The Complexity of Ethnic Identity Among Jewish American Emerging Adults

Jewish Americans may grapple with issues of ethnic identity differently than the larger White American group. Drawn from a large multisite sample (N = 8,501), 280 Jewish American (207 female, 73 male) emerging adults were compared with White American and ethnic minority samples on ethnic and U.S. identity. Jewish Americans rated themselves as significantly higher on measures of ethnic and U.S. identity compared with White Americans but not as highly as ethnic minorities. Ethnic identity search, affirmation, and resolution also predicted higher self-esteem for Jewish Americans, similar to the pattern for other ethnic groups. In addition, ethnic identity search and affirmation moderated the link between perceived discrimination and depressive symptoms among Jewish Americans.     

Are Adewale and Ngochi more employable than Jamal and Lakeisha? The influence of nationality and ethnicity cues on employment-related evaluations of Blacks in the United States

ABSTRACT

Previous research has consistently shown that racial bias can influence employers’ perceptions and evaluations of Black individuals in hiring and promotion decisions. However, within-race differences (e.g., skin tone, Afrocentric features) can lead to variation in these decisions. In addition to phenotypical variation, ethnicity cues (e.g., perceived country of origin, name) may be important within-race factors influencing the perception and evaluations of Black job applicants. Using a resume evaluation paradigm, participants evaluated one of three resumes in which the target applicant’s name provided cues about ethnicity (either Black American, Black African, or White American). Results suggest that Black Americans may experience more discrimination in hiring and are generally perceived less positively across several employment-related domains than both White and Black African applicants. Specifically, we find that Black Americans are less likely to be selected for an interview or offered a job and are evaluated more negatively overall relative to Black Africans.     

Ethnic Consciousness and Its Relationship to Conservatism and Blame Among African Americans1

Ethnic consciousness is “a set of political beliefs and action orientations arising out of the awareness of similarity” (Gurin, Miller, & Gurin, 1980, p. 30). We suggest that these beliefs relate to political values and views among African Americans. Correlational data revealed that ethnic consciousness is negatively correlated with conservative values. Experimental data revealed that students high in ethnic consciousness blamed a White firm for the termination of an African American employee more than a Black firm for terminating a European American employee. Those low in ethnic consciousness did not discriminate between the Black firm versus the White firm. Consciousness may operate as a means of connecting ethnic identity and political views.     

Shades of American Identity: Implicit Relations between Ethnic and National Identities

The issue of ethnic diversity and national identity in an immigrant nation such as the USA is a recurrent topic of debate. We review and integrate research examining the extent to which the American identity is implicitly granted or denied to members of different ethnic groups. Consistently, European Americans are implicitly conceived of as being more American than African, Asian, Latino, and even Native Americans. This implicit American = White effect emerges when explicit knowledge or perceptions point in the opposite direction. The propensity to deny the American identity to members of ethnic minorities is particularly pronounced when targets (individuals or groups) are construed through the lenses of ethnic identities. Implicit ethnic–national associations fluctuate as a function of perceivers' ethnic identity and political orientation, but also contextual or situational factors. The tendency to equate being American with being White accounts for the strength of national identification (among European Americans) and behavioral responses including hiring recommendations and voting intentions. The robust propensity to deny the American identity to ethnic minority groups reflects an exclusionary national identity.     

American elementary school children's attitudes about immigrants, immigration, and being an American

The current study examined 5 to 11-year-old European American children's (N = 90) attitudes regarding immigrants, immigration policy, and what it means to be an American. The majority of children in the sample (from a predominantly European American community) held strong American identities and had distinct ideas about what it means to be an American (namely, one must love America, live by its rules, and be White). Children were in favor of legal immigration as a policy, and although they believed in allowing illegal immigrants to stay if employed, many younger children believed they should go to jail. Many children in the sample were aware of Americans' anti-immigration sentiments, largely attributing it to ethnic/cultural discrimination. Finally, children held negative attitudes about immigrants, particularly Mexican immigrants. These negative attitudes were most evident among children who held a strong, prototypical national in-group identity. In contrast, children did not hold differential attitudes about White and Black Americans.     

Boundaries of American Identity: Relations Between Ethnic Group Prototypicality and Policy Attitudes

We sought to document that the extent to which different ethnic groups are perceived as embodying the American identity is more strongly linked to antiminority policy attitudes and acculturation ideologies among majority‐group members (European Americans) than among minority‐group members (Asian Americans or Latino/as). Participants rated 13 attributes of the American identity as they pertain to different ethnic groups and reported their endorsement of policy attitudes and acculturation ideologies. We found a relative consensus across ethnic groups regarding defining components of the American identity. However, European Americans were perceived as more prototypical of this American identity than ethnic minorities, especially by European American raters. Moreover, for European Americans but not for ethnic minorities, relative ingroup prototypicality was related to antiminority policy attitudes and acculturation ideologies. These findings suggest that for European Americans, perceptions of ethnic group prototypicality fulfill an instrumental function linked to preserving their group interests and limiting the rights afforded to ethnic minorities.     

Alienable Speech: Ideological Variations in the Application of Free-Speech Principles

Although freedom of speech is a Constitutionally protected and widely endorsed value, political tolerance research finds that people are less willing to protect speech they dislike than speech they like ( Gibson, 2006 ). Research also suggests liberal-conservative differences in political tolerance ( Davis & Silver, 2004 ). We measured U.S. citizens' political tolerance for speech acts, while manipulating the speaker's ethnicity and the speech's ideological content. Speech criticizing Americans was protected more strongly than was speech criticizing Arabs, especially among more politically liberal respondents. Liberals also reported greater free-speech support. Respondents expressed greater political tolerance for a speaker when he was an exemplar of the criticized group, but showed equal political tolerance for speakers whose group membership (as a White or Black American) was irrelevant to the speech. Finally, implicit political identity showed convergent validity with explicit political identity in predicting speech tolerance, and implicit racial and ethnic preferences showed variable prediction of speech tolerance across the two studies.     

The Paradox Between Integration and Perceived Discrimination Among American Muslims

Muslim Americans are increasingly integrated into American life, displaying high socioeconomic status, political participation, and adherence to American values. However, they are evaluated more negatively than many other racial, ethnic, and religious minorities and are frequent targets of discrimination. This article examines the mismatch between the integration of Muslims and their poor reception. Drawing on theories of cultural fluency and cognitive dissonance, we argue that cultural integration can exacerbate, rather than mitigate, perceived discrimination because integrated individuals are socialized to expect fair treatment and can recognize and decode even subtle forms of discrimination due to high levels of cultural and language fluency. Using three nationally representative surveys and an opt-in, online study of American Muslims between 2007 and 2017, we find that integrated Muslims are consistently more likely than their counterparts to report individual- and group-level societal and political discrimination. The paradox between adopting the host culture and feeling marginalized poses a challenge to the assumption that integration naturally leads to a sense of belonging among minorities, with important implications for liberal democracies.     

Introduction to Special Issue. Counselors Be Aware: Clients Come in Every Size,Shape, Color,and Sexual Orientation

In order to guarantee that each individual is free to pursue his/her potential, each member of AACD is charged to (a) engage in ongoing examination of his/her own attitudes, feelings, stereotypic views, perceptions and behaviors that might have prejudicial or limiting impact on women, ethnic, minorities, elderly persons, gay/lesbian persons and persons with handicapping conditions; (b) contribute to an increased sensitivity on the part of other individuals, groups or institutions to the barriers to opportunity imposed by discrimination; (c) advocate equal rights for all individuals through concerted personal, professional and political activity. (Position paper of the Human Rights Committee of the American Association for Counseling and Development, 1987, p.1)     

The Effects of Contact with Asians and Asian Americans on White American College Students: Attitudes, Awareness of Racial Discrimination, and Psychological Adjustment

On the basis of acculturation theory, explicating mutual influences between different cultural or ethnic groups coming into contact, this study focused "on the other side of acculturation" theory by examining the effects of intercultural contact with Asians and Asian Americans on the psychosocial experiences of White American college students. Participants (N = 315), undergraduates attending a public university located within the state of Massachusetts, completed a survey that assessed demographic and personal characteristics, acculturation (extent of intercultural contact with Asian people and Asian cultures), attitudes towards Asians and Asian Americans, awareness of institutional discrimination and blatant racial issues, and psychological distress. Results indicated that White American students' intercultural contact with Asians and Asian Americans contributed significant variance to the prediction of their attitudes towards this ethnic group and awareness of discrimination and racial issues, but not to psychological distress. This study provides implications for understanding mutual acculturative influences between different ethnic groups in the United States.     

Perceived Academic Competence and Overall Job Evaluations: Students' Evaluations of African American and European American Professors

Despite the fact that few people appear to endorse negative stereotypes of Blacks, such stereotypes are widely disseminated in our culture. Consequently, such stereotypes can have pervasive consequences on one's impressions of African Americans, even by low-prejudice Whites and by Blacks themselves. Thus, we predicted that student judgments of intellectual competence would be more important when students were making global performance evaluations of Black faculty than of White faculty. Furthermore, to the extent that intellectual competence is more salient in the judgment of Black faculty, such judgments should be essentially the same among Black and White students, and for low- and high-prejudice students. For the most part, analyses of instructor evaluations at a major American university supported these expectations.     

U.S. ethnic minorities' attitudes towards Whites: The role of shared reality theory in intergroup relations

In the current research, we suggest that shared reality, the belief that one perceives the world the same way as another group, can predict attitudes towards that group. We tested shared reality theory in the context of American ethnic minority groups' (i.e., African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinas/os) attitudes towards White Americans. In surveys of two samples recruited from different geographical locations in the USA, we tested predictions derived from different theories of intergroup relations. Using mediational analysis, we defined models to assess the extent to which shared reality theory predicted—directly and indirectly—prejudicial attitudes towards Whites. We tested the model derived from shared reality theory against other theoretical alternatives. Taken together, the results of the research indicated that shared reality predicts attitudes towards White Americans among these three ethnic groups. Thus, shared reality is a relevant, though largely overlooked, factor in intergroup dynamics.     

Differences in Black and White American College Students�� Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men

Differences in attitudes toward lesbians and gay men (ATLGM) held by Black and White Americans have rarely been studied systematically despite anecdotal evidence suggesting that Black Americans may be less accepting of lesbians and gay men than are White Americans. We tested the hypothesis that Black American??s ATLGM would be less positive than White Americans?? using data collected from 60 Black (36 female, 24 male) and 62 White (25 female, 37 male) students from a public university in the Midwestern United Sates. We found that Black students held generally neutral ATLGM whereas White students?? attitudes were slightly positive. This difference was mediated by racial group differences in right-wing authoritarianism.     

To be or not to be (ethnic): Public vs. private expressions of ethnic identification differentially impact national inclusion of White and non-White groups

Many pluralistic nations are witnessing vigorous debate about multiculturalism. In the U.S., Americans generally embrace principles of ethnic diversity but dislike minorities who express strong ethnic identification. Two experiments examined this seeming contradiction by differentiating between ethnic identity expressed in private vs. public by non-White and White individuals. Then we tested whether individuals' identity expressions differentially affected perceivers' construal of their entire ethnic group as legitimately American. Results indicated that at a conscious level, White and non-White ethnic groups were held to the same standard and construed as significantly less American when members expressed their ethnic identity publicly vs. privately. However, at an unconscious level, a double standard emerged: non-White ethnic groups were implicitly rejected as less American if members expressed ethnic identity publicly, while White ethnics were implicitly accepted as legitimate Americans regardless of where they expressed ethnic identity.     

Perspective taking combats the denial of intergroup discrimination

Despite the continuing, adverse impact of discrimination on the lives of racial and ethnic minorities, the denial of discrimination is commonplace. Four experiments investigated the efficacy of perspective taking as a strategy for combating discrimination denial. Participants who adopted a Black or Latino target's perspective in an initial context were subsequently more likely to explicitly acknowledge the persistence of intergroup discrimination than were non-perspective takers (Experiments 1–3) or participants who adopted a White target's perspective (Experiment 1). Perspective taking also engendered more positive attitudes toward a social policy designed to redress intergroup inequalities (i.e., affirmative action), and this relationship was mediated by increased recognition of discrimination (Experiments 2a and 2b). Increased identification with the targeted outgroup, as reflected in automatic associations between the self and African Americans, was found to underlie the effect of perspective taking on sensitivity to discrimination (Experiment 3). The collective findings indicate that perspective taking can effectively combat discrimination denial.     

Negativity and outgroup biases in attitude formation and transfer

In an initial experiment, the behavior of one person had a stronger influence on implicit evaluations of another person from the same group when (a) the attitude was negative rather than positive and (b) the people were outgroup members rather than ingroup members. Explicitly, participants resisted these attitude transfer effects. In a second experiment, negative information formed less negative explicit attitudes when the target was Black than when the target was White, and participants were more vigilant not to transfer that negative attitude to a new Black person. Implicit attitudes, however, transferred to both Black and White targets. Positive information formed stronger positive explicit attitudes when the target was Black than when the target was White, and that evaluation transferred to another Black person both implicitly and explicitly. Even when deliberately resisting outgroup negativity in attitude formation and transfer, people appear unable to avoid it implicitly.     

AMPing Racial Attitudes: Comparing the Power of Explicit and Implicit Racism Measures in 2008

In 2008, ANES included for the first time—along with standard explicit measures of old‐fashioned and symbolic racism—the Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP), a relatively new implicit measure of racial attitudes. This article examines the extent to which four different measures of racial prejudice (three explicit and one implicit) predict public opinion during and after the 2008 election, including Americans' views towards several racial policy issues, their evaluations of, and feelings toward, Barack Obama, and their attitudes toward a Black president in general. Oversamples of African American and Latino respondents in the 2008 ANES enable us to broaden our tests of these measures beyond traditional White samples. We find that racial prejudice played an important role for all racial/ethnic groups but that the traditional explicit measures of racism are by far the stronger predictors for all of our dependent variables (compared to the new implicit measure) for both White and Black respondents. Surprisingly, the AMP adds clear explanatory power only to models in the Latino sample.     

Do unto others as others have done unto you?: Perceiving sexism influences women's evaluations of stigmatized racial groups

The present research examines how making discrimination salient influences stigmatized group members' evaluations of other stigmatized groups. Specifically, three studies examine how salient sexism affects women's attitudes toward racial minorities. White women primed with sexism expressed more pro-White (relative to Black and Latino) self-report (Studies 1 and 3) and automatic (Study 2) intergroup bias, compared with White women who were not primed with sexism. Furthermore, group affirmation reduced the pro-White/antiminority bias White women expressed after exposure to sexism (Study 3), suggesting the mediating role of social identity threat. Overall, the results suggest that making discrimination salient triggers social identity threat, rather than a sense of common disadvantage, among stigmatized group members, leading to the derogation of other stigmatized groups. Implications for relations among members of different stigmatized groups are discussed.     

Explaining Muslim Americans’ Opinions on Salient Issues

Despite numerous individual success stories of living the American dream, the Muslim American community still remains one of the most misunderstood and underrepresented minorities in the United States. This study investigates the views of this community by mapping and explaining members' investigates on a number of issues of social and political import. It shows that the issue attitudes of Muslim Americans are rather uniform on some social and non-social issues but very diverse on others. Moreover, it also shows that the differences of opinion that were uncovered can be explained by a variety of factors including a respondent's ethnic or national origin and how committed a respondent is to the practice of Islam, defined by the frequency of mosque attendance. While these results are temporally limited, they do show that this is a very diverse community and set a strong foundation for further quantitative and qualitative investigations of how Muslim Americans' religious practices, ethnic backgrounds, and socio-economic characteristics affect their essential social and political beliefs.     

Coalition or derogation? How perceived discrimination influences intraminority intergroup relations

Five studies explored how perceived societal discrimination against one's own racial group influences racial minority group members' attitudes toward other racial minorities. Examining Black-Latino relations, Studies 1a and 1b showed that perceived discrimination toward oneself and one's own racial group may be positively associated with expressed closeness and common fate with another racial minority group, especially if individuals attribute past experiences of discrimination to their racial identity rather than to other social identities (Study 1b). In Studies 2-5, Asian American (Studies 2, 3, and 4) and Latino (Study 5) participants were primed with discrimination against their respective racial groups (or not) and completed measures of attitudes toward Black Americans. Participants primed with racial discrimination expressed greater positivity toward and perceived similarity with Blacks than did participants who were not primed. These results suggest, consistent with the common ingroup identity model (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000), that salient discrimination against one's own racial group may trigger a common "disadvantaged racial minority" (ingroup) identity that engenders more positive attitudes toward and feelings of closeness toward other racial minorities.