The Impact of Multiculturalism Versus Color-Blindness on Racial Biasq
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40 (2004) 417–423 www.elsevier.com/locate/jesp The impact of multiculturalism versus color-blindness on racial biasq Jennifer A. Richeson* and Richard J. Nussbaum Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, 6207 Moore Hall, Hanover, NH 03755, USA Received 19 June 2003; revised 25 September 2003 Abstract The present study examined the influence of different interethnic ideologies on automatic and explicit forms of racial prejudice. White American college students were exposed to a message advocating either a color-blind or a multicultural ideological approach to reducing interethnic tension and then completed explicit racial attitude measures, as well as a reaction time measure of automatic evaluations of racial groups. Results suggested that, relative to the multicultural perspective, the color-blind perspective generated greater racial attitude bias measured both explicitly and on the more unobtrusive reaction time measure. The findings of the present study add to previous research advocating a multicultural or dual-identity model of intergroup relations as the more promising route to interracial harmony. Ó 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Two fundamentally different approaches to the re- short, color-blind perspectives advocate reducing, elim- duction of interracial tension and stratification have inating, and ignoring category memberships, whereas been proposed by social scientists. One approach, often multiculturalism advocates considering, and sometimes called color-blindness, proposes that racial categories do emphasizing and celebrating, category memberships. not matter and should not be considered when making Both the color-blind and multicultural perspectives decisions such as hiring and school admissions. The can also be found in the extant literature on intergroup primary tenet of this approach is that social categories relations in social psychology. The color-blind perspec- should be dismantled and disregarded, and everyone tive, however, has been the dominant view in much of should be treated as an individual (Firebaugh & Davis, this work (see Gurin, Peng, Lopez, & Nagda, 1999 for 1998; Lipset, 1996; Sniderman & Piazza, 1993). The more). Research stemming from Social Identity Theory second approach, typically called multiculturalism, pro- (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and Self-Categorization Theory poses that group differences and memberships should (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) has not only be acknowledged and considered, but also, documented the plethora of negative outcomes that stem celebrated (Takaki, 1993; Yinger, 1994). A central tenet from social categorization, including outgroup homo- of this perspective is that ignoring ethnic group differ- geneity, ingroup favoritism and ethnocentrism, as well ences, for instance, undermines the cultural heritage of as prejudice and stereotyping (see Brewer & Brown, non-white individuals, and, as a result, is detrimental to 1998 for a review). Based on this work, mainstream the well being of ethnic minorities (Sleeter, 1991). In social psychology has focused many of its intergroup conflict intervention efforts on methods that reduce category salience and encourage individuation (e.g., q This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant (# 0132420), as well as a Filene undergraduate research grant Fiske & Neuberg, 1990). In contrast to this perspective, awarded to R.J.N. and a faculty fellowship from the Rockefeller some research by social psychologists is beginning to Center of Dartmouth College awarded to J.A.R. The authors would consider the potential positive consequences of taking a like to thank Anthony Greenwald for the Implicit Association Test more multicultural approach to intergroup relations software program, Bernadette Park for the ideological prompt (Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, & Gurin, 2002; Gurin et al., stimulus materials, as well as J. Nicole Shelton and two anonymous reviewers for comments on previous versions of this paper. 1999; Huo, Smith, Tyler, & Lind, 1996; Triandis, 1988). * Corresponding author. For instance, Hewstone and colleagues proposed in E-mail address: [email protected] (J.A. Richeson). their model of Mutual Differentiation that introducing a 0022-1031/$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2003.09.002 418 J.A. Richeson, R.J. Nussbaum / Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40 (2004) 417–423 cooperative relationship between groups without dis- samples of participants, the lack of a clear control or mantling group boundaries or identities should reduce comparison group makes it hard to ascertain the rela- intergroup tension (Hewstone, 1996; Hewstone & tion between color-blind ideologies and racial attitudes. Brown, 1986). Similarly, Gaertner, Dovidio and col- Support for Bonilla-SilvaÕs claims regarding color- leagues include what they call ‘‘dual identities’’—the si- blindness from experimental research would be par- multaneous embracing of both superordinate and ticularly compelling, especially in light of the body of subordinate group memberships—in their Common In- social-psychological research in support of the benefits group Identity model (see e.g., Dovidio, Kawakami, & of color-blindness (or decategorization). Gaertner, 2000; Gaertner, Mann, Murrell, & Dovidio, Some evidence can be gleaned from recent experi- 1989). They argue that holding a dual identity should be mental work conducted by Wolsko, Park, Judd, and sufficient to reduce prejudice, and, moreover, they write, Wittenbrink (2000). They examined the impact of ex- ‘‘the benefits of dual identity may be particularly rele- posure to multicultural and color-blind ideologies on vant to interracial and interethnic group contexts’’ intergroup judgments. Specifically, they presented indi- (Dovidio et al., 2000, p. 153). viduals with brief statements advocating either a color- As recent social-psychological research uncovers the blind or a multicultural approach to achieve interethnic potential value of multiculturalism, considerable re- harmony then measured those individualsÕ warmth and search in sociology, education, and anthropology has ethnocentrism (Wolsko et al., 2000, Exp. 1). Although highlighted numerous disadvantages of the color-blind participants in both ideological statement conditions perspective (e.g., Stephan, 1999). Several field studies of revealed less pro-white bias in their warmth judgments integration efforts in schools have found that color-blind compared to control participants, there was a non-sig- ideologies are widely endorsed and espoused by teachers nificant trend for participants in the color-blind condi- and administrators (e.g., Jervis, 1996; Pollock, 2004; tion to reveal greater pro-white bias on this measure Rist, 1978; Schofield, 2001), informing both behavior than participants in the multiculturalism condition with students and pedagogy (Schofield, 2001, 1982). For (p <:17). Although this finding is suggestive, it is hard instance, many of the teachers at one integrated school to ascertain whether the failure to find a reliable differ- in which color-blindness was the prevailing policy were ence on this measure was because the null hypothesis is hesitant to notice studentsÕ self-segregation, actual racial indeed true, or rather, an artifact of measurement error. differences in student suspension rates, or, even to in- For instance, the self-report measure of warmth em- corporate teaching materials that represented the di- ployed may have been corrupted by self-presentation versity among the student body (Schofield, 2001). bias that masked individualsÕ actual racial attitudes. Furthermore, Schofield reports that race had been so de- Consequently, in the present study, we sought to com- emphasized in one classroom in this school that ‘‘one pare the influences of color-blindness and multicultur- white child was surprised to learn from a member of our alism on racial attitudes, making use of both an explicit research team that Martin Luther King, Jr. was African measure as well as a relatively unobtrusive reaction time American, not White’’ (Schofield, 2001, p. 262). Igno- measure; namely, the IAT. Consistent with the hy- rance of the accomplishments of racial minorities has pothesis forwarded by the aforementioned educational been found to predict negative racial attitudes (Stephan and sociological research, we predicted that color- & Stephan, 1984). Thus, this work suggests that color- blindness would be associated with greater racial atti- blind ideologies may negatively impact racial attitudes tude bias compared to multiculturalism. (see also, Blum, 2002). Similar to this work, in a compelling new book Bonilla- Silva (2003) argues that color-blind perspectives regard- Automatic attitudes ing race relations serve to maintain rather than dismantle the social stratification of the races. Moreover, he claims Considerable research demonstrates that attitudes that individuals who endorse a color-blind ideology tend can be activated automatically and implicitly (see Fazio also to hold more prejudiced views. He writes, & Olson, 2003; Greenwald et al., 2002 , for reviews). In the present study, we employed the Implicit Association I contend that whites have developed powerful explanations— Test (IAT) to assess automatic racial attitudes (see which have ultimately become justifications—for contemporary Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998 for more de- racial inequality that exculpate them