More eyes on the prize: variability in White Americans' perceptions of progress toward racial equality

Much recent research suggests that Whites and non-Whites think differently about issues of race in contemporary America. For example, Eibach and Ehrlinger (2006) recently demonstrated that Whites perceive that more progress toward racial equality has been made as compared to non-Whites. The authors of this article sought to extend Eibach and Ehrlinger's analysis. To this end, they found that differences in Whites' and non-Whites' perceptions of racial progress can be explained by the reference points they use for understanding progress toward racial equality (Study 1). Furthermore, they demonstrated that there is variability in White people's perceptions of racial progress that can be explained by self-reported racial prejudice (Studies 1 and 2). Finally, they demonstrated that White people's perceptions of racial progress predict reactions to affirmative action (Study 2). Implications for better understanding intergroup relations and reactions to social policies are discussed.     

Anger and asymmetrical frontal cortical activity: Evidence for an anger–withdrawal relationship

Anger has been associated with relative left frontal cortical activity, reflecting its approach (vs. withdrawal) motivational tendency. However, there may be contexts in which anger is associated with withdrawal motivation and, hence, relative right frontal cortical activity. Based on past research, we hypothesised that for some individuals, interracial interactions may be one such context, as societal pressure to be politically correct dictates that anger should not be expressed. Thus, in the context of an interracial interaction, the experience of anger may coincide with a desire to withdraw from the situation. Cortical activity was measured while White participants anticipated an interracial interaction. Consistent with expectations, self-reported anger was associated with relative right frontal cortical activity. In general, the motivational correlates of anger may be partially determined by the specific attributes of the person and the social context in which anger occurs.