From hierarchy to rivalry: Asian candidate evaluation in changing racial contexts

Existing studies on candidate evaluation have posited that racial cues would invoke negative attitudes toward outgroups, thus lowering support for minority candidates. However, recent studies have found that even implicit racial cues show no negative effect but actually work positively in favor of the minority candidates. In this study, I explore this puzzle by setting up a survey experiment that pairs an Asian candidate against competitors with varying racial backgrounds. Consistent with the existing evidence, I found that White voters tend to support an Asian candidate to a greater degree than a co‐ethnic, White competitor. However, departing from the previous studies that have explained this tendency as a reward for model minority, I argue that such a pattern is associated with reaffirming Whites’ ingroup identity in a racial hierarchy by compensating minorities. When the apparent racial hierarchy—White versus non‐White—is replaced with a minority‐only context, Whites no longer need to favor an Asian candidate and divide their support more evenly to the two minority candidates. I further show that this tendency is moderated by the intensity of their ingroup attitudes.     

Teaching the Candidate in Case Seminar

There has been insufficient focus on the impact and usefulness of the case seminar for teaching in psychoanalytic institutes. In order to better understand case seminar, questionnaires were submitted to candidates, graduates, and faculty in two psychoanalytic teaching institutes. The responses indicate that the case seminar format should be standardized; level of experience of candidates should be similar; professors should examine suitability of the case beforehand; and candidates need to be prepared for the group process. Findings are useful in improving the teaching of psychoanalysis and encouraging the creative use of the candidate's self in psychoanalytic training.