Objectivity interrogation of racial scholarship in psychology and management.

Scholars of color remain underrepresented in US institutions in academia. In this paper, we will examine one factor that contributes to their continued marginalization in psychology and management: the scientific method's commitment to traditional notions of objectivity. We argue that objectivity-defined as practices and policies rooted in the heightened value placed on a research process that is ostensibly free from bias-is central to the prominence of primarily White scholarship in psychology and management research and remains central to knowledge production. To investigate this, we employ a mixed-methods approach, integrating qualitative and quantitative data to codify how scholars of color experience objectivity interrogations, or written and verbal questioning in academic contexts that implicates their scientific rigor. We also identify how scholars of color engage in objectivity armoring, or self-presentational strategies (toning down and stepping up) to contend with these interrogations. Finally, we reveal these toning down processes in language use within publications on racial scholarship. Overall, these studies reveal the unique challenges scholars of color face to legitimize and validate their work on race and racism within predominantly White institutions and disciplines.

Psychological Science Is Not Race Neutral.

In their analysis in a previous issue of Perspectives on Psychological Science, Roberts and colleagues argued that the editors, authors, and participants throughout subfields of psychological science are overwhelmingly White. In this commentary, we consider some of the drivers and consequences of this racial inequality. Drawing on race scholarship from within and outside the field, we highlight three phenomena that create and maintain racial inequality in psychology: (a) racial ignorance, (b) threats to belonging, and (c) racial-progress narratives. We close by exploring steps that journals and authors can take to reduce racial inequality in our field, ending with an appeal to consider the experience of scholars of color in race scholarship and in psychological science more broadly.

Testing the efficacy of three informational interventions for reducing misperceptions of the Black-White wealth gap.

Americans remain unaware of the magnitude of economic inequality in the nation and the degree to which it is patterned by race. We exposed a community sample of respondents to one of three interventions designed to promote a more realistic understanding of the Black-White wealth gap. The interventions conformed to recommendations in messaging about racial inequality drawn from the social sciences yet differed in how they highlighted data-based trends in Black-White wealth inequality, a single personal narrative, or both. Data interventions were more effective than the narrative in both shifting how people talk about racial wealth inequality-eliciting less speech about personal achievement-and, critically, lowering estimates of Black-White wealth equality for at least 18 mo following baseline, which aligned more with federal estimates of the Black-White wealth gap. Findings from this study highlight how data, along with current recommendations in the social sciences, can be leveraged to promote more accurate understandings of the magnitude of racial inequality in society, laying the necessary groundwork for messaging about equity-enhancing policy.

Black and Latinx conservatives upshift competence relative to liberals in mostly white settings.

Racial minorities vary in their sociopolitical views, as figures such as Barack Obama and Ted Cruz often demonstrate. Here, I examine the implications for interracial behaviour, proposing that Black and Latinx conservatives-specifically, those who are more supportive of hierarchy-upshift competence relative to liberals in mostly white settings, distancing themselves from stereotypes. Analysing 250,000 Congressional remarks and 1 million tweets revealed that Black and Latinx conservatives (determined by voting behaviour) referenced high power and ability more than liberals. No such pattern emerged for white politicians. A meta-analysis of four experiments further revealed that Black conservatives (determined by social dominance orientation) referenced high status more than liberals when responding to a white (but not Black) partner. This was robust to controls and unique to hierarchy-based conservatism. Finally, analysing 18,000 editorials suggested the following implications: the more minority conservatives referenced power in Congress, the more journalists referenced power in editorials about them. The findings highlight the diverse ideology of racial minorities, as well as the behavioural implications.

Race-status associations: Distinct effects of three novel measures among White and Black perceivers.

Race is fraught with meaning, but unequal status is central. Race-status associations (RSAs) link White Americans with high status and Black Americans with low status. RSAs could occur via observation of racially distributed jobs, perceived status-related stereotypic attributes, or simple ranking. Nine samples (N = 3,933) validate 3 novel measures of White = high status/Black = low status RSAs-based on jobs, rank, and attributes. First, RSA measures showed clear factor structure, internal validity, and test-retest reliability. Second, these measures differentially corresponded to White Americans' hierarchy-maintaining attitudes, beliefs, and preferences. Potentially based on observation, the more spontaneous Job-based RSAs predicted interracial bias, social dominance orientation, meritocracy beliefs, and hierarchy-maintaining hiring or policy preferences. Preference effects held after controlling for bias and support for the status quo. In contrast, the more deliberate Rank- and Attribute-based RSAs negatively predicted hierarchy-maintaining beliefs and policy preferences; direct inferences of racial inequality linked to preferences for undoing it. Third, Black = low status, rather than White = high status, associations largely drove these effects. Finally, Black Americans also held RSAs; Rank- or Attribute-based RSAs predicted increased perceived discrimination, reduced social dominance, and reduced meritocracy beliefs. Although individuals' RSAs vary, only White Americans' Job-based stratifying associations help maintain racial status hierarchies. Theory-guided evidence of race-status associations introduces powerful new assessment tools. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Self-presentation in interracial settings: The competence downshift by White liberals.

Most Whites, particularly sociopolitical liberals, now endorse racial equality. Archival and experimental research reveals a subtle but persistent ironic consequence: White liberals self-present less competence to minorities than to other Whites-that is, they patronize minorities stereotyped as lower status and less competent. In an initial archival demonstration of the competence downshift, Study 1 examined the content of White Republican and Democratic presidential candidates' campaign speeches. Although Republican candidates did not significantly shift language based on audience racial composition, Democratic candidates used less competence-related language to minority audiences than to White audiences. Across 5 experiments (total N = 2,157), White participants responded to a Black or White hypothetical (Studies 2, 3, 4, S1) or ostensibly real (Study 5) interaction partner. Three indicators of self-presentation converged: competence-signaling of vocabulary selected for an assignment, competence-related traits selected for an introduction, and competence-related content of brief, open-ended introductions. Conservatism indicators included self-reported political affiliation (liberal-conservative), Right-Wing Authoritarianism (values-based conservatism), and Social Dominance Orientation (hierarchy-based conservatism). Internal meta-analyses revealed that liberals-but not conservatives-presented less competence to Black interaction partners than to White ones. The simple effect was small but significant across studies, and most reliable for the self-reported measure of conservatism. This possibly unintentional but ultimately patronizing competence-downshift suggests that well-intentioned liberal Whites may draw on low-status/competence stereotypes to affiliate with minorities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Status, Power, and Intergroup Relations: The Personal Is the Societal.

Hierarchies in the correlated forms of power (resources) and status (prestige) are constants that organize human societies. This article reviews relevant social psychological literature and identifies several converging results concerning power and status. Whether rank is chronically possessed or temporarily embodied, higher ranks create psychological distance from others, allow agency by the higher ranked, and exact deference from the lower ranked. Beliefs that status entails competence are essentially universal. Interpersonal interactions create warmth-competence compensatory tradeoffs. Along with societal structures (enduring inequality), these tradeoffs reinforce status-competence beliefs. Race, class, and gender further illustrate these dynamics. Although status systems are resilient, they can shift, and understanding those change processes is an important direction for future research, as global demographic changes disrupt existing hierarchies.