Aversive Racism
From PsychWiki - A Collaborative Psychology Wiki
Throughout the history of the United States, racism and discrimination has been at the forefront of the nation’s problems. With the Civil Rights Movement in 1960 and an ever increasingly multiethnic and multicultural population, American society has become more accepting of people from different ethnicities and backgrounds. Nonetheless, racism continues to exist today, in a more contemporary manner with more discreet and subtle approaches. Gaertner and Dovidio’s 1986 theory of aversive racism shows how racism has molded and come to take shape today.
Background
John F. Gaertner and Samuel L. Dovidio defined the term “aversive racism” in 1986 as “the racial attitudes of many whites who endorse egalitarian values who regard themselves as nonprejudiced, but discriminate in subtle, rationalizable ways” (1). They sought to justify the discrepancy between the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which officially prohibited discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin, and the innate feelings of individuals of color and woman whom continue to experience discrimination till this day.
Methodology
Gaertner and Dovidio (1986) conducted a field test in 1973 to prove their theory. First, they divided people into two separate groups, those who had conservative and those who had liberal political beliefs. Both liberal and conservative households received phone calls from distressed callers who were black or white, made clear by the their respective dialects. The callers, calling from public phones, explained that his or her car had broken down and he or she needed to reach a service garage. The callers then asked the participants in the households to help them by calling the garage for them. A “not helping” response was marked down if the participants refused to help or hung up after the caller said he or she had no more change. A “premature hang-up” was noted if the participant hung up the phone even before learning that the caller had no change to make another phone call. In this case, the independent variables were the troubled callers and the response from the liberal and conservative households were the dependent variables.
Results
The first finding was easily predicted as the results showed that conservatives showed a higher “not helping” response to black callers than to whites callers, 92% vs 65% (4). Liberals showed to have helped black and white callers more equally with the data showing the participants helped black callers 75% and helped white callers 85% (4). Based on these results alone, it would seem as if liberals were less prejudiced than conservatives. However, further discovery showed that liberals had a much higher rate of “hung up prematurely” marks on the black callers than on the white callers, 19% vs 3% (4). Therefore, the experiment showed that conservative and liberal whites did discriminate against blacks, but in different ways.
Two Different Perspectives
Another complicated component of aversive racism is the difference of perspectives of those on the receiving end and those on the giving end. Research shows that while aversive racism is obvious to black people, white people strongly disagree. In a survey, 40 to 60 percent of whites viewed the average black person as living a similar, if not equal life to white Americans. On the other hand, African Americans on many occasions reported that discrimination is still a dominant force in their lives (4). This difference in experiences of racial inequity leads to continued ignorance and obliviousness of the dominant groups while people in minority groups continue to face discriminatory situations on a daily basis.
Alternative Forms of Racism
In light of the decreased public and overt displays of racism, researchers have discovered other forms of indirect racism. Other terms and theories include “symbolic racism” and “ambivalent racism.”
“Symbolic racism,” (Kinder and Sears, 1981; McConahay, 1986) is another form of discreet racism, involving specifically with policy-related issues and the categorization of the whole group based on individual members. Symbolic racism has been described as the combination of anti minority sentiments with traditional, Protestant and conservative values (6). An example of this of this theory is the attribution of African American poverty to their violation of basic moral values, such as self-reliance, individual responsibility, and work ethic as opposed to attributing it to the institution of racism and discrimination.
“Ambivalent racism,” (Irwin Katz and R. Glen Hass, 1981) explores the possibility that people can experience an emotional conflict between positive and a negative feeling towards specific targeted groups. This sense of ambivalence is very unclear and difficult to fully comprehend as it simply explains that there are those who can see certain groups in both good and bad ways and struggle to categorize their own specific thoughts and judgments of the group.
More Studies
In another experiment conducted by Dovidio and Gaertner in 2000, white college students were asked to assess the credentials and to make hiring recommendations for prospective white and black job candidates with either strong, weak or marginal credentials. The results showed no overt discrimination when the applicants clearly had strong or weak credentials. Signs of aversive racism appeared only when the applicants possessed marginal credits. As shown in the Table 6.1 (1), black candidates were recommended more than 20% less than the same white candidates who had the same marginal credentials (1).
<http://books.google.com/books?id=xQd28qwC-YMC&printsec=frontcover>.
Recent Example
A modern example of aversive racism can be traced back to the the 2008 presidential elections with the emergence of the first biracial candidate, Barack Obama. For the later half of the campaigning process leading up to Election Day, Obama showed a decent lead in the polls ranging anywhere from 3-10%. Nonetheless, a survey conducted by Stanford University, claimed support for Obama would have been “six percentage points higher if he were white.” New York Times journalist, Nicholas Kristoff (Oct. ’08) explained, “a lot of the votes Obama loses will come from the well educated whites, who do in fact believe in racial equality, but unconsciously have no intention on voting for a black president.” As Obama was often criticized for his “lack of experience,” the same would not have been an issue, as Kristoff writes, “if he were a white candidate” (5).
Conclusion
This theory of “aversive racism” Gaertner and Dovidio defined in 1986 continues its prevalence till this day. From the job-hiring process to presidential campaigns, people’s subconscious feelings of prejudice have been engrained as a result of United States history, shaping American society and how people interact with different people. In order to combat this unconscious feeling, Gaertner and Dovidio call for people to accept its existence and to take personal responsibility.
“In order to address contemporary racism, even and especially among well-intentioned people, it is necessary to establish new, positive norms for action that replace our current norms for avoidance of responsibility” (Gaertner and Dovidio, January ’08).
References
1) Chin, Jean Lau. Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination: Racism in America. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004. 2 Dec. 2008 <http://books.google.com/books?id=xQd28qwC-YMC&printsec=frontcover>.
2) Dovidio, John F., and Samuel L. Gaertner. "Aversive Racism and Selection Decisions." Psychological Science 11.4 (2000): 315-319. 20 Nov. 2008 <http://http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120705508/abstract>.
3) Glick, Peter, and Susan T. Fiske. "The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70.3 (1996): 491-512. 2 Dec. 2008 <http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=main.showContent& view=fulltext&ormat=TML id=1996-03014-006http://>.
4) John F. Dovidio and Samuel L. Gaertner, Color Blind or Just Plain Blind?: The Pernicious Nature of Contemporary Racism, 12(4) The NonProfit Quarterly (Winter 2005). 5) Kristoff, Nicholas D. "Racism Without Racists." New York Times 4 Oct. 2008. 23 Nov. 2008 <http://http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/opinion/ 05kristof.html?r=2&ei=5070&emc=eta1&o ref=slogin>.
6) "The Varieties of Prejudice." 2 Dec. 2008 <httphttp://science.jrank.org/pages/10839/Prejudice-Varieties-Prejudice.html>.
