Searching for Common Ground between Supporters and Opponents of Affirmative Action

Supporters and opponents of affirmative action are often characterized as debating about a single, consensually understood type of affirmative action. However, supporters and opponents instead may have different types of policies in mind when thinking about affirmative action and may actually agree on specific manifestations of affirmative action policies more than is commonly believed. A survey conducted using a student sample and a sample from the broader Chicago-area community showed that affirmative action policies can be characterized into merit-violating versus merit-upholding manifestations. Supporters of affirmative action in general were more likely to think of affirmative action in its merit-upholding manifestations, whereas opponents were more likely to think of the merit-violating manifestations. However, both supporters and opponents showed more support for merit-upholding rather than merit-violating manifestations of affirmative action. The same pattern of results was upheld even when splitting the samples into those who endorsed negative racial attitudes versus those who did not, suggesting that even those who may be considered racist will endorse affirmative action policies that uphold merit values. The results are discussed in terms of the importance of clarifying the political discourse about what affirmative action is and what it is designed to do.     

Remedies for discrimination: Race,sex and affirmative action

Discrimination, and its intended remedy in affirmative action, are often discussed as if they operate equivalently for all target groups. However, the specific nature of inter-group relations between racial groups and between gender groups leads to differences both in the experience of racism and sexism and in the requirements for affirmative action programs. This article describes some of the legal differences between race and sex as social constructs, and explores the implications for workplace policies designed to remedy racial and gender-based discrimination. Research results have shown that, among Whites, there is more support for preference toward women than toward ethnic and racial minorities. Such attitudinal differences both reflect the different nature of intergroup relations and point to the different needs for affirmative action policies toward each group.     

Interracial contact and changes in the racial attitudes of white college students

College campuses are among the most racially diverse settings in our segregated society. For many students, especially non-Hispanic whites, college represents the first time they have come into significant contact with members of other groups. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen, this paper explores the effects of campus diversity and various types of interracial contact on the racial and ethnic attitudes of white students over the course of four years in college. The findings are largely consistent with the contact hypothesis, particularly with respect to changes in attitudes towards blacks. White students who report having a close friend who is black and those who have dated or had a romantic partner who is black express less social distance towards blacks in their senior year, as do white students who were involved in extracurricular activities in which blacks are the majority. Participating in extracurricular activities dominated by blacks is also associated with more positive views of the impact of affirmative action on academic standards expressed as students were leaving college. Although there is evidence that both stereotypes and social distance towards groups are mitigated by intergroup contact, stereotypes appeared to be somewhat more resistant to change. The findings suggest that institutions should continue efforts to diversify their student populations, and also promote involvement in extracurricular activities for students from all groups.     

White guilt and racial compensation: the benefits and limits of self-focus

In two studies, the authors investigated guilt as a response to group-based advantage. Consistent with its conceptualization as a self-focused emotion, White guilt was based in self-focused beliefs in racial inequality. Thus, guilt was associated with belief in White privilege (Study 1) and resulted from seeing European Americans as perpetrators of racial discrimination (Study 2). Just as personal guilt is associated with efforts at restitution, White guilt was predictive of support for affirmative action programs aimed at compensating African Americans. White guilt was not, however, predictive of support for noncompensatory efforts at promoting equality, such as affirmative action programs that increase opportunities (Study 2). In contrast, the other-focused emotion of group-based sympathy was a more general predictor of support for different affirmative action policies. Our findings demonstrate the benefits and limits of group-based guilt as a basis of support for social equality and highlight the value of understanding the specific emotions elicited in intergroup contexts.     

Debates on Genetically Modified Crops in the Context of Sustainable Development

The paper discusses conflicts in perceptions of GM crops illustrating the complexities of GM debates and applications of the concept of sustainable development. The concept consists of three discourses that both opponents and supporters of GM crops refer to in their analyses: environmentalism, social and economic development and the two sub-issues of sustainable development—biodiversity loss and food security. This creates a unique situation when both proponents and opponents of GM food use the same framework of sustainable development to support their arguments and do not reach a common ground. This will be illustrated by a review of the arguments brought by these two groups.     

Predicting support for racial transformation policies: Intergroup threat,racial prejudice,sense of group entitlement and strength of identification

Policies and programs designed to challenge the effects of racial discrimination (such as affirmative action) are hotly contested. Factors which have been proposed to explain opposition to these policies include racial prejudice, group threat and self‐interest, and perceptions of intergroup justice. We report the results of two random national telephone surveys which tested a theoretically based model of the predictors of policy support in post‐apartheid South Africa. The results provided limited support for Blumer's group position model. Compensatory and preferential treatment policies had different underlying predictors: Violated entitlement featured in the models of compensatory policy attitudes, but not preferential treatment policy attitudes, where threat was the strongest predictor. In addition to threat and violated entitlement, policy attitudes among the black sample were related to ingroup identification but those of the white sample were related to prejudice. The effects of these variables were in the opposite directions for the two samples: Policy support was associated with strong ingroup identification and high levels of threat among the black sample (i.e. prospective beneficiaries of the transformation policies), but with low levels of prejudice and threat among the white sample. We conclude by considering the implications that these findings have for social change programs. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of racial diversity on complex thinking in college students

An experiment varying the racial (Black, White) and opinion composition in small-group discussions was conducted with college students (N = 357) at three universities to test for effects on the perceived novelty of group members' contributions to discussion and on participants' integrative complexity. Results showed that racial and opinion minorities were both perceived as contributing to novelty. Generally positive effects on integrative complexity were found when the groups had racial- and opinion-minority members and when members reported having racially diverse friends and classmates. The findings are discussed in the context of social psychological theories of minority influence and social policy implications for affirmative action. The research supports claims about the educational significance of race in higher education, as well as the complexity of the interaction of racial diversity with contextual and individual factors.     

Affirmative action. Psychological data and the policy debates

The authors bring psychological research to bear on an examination of the policy of affirmative action. They argue that data from many studies reveal that affirmative action as a policy has more benefits than costs. Although the majority of pro-affirmative action arguments in the social sciences stress diversity, the authors' argument focuses on issues of merit. The merit-based argument, grounded in empirical studies, concludes that the policy of affirmative action conforms to the American ideal of fairness and is a necessary policy.     

Opposition to Affirmative Action: Racial Affect and Traditional Value Predictors Across Four Programs1

Research on white opinions of such compensatory policies as busing and affirmative action has suggested that prejudice is the primary determinant of policy attitudes (Jacobson, 1985; McConahay, 1982). Often, however, racism is measured in a manner that confounds prejudice with values and concerns about justice. A study was conducted in which undergraduates (N= 185) were told that one of four affirmative-action programs for black students would be implemented at their university either in the following year or in 5 years. We found that: (a) support varied considerably across programs and was greater when implementation was imminent; (b) separate operationalizations of race prejudice and dispositional justice beliefs accounted for equal, and at times greater, variance in affirmative action opinions relative to a measure of symbolic racism; and (c) correlates of policy endorsement, including dispositional justice beliefs but not racial affect, varied from program to program. It is suggested that future research should explicitly distinguish race prejudice from values as predictors. It is also suggested that justice concerns, particularly regarding policy specifics, are important predictors of affirmative action attitudes that to date have largely been overlooked.     

Race,Religion, and Anti‐Poverty Policy Attitudes

Using the 2008 National Politics Study, the present study indicates that while African Americans are more likely than whites to hear sermons about poverty and other political issues, hearing such sermons more consistently associates with support for anti‐poverty government programs among non‐Hispanic whites than among both African Americans and Hispanics. The racially/ethnically marginalized status of blacks and Hispanics may contribute to these groups being more receptive than whites to religious messages emphasizing social inequality. The contrasting racial experiences of dominance and marginalization may also help explain why hearing politicized sermons is more meaningful to the progressive social welfare attitudes of whites than to African Americans and Hispanics. This expectation is rooted in the heightened variability of perspectives among whites and their religious organizations regarding the government's role in aiding the economically disadvantaged. Conversely, the vast majority of blacks and Hispanics support the government helping individuals who fallen upon hard times. The greater variability in opinion among whites may also allow for greater differences in opinion to emerge between whites who attend relative to those outside of religious congregations led by clergy emphasizing spiritual and political solidarity with the poor than is the case for African Americans and Hispanics.     

Ambiguity Intolerance and Support for Valuing-Diversity Interventions

This study examined the effect of ambiguity intolerance on attitudes toward corporate diversity programs. It was found that, holding constant demographic backgrounds of age, gender, work experience, managerial position, and majority-minority status, ambiguity intolerance was negatively related to support for diversity programs. The study also replicated previous findings that women and racial minority members support diversity programs more than do men and racial majority members. This study demonstrates the importance of including personality variables in diversity research.     

REFLECTIONS ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION GOALS IN PSYCHOLOGY ADMISSIONS

Four goals of affirmative action in higher education are described as they relate to psychology admissions. Broadly conceived, these goals are compensating for past injustice, correcting present inequity, promoting intellectual diversity, and enhancing the presence of role models. It is argued that the four goats differ in their underlying assumptions about the purposes of affirmative action and that these differences can result in disparate admission decisions. Data from three experiments on decision making in graduate psychology admissions are presented to illustrate the analysis. In these studies, academic psychologists rated the admissibility of hypothetical graduate student applicants who varied on a number of characteristics (e g., ethnicity, social class, interest in minority research) pertinent to affirmative action. A consistent pattern of ethnic group differences in admissibility ratings was documented, illustrating that compensation for past injustice can be interpreted as a salient affirmative action goal in graduate admissions decisions. Implications of the analysis for clarifying admissions decisions guided by affirmative action goals are discussed.     

Support for Affirmative Action Initiatives Among Diverse Groups: The Role of Ethnic Identity

This study investigates the relationships among demographic factors (race/ethnicity, color, and gender), ethnic identity (i.e., the degree to which one identifies with and feels a part of one's racial or ethnic group), and support for affirmative action initiatives. Using a sample of 1,880 university employees, the results of this survey study reveal that women and minority group members express higher levels of ethnic identity and support for affirmative action initiatives, mirroring previous research. In addition, the findings indicate that ethnic identity and support for affirmative action initiatives are correlated and that ethnic identity serves as a mediator and moderator in the relationship between demographic variables and support for affirmative action for some subgroups.     

Understanding Affirmative Action

The purpose of this article is to lay a conceptual groundwork that is needed if social scientists and policy makers are to design and implement fair and effective affirmative action programs. Because affirmative action is not well understood, in or out of the academy, the article starts with definitions, both general and technical, contrasts affirmative action with equal opportunity, and touches on the distinction between policy and practice. I then argue that affirmative action is a necessary policy, that it can be effective, and that it is fair. But the policy is for three other reasons: (a) it focuses on deficiencies, (b) it disturbs expectations, and (c) it poses a threat to individualism, interfering with self-congratulations.     

White Men’s Fears, White Women’s Tears: Examining Gender Differences in Racial Affect Types

This investigation extends research on White students’ affective costs of racism. Consistent with previous research that identified distinct costs of racism (or racial affect) types, the authors used cluster analysis to examine unique patterns in White empathy, guilt, and fear among White undergraduate women (n?=?227) and men (n?=?175) from a large university in the Midwestern United States. Extending prior research and building on conceptual scholarship concerned with intersections of race and gender, the authors separated the sample by gender to determine whether different affective costs of racism types emerged for women and men. The authors found the same five cluster solution for both women and men in the present study, and these solutions were consistent with previous research conducted among combined samples of women and men. Findings suggested that women were significantly more likely than men to be in the most desirable, Antiracist type, compared to the least desirable, Insensitive and Afraid type. Additionally, the authors examined whether support for affirmation action differed by racial affect type for women and men. Partially supporting their hypothesis, the authors found that racial affect types with different levels of White empathy distinguished levels of support for affirmative action among White women. Among White men, the authors found that racial affect types with different levels of White fear explained differing levels of affirmative action support. Implications for future research and diversity education interventions are discussed.     

Women's Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action: Putting Actions in Context1

Although women typically favor affirmative action, they do exhibit a range of reactions to affirmative action programs. To understand the diversity of reactions, the present study proposed an examination of various forms of affirmative action in the context of the discrimination problem such actions were designed to address. In Study 1, 60 female university students were presented with one of six scenarios describing a situation of discrimination against women, followed by a series of potential affirmative action response options which participants rated in terms of their level of endorsement. Analyses of variance showed that, despite the range of discrimination scenarios, some of which presented extreme cases of discrimination against women, respondents consistently endorsed nondiscrimination measures, and opposed affirmative action strategies involving preferential treatment. Study 2, which preselected 43 women who valued social equality, replicated this finding and found that these results were not due to women not perceiving the presence of collective discrimination. Study 3 examined the attitudes of women in a law and security police training stream (n = 19), whose vulnerability to employment discrimination, both as a group and personally, would be salient. The women in this study endorsed all forms of affirmative action, including explicit preferential treatment in the hiring of women police officers. The implications of these results for the consideration and implementation of affirmative action programs are discussed.     

Thinking about Mutual Influences and Connections across Cultures Relates to More Positive Intergroup Attitudes: An Examination of Polyculturalism

Polyculturalism is an ideology focusing on the many ways that racial and ethnic groups have interacted, exchanged ideas, and influenced each other's cultures throughout history and into the present. In this paper, we first briefly review the introduction of and research on polyculturalism by historians. Then we summarize numerous studies with racially and ethnic diverse college students and adult community members in the United States, which have found that greater endorsement of polyculturalism is significantly associated with more positive racial/ethnic intergroup attitudes (less support for social inequality, greater interest in, appreciation for, and comfort with diversity and differences, greater interest in intergroup contact, and greater support for liberal immigration and affirmative action policies) and lower sexual prejudice (lower affective prejudice toward gay men and lesbians, traditional heterosexism, and denial of discrimination against homosexuals, and more positive attitudes toward gay men and lesbians). We conclude by discussing several future directions of this work.     

College Students' Racial Attitudes

Factor analyses of responses from white ( N = 260) and black ( N = 81) college students in two neighboring universities were utilized to develop contemporary measures of racial attitudes and of the degree of interracial contact experienced by blacks and by whites. Two sets of 112 attitudinal statements were utilized for the initial factor analyses, one set for black respondents and one for whites. About 60% of the items in the two sets were identical or the same except that the racial designations were reversed. Two 20-item racial attitude scales were derived from the factor analyses, one for blacks and one for whites. For students of each race, scores on the attitude measure showed a weak but significant relationship with a 16-item self-report scale of amount of interracial contact experienced, past and present. The relationship of these scales to earlier racial attitude measures (symbolic racism, modern racism, the MRAI, value rankings) were assessed. Second-order factor analyses suggested that the black students' racial attitudes were more heterogeneous than were the white students' racial attitudes. In general, black respondents tended to show more support than whites for programs designed to increase opportunities for, and recognition of, blacks. Black students also tended to endorse a greater degree of social distance between the races than white students did. The pattern of relationships between racial attitudes and sociopolitical issues differed for whites and blacks.     

MALE ACCEPTANCE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS FOR WOMEN: THE RESULTS OF ALTRUISTIC OR EGOISTICAL MOTIVES?

It has been argued in the past that self-interest plays an important role in the reaction of men to affirmative action programs that are designed to promote women in non-traditional jobs. In the main, this hypothesis has received limited support apparently because the conception of self-interest was understood in terms of one's private well-being. It is clear, however, that self-interest also refers to group status or position in society. In this study self-interest was measured through the concept of collective relative deprivation. The effects of relative deprivation on behalf of others, and the procedure employed to implement affirmative action programs on men's attitudes toward these programs were also assessed. One hundred and forty-five male managers or professionals participated in the study. According to predictions, results show that collective relative deprivation and preferential treatment for women have negative effects on affirmative action attitudes. Findings are thus supportive of the broader conception of self-interest and relative deprivation arguments. Finally, the positive link between relative deprivation on behalf of others and affirmative action indicates that men who disapprove of sex inequalities support these programs. Il a été postulé que le ‘self-interest’ influence les réactions des hommes aux programmes d'action positive mis sur pied pour assurer une représentativité plus équitable des femmes dans les secteurs non-traditionnels d'emploi. Cette hypothèse n'a pas été confirmée en raison de la conception individualiste du ‘self-interest’. Le ‘self-interest’ réfère tout autant à la situation de l'individu qu'à celle de son groupe. Dans la présente étude, le ‘self-interest’ a été mesuré par le biais du concept de privation relative collective. Les effets de la privation relative pour autrui et de la procédure d'implantation des programmes d'action positive sur les attitudes des hommes face à l'action positive ont également été évalués. En tout, 145 cadres ou professionnels masculins ont participé à la présente étude. Les résultats confirment les hypothèses voulant que la privation relative collective et le traitement préférentiel ont des effets négatifs sur les attitudes aux programmes d'action positive, ce qui milite en faveur d'une conception élargie du ‘self-interest’. Finalement, le lien positif entre la privation relative autrui et l'action positive montre que les hommes qui sont défavorables aux inégalités de sexe favorisent les programmes.     

Procedural Justice and Affirmative Action

There is widespread agreement among both supporters and opponents that affirmative action either must not violate any principle of equal opportunity or procedural justice, or if it does, it may do so only given current extenuating circumstances. Many believe that affirmative action is morally problematic, only justified to the extent that it brings us closer to the time when we will no longer need it. In other words, those that support affirmative action believe it is acceptable in nonideal theory, but not ideal theory. This paper argues that affirmative action is entirely compatible with equal opportunity and procedural justice and would be even in an ideal world. I defend a new analysis of Rawlsian procedural justice according to which it is permissible to interfere in the outcomes of procedures, and thus I show that affirmative action is not morally problematic in the way that many have supposed.