | Cambridge Core
The Consequences of Elite Action Against Elections - Volume 55
doi.org
November 17, 2025 at 4:57 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
gelliottmorris.com
I want to say thank you to everyone who reads and supports Strength In Numbers. The organized backlash I'm getting from hacks and the centrist-contrarian-consultant industrial complex is proof of the value SIN brings to an otherwise insular and epistemically closed space. You make it possible! <3
November 16, 2025 at 1:10 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
adambonica.bsky.social
6/🧵 Why does conventional wisdom miss this? We confuse electoral swings with attitude changes. Gen Z shifted 6 points toward Trump in 2024, suddenly pundits say they're "the most conservative generation in 50 years." Only 42% of Gen Z voted. We mistake turnout shifts for ideological transformation.
A horizontal bar chart titled “Generational Turnout: From 2020 to 2024 Rates” shows turnout rate changes among registered voters by generation and party affiliation. The chart includes four generational groups—Gen Z, Millennial, Gen X, and Boomer—and tracks changes from 2020 (dot) to 2024 (arrow tip), with Democratic turnout in blue and Republican turnout in red. Key trends: • Gen Z: Democratic turnout dropped by 13.7 percentage points (pp); Republican turnout dropped by 7.9pp. • Millennials: Democratic turnout fell by 5.6pp; Republican turnout fell by 0.3pp. • Gen X: Democratic turnout dropped 4.2pp; Republican turnout dropped 0.8pp. • Boomers: Democratic turnout declined 3.2pp; Republican turnout declined 1.4pp. A note below the chart explains that all groups saw turnout declines, but Democratic voters dropped off more steeply. A boxed summary highlights the consistent pattern: Republicans started from higher turnout and maintained more of their base, while Democrats experienced longer arrows (larger drop-offs) across all generations.
November 14, 2025 at 8:44 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
alxrh.bsky.social
Americans are more likely to disapprove of ICE after answering questions about ICE's treatment of citizens vs. questions about treatment of immigrants. That suggests news about ICE mistreating citizens could particularly weaken public support.

today.yougov.com/politics/art... (@today.yougov.com)
Americans who were asked about their evaluation of ICE after questions about ICE's treatment of U.S. citizens were 7 percentage points more likely to disapprove of ICE than those who had just seen questions about ICE's treatment of authorized immigrants (56% vs. 49%) and 5 percentage points less likely to approve (36% vs. 41%). This effect goes in the same direction among Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. In all three groups, respondents who were first asked about ICE's treatment of citizens were between 5 and 7 percentage points more likely to disapprove of ICE than those who were first asked about authorized immigrants.
November 14, 2025 at 8:58 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
alxrh.bsky.social
A majority of Americans disapprove of ICE. More Americans approve of protests against ICE than disapprove of them. Why? Maybe because many Americans think ICE is too forceful and are worried ICE could mistreat someone they know.

New article at @today.yougov.com: today.yougov.com/politics/art...
A majority (53%) of Americans somewhat or strongly disapprove of how ICE is handling its job. Only 39% approve. Both Democrats and Independents are much more likely to disapprove than to approve of ICE (85% vs. 12% among Democrats and 62% vs. 25% among Independents). In contrast, Republicans overwhelmingly approve of the agency's job handling: 79% approve and 13% disapprove. Americans are more likely to somewhat or strongly approve than disapprove of protests against ICE actions (48% vs. 39%). Majorities of Democrats (76%) and Independents (55%) approve of protests against ICE actions, with small shares disapproving (12% of Democrats and 28% of Independents). Most Republicans disapprove of anti-ICE protests (76%, compared to 13% who approve). Half (52%) of Americans say that ICE's tactics are too forceful. Only 26% say that its tactics are about right and 11% say that they are not forceful enough. Majorities of both Democrats (86%) and Independents (60%) say that ICE's tactics are too forceful. But only 12% of Republicans think ICE is too forceful; 52% say ICE's tactics are about right. Those who think ICE's tactics are not forceful enough are in the minority in all three groups: 1% of Democrats, 8% of Independents, and 24% of Republicans. Nearly half (46%) of Americans are somewhat or very concerned that someone they know could be mistreated by ICE. That's roughly the same as the share who are not very or not at all concerned (47%). Three-quarters (75%) of Democrats are concerned that someone they know could be mistreated by ICE. Half (50%) of Independents are concerned as well, more than the 39% who are not very or not at all concerned. Only 16% of Republicans are concerned ICE could mistreat someone they know; most (78%) are not very or not at all concerned. Most Hispanic (72%) and Black (65%) Americans are concerned that someone they know could be mistreated by ICE. Concern among white Americans is less widespread (38%, vs. 57% who are not very or not at all concerned).
November 14, 2025 at 8:58 PM
Reposted by Marcel Roman
dancassino.bsky.social
This is out today in open access, and while it's very much a methodology piece, I think it's really important to building the foundation for how we move forward with understanding the role of gender in politics.
November 14, 2025 at 4:24 PM