Implicit race bias revisited: On the utility of task context in assessing implicit attitude strength

Decades of research have shown that many people harbor implicit attitudes that are positive toward Whites relative to Blacks. With some notable exceptions, these findings are almost always obtained using implicit attitude tasks that assess attitudes toward Whites and Black simultaneously. This makes it difficult to determine whether implicit race bias effects are the result of strong liking for Whites, dislike for Blacks, or both. The present article reports results from a study in which participants' automatic bias towards Blacks and Whites is assessed across multiple evaluative contexts. Results show consistent negative automatic attitudes towards Blacks, but there was considerable variability in participants' attitudes toward Whites. Consistent with the idea that strong attitudes are less contextually sensitive than weaker attitudes (e.g. Krosnick, 1988), it is concluded that participants harbor strong automatic bias against Blacks, but not strong favoritism for Whites. Implications for a context-centered approach to implicit attitude measurement are discussed.     

Implicit motivation to control prejudice

This research examines whether spontaneous, unintentional discriminatory behavior can be moderated by an implicit (nonconscious) motivation to control prejudice. We operationalize implicit motivation to control prejudice (IMCP) in terms of an implicit negative attitude toward prejudice (NAP) and an implicit belief that oneself is prejudiced (BOP). In the present experiment, an implicit stereotypic association of Blacks (vs. Whites) with weapons was positively correlated with the tendency to “shoot” armed Black men faster than armed White men (the “Shooter Bias”) in a computer simulation. However, participants relatively high in implicit negative attitude toward prejudice showed no relation between the race-weapons stereotype and the shooter bias. Implicit belief that oneself is prejudiced had no direct effect on this relation, but the interaction of NAP and BOP did. Participants who had a strong association between self and prejudice (high BOP) but a weak association between prejudice and bad (low NAP) showed the strongest relation between the implicit race-weapons stereotype and the Shooter Bias, suggesting that these individuals freely employed their stereotypes in their behavior.     

Subliminal exposure to faces and racial attitudes: Exposure to Whites makes Whites like Blacks less

Despite recent social and political advances, most interracial contact is still superficial in nature, and White individuals interact mainly with other Whites. Based on recent mere exposure research, we propose that repeated exposure to Whites may actually increase prejudice. In a series of experiments, White participants were subliminally exposed to White faces or nothing (control) and then completed various explicit and implicit measures of racial attitudes. Exposure to White faces consistently led to more prejudice by making attitudes toward Blacks more negative, rather than by making attitudes toward Whites more positive. A final experiment demonstrated that the pattern of increased prejudice following exposure to Whites was moderated by the strength of participants’ attitudes toward Whites. Only when White attitudes were strong did Black attitudes became more negative after exposure to White faces.     

On the automatic evaluation of end-states

The author's research examined automatically activated attitudes toward desired end-states. Across 4 studies, participants' automatic attitudes toward goals (i.e., thinness, egalitarianism) significantly predicted their goal pursuit, including behaviors, intentions, and judgments. Such attitudes predicted behavior and judgments that are difficult to monitor and control (i.e., restrained eating, subtle prejudice), but not judgments that are easy to monitor and control (i.e., blatant prejudice). Automatic attitudes toward goals also possessed unique predictive validity compared with explicit measures of motivation and with automatic attitudes toward more physical, "graspable" objects. The findings are discussed with regard to the predictive validity of automatic attitudes, the use of automatic attitudes toward goals as an implicit measure of motivation, and the role of automatic evaluative processes in goal-pursuit and self-regulation.     

The threat of appearing prejudiced and race-based attentional biases

The current work tested whether external motivation to respond without prejudice toward Blacks is associated with biased patterns of selective attention that reflect a threat response to Black individuals. In a dot-probe attentional bias paradigm, White participants with low and high external motivation to respond without prejudice toward Blacks (i.e., low-EM and high-EM individuals, respectively) were presented with pairs of White and Black male faces that bore either neutral or happy facial expressions; on each trial, the faces were displayed for either 30 ms or 450 ms. The findings were consistent with those of previous research on threat and attention: High-EM participants revealed an attentional bias toward neutral Black faces presented for 30 ms, but an attentional bias away from neutral Black faces presented for 450 ms. These attentional biases were eliminated, however, when the faces displayed happy expressions. These findings suggest that high levels of external motivation to avoid prejudice result in anxious arousal in response to Black individuals, and that this response affects even basic attentional processes.     

Endorsing Obama licenses favoring Whites

Three studies tested whether the opportunity to endorse Barack Obama made individuals subsequently more likely to favor Whites over Blacks. In Study 1, participants were more willing to describe a job as better suited for Whites than for Blacks after expressing support for Obama. Study 2 replicated this effect and ruled out alternative explanations: participants favored Whites for the job after endorsing Obama, but not after endorsing a White Democrat, nor after seeing Obama’s photo without having an opportunity to endorse him. Study 3 demonstrated that racial attitudes moderated this effect: endorsing Obama increased the amount of money allocated to an organization serving Whites at the expense of an organization serving Blacks only for participants high in a measure of racial prejudice. These three studies suggest that expressing support for Obama grants people moral credentials [Monin, B., & Miller, D. T. (2001). Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 33-43], thus reducing their concern with appearing prejudiced.     

The Nature of Contemporary Prejudice: Insights from Aversive Racism

Within the United States, declines in the overt expression of racial prejudice over several decades have given way to near universal endorsement of the principles of racial equality as a core cultural value. Yet, evidence of persistent and substantial disparities between Blacks and Whites remain. Here, we review research that demonstrates how the actions of even well-intentioned and ostensibly non-prejudiced individuals can inadvertently contribute to these disparities through subtle biases in decision making and social interactions. We argue that current racial attitudes of Whites toward Blacks in the United States are fundamentally ambivalent, characterized by a widespread contemporary form of racial prejudice, aversive racism , that is manifested in subtle and indirect ways, and illustrate its operation across a wide range of settings, from employment and legal decisions, to group problem-solving and everyday helping behavior. We conclude by describing research aimed at combating these biases and identify new avenues for future research.     

The contact hypothesis revisited: status bias in the reduction of implicit prejudice in the United States and Lebanon

Although 50 years of research demonstrate that friendly intergroup contact reduces intergroup prejudice, the findings are based solely on self-reported, explicit prejudice. In two parallel experiments examining intergroup contact and prejudice-between Whites and Blacks in the United States (Experiment 1) and between Christians and Muslims in Lebanon (Experiment 2)-we examined whether intergroup status differences moderate contact effects on implicit prejudice, as well as explicit prejudice. Both experiments replicated the standard effect of contact on explicit prejudice. They also demonstrated that intergroup contact reduces implicit prejudice among low-status groups. In Experiment 1, the implicit prejudice of Blacks toward Whites (but not Whites toward Blacks) was reduced as a function of friendly contact. In Experiment 2, the implicit prejudice of Muslims toward Christians (but not Christians toward Muslims) was reduced as a function of friendly contact.     

Hispanic Prejudice in the United States

Hispanics recently became the nation's largest minority. By 2050, they will be one third of the population. As their power and influence grows, it is important to have knowledge of their prejudice. There are many studies of prejudice toward Hispanics, largely negative; but little is known about their prejudice toward others. To provide more knowledge of the subject, responses by 758 Hispanics to items about prejudice contained on nationwide surveys were analyzed. Hispanics generally preferred their own kind for marriage and as neighbors. They saw many differences between themselves and Blacks, Asians, Jews, and Whites with respect to intelligence and to being wealthy, hardworking, and prone to violence. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.     

Prejudice in the Lives of Asian Americans

Expressions of prejudice were compared between Asian American and Black, Hispanic, Jewish, and White respondents to social distance and stereotype items on 5 recent nationwide public opinion surveys. There was much prejudice toward Asian Americans. Their prejudice was greatest toward Blacks and Hispanics and least toward Jews and Whites. Among Asian American subgroups, prejudice toward Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites was greatest by Chinese Americans and Japanese Americans; and least by Filipino Americans and Asian Indian Americans. Suggestions are made for further research.     

Motivation to Control Prejudice as a Mediator of Identity and Affirmative Action Attitudes1

Affirmative action is a divisive issue in society today. Attitudes toward affirmative action vary both between and within ethnic and racial groups, with Whites exhibiting the majority of negative attitudes. Researchers have suggested a variety of psychological explanations for differences in attitudes toward affirmative action (e.g., racism, self‐interest, fairness). The current study investigates whether motivation to control prejudice acts as a mediator of ethnic/racial identity and Whites’ attitudes toward affirmative action. Support was found for the mediating role of motivation to control prejudice for several aspects of ethnic and racial identity and affirmative action attitudes. Limitations of the study are discussed, as are topics for future research.     

Prejudice from thin air: The effect of emotion on automatic intergroup attitudes

Two experiments provide initial evidence that specific emotional states are capable of creating automatic prejudice toward outgroups. Specifically, we propose that anger should influence automatic evaluations of outgroups because of its functional relevance to intergroup conflict and competition, whereas other negative emotions less relevant to intergroup relations (e.g., sadness) should not. In both experiments, after minimal ingroups and outgroups were created, participants were induced to experience anger, sadness, or a neutral state. Automatic attitudes toward the in- and outgroups were then assessed using an evaluative priming measure (Experiment 1) and the Implicit Association Test (Experiment 2). As predicted, results showed that anger created automatic prejudice toward the outgroup, whereas sadness and neutrality resulted in no automatic intergroup bias. The implications of these findings for emotion-induced biases in implicit intergroup cognition in particular, and in social cognition in general, are considered.     

Prejudice matters: understanding the reactions of Whites to affirmative action programs targeted to benefit Blacks.

The authors examined, in 2 studies, the effects of equal employment opportunity/affirmative action (EEO/AA) policies on Whites' job-related attitudes. First, in an experiment, White prospective job recruits, as expected, rated a potential employer whose EEO/AA policies were framed as targeted to benefit Blacks as less attractive than a potential employer whose EEO/AA policies were framed more generally. Second. the results of a field study showed that prejudice against Blacks moderated the relationship between Whites' perceptions that their organization's EEO/AA policies were targeted to benefit Blacks and their satisfaction with promotion opportunities. Specifically, among prejudiced Whites, this relationship was negative and considerable in size (r = -.39. p < .01); whereas, among nonprejudiced Whites, it was negligible (r = -.04, ns). The implications of our findings for the study of prejudice in organizations are discussed.     

Dangerous Enough: Moderating Racial Bias with Contextual Threat Cues

Research shows that participants shoot armed Blacks more frequently and quickly than armed Whites, but make don't-shoot responses more frequently and quickly for unarmed Whites than unarmed Blacks. We argue that this bias reflects the perception of threat — specifically, threat associated with Black males. Other danger cues (not just race) may create a similar predisposition to shoot, and if these cues promote shooting when the target is White, they should attenuate racial bias. We embedded targets in threatening and safe backgrounds. Racial bias was evident in safe contexts but disappeared when context signaled danger, and this reduction was largely due to an increased tendency to shoot White targets.     

Mimicry reduces racial prejudice

Humans are empathic animals. We automatically match other people's motor responses, allowing us to get “under the skin” of other people. Although this perception–action-coupling—a form of motor resonance—occurs spontaneously, this happens less readily with the outgroup (vs. the ingroup) and for those high (vs. low) in prejudice. Thus, prejudice diminishes our tendency to resonate with the outgroup. Here we suggest that the reverse is also possible—that resonating with the actions of an outgroup member can reduce prejudice. We predict, in other words, that explicitly mimicking the outgroup can reduce prejudice. Participants watched a 140-second video depicting actors repeatedly reaching for and drinking from a glass of water. They passively watched a video with Black actors; watched the video and mimicked the Black actors; or watched and mimicked a video with actors from their ingroup. Participants then completed the Affect Misattribution Procedure (Payne, Cheng, Govorun, & Stewart, 2005), a measure of implicit anti-Black prejudice, and an explicit symbolic racism measure. Results indicate that the outgroup-mimicry group had similar implicit preference for Blacks and Whites, unlike the other two groups, which preferred Whites over Blacks. The outgroup-mimicry group also reported less explicit racism towards Blacks than the ingroup-mimicry group, but no less than the ingroup-observation group. Mimicking specific outgroup members, therefore, reduces implicit, and possibly explicit, bias against the outgroup more generally.     

The regulation of explicit and implicit race bias: the role of motivations to respond without prejudice

Three studies examined the moderating role of motivations to respond without prejudice (e.g., internal and external) in expressions of explicit and implicit race bias. In all studies, participants reported their explicit attitudes toward Blacks. Implicit measures consisted of a sequential priming task (Study 1) and the Implicit Association Test (Studies 2 and 3). Study 3 used a cognitive busyness manipulation to preclude effects of controlled processing on implicit responses. In each study, explicit race bias was moderated by internal motivation to respond without prejudice, whereas implicit race bias was moderated by the interaction of internal and external motivation to respond without prejudice. Specifically, high internal, low external participants exhibited lower levels of implicit race bias than did all other participants. Implications for the development of effective self-regulation of race bias are discussed.     

Framing matters: contextual influences on interracial interaction outcomes

Previous studies indicate that interracial interactions frequently have negative outcomes but have typically focused on social contexts. The current studies examined the effect of manipulating interaction context. In Study 1, Black and White participants worked together with instructions that created either a social focus or a task focus. With a task focus, interracial pairs were more consistently synchronized, Black participants showed less executive function depletion, and White participants generally showed reduced implicit bias. Follow-up studies suggested that prejudice concerns help explain these findings: White participants reported fewer concerns about appearing prejudiced when they imagined an interracial interaction with a task focus rather than a social focus (Study 2a), and Black participants reported less vigilance against prejudice in an imagined interracial interaction with a task focus rather than a social focus (Study 2b). Taken together, these studies illustrate the importance of interaction context for the experiences of both Blacks and Whites.     

Teammates On and Off the Field? Contact With Black Teammates and the Racial Attitudes of White Student Athletes1

The intergroup contact hypothesis holds that proximate, cooperative interactions on an equalized basis between Blacks and Whites can minimize Whites’ prejudice (Allport, 1954). This experiment investigated the effect of contact between White and Black high school teammates on White student athletes’ racial attitudes. Using the 1996 Social and Group Experiences (SAGE) survey (created by the authors and administered in the Fall of 1996) commissioned by the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the results indicated a significant relationship between amount of contact with Black teammates in high school and racial policy support and affect, depending on the type of sport played. White student athletes playing team sports who had higher percentages of Blacks as high school teammates expressed more policy support for and greater positive affect toward Blacks as a group than did their counterparts playing individual sports. The role of athletic experiences in changing racial attitudes is discussed.     

The role of ethnicity,gender, emotional content,and contextual differences in physiological,expressive, and self-reported emotional responses to imagery

Cardiovascular responses, skin conductance, corrugator ("frown"), and zygomaticus ("smile") electromyographic activity, and self-reported emotional responses were examined in response to scenarios that varied in emotional content and whether they involved interacting with a Black or White person. Black (33 women, 25 men) and White (28 women, 26 men) students imagined joy, neutral, fear, and anger situations. Emotional contents replicated patterns of physiological and self-reported emotion found in other studies, although gender differences in emotion found in other studies were evident only in White participants. Blacks exhibited more positive facial expressions, while Whites were more negatively expressive. Blacks, and particularly Black men, exhibited greater blood pressure reactivity to the emotional contexts. For both White and Black participants, imagined interactions with Blacks increased both positive and negative facial expression. Results suggest that, compared to Whites, Blacks are both more autonomically reactive to emotional interactions and may be responded to more emotionally. The results are discussed in terms of the need to study specific contextual factors rather than broad cross-cultural characterisations.     

Forms of Personality Obstructive to Progress in College

Abstract

This study examined the relationship between self-image and ethnic identification among 3 South African groups. Participants included random samples of 347 Afrikaans-speaking Whites, 113 English-speaking Whites, and 466 Blacks in urban Gauteng. Positive and negative self-image were extracted using the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (M. Rosenberg, 1965). Afrikaans-speaking Whites had the most positive self-image and Blacks the most negative self-image. A positive self-image was correlated with stronger ethnic identification among Afrikaans-speaking Whites. The opposite was true for Blacks. This relationship was insignificant among English-speaking Whites. Ambivalence toward ingroup identity was persistently correlated with self-image for all groups.