Social justice movements often consist of both targets of bias (e.g., Black people) and nontarget allies (e.g., White people). However, little is known about what factors shape minorities’ perceptions of allies and their ally behaviors. Across four studies, we investigated Black participants’ perceptions of Whites’ motives to engage in ally behaviors. In Study 1, we found that Black participants perceived nontarget allies as both highly internally and externally motivated, suggesting ally motives may be ambiguous to Black perceivers. Studies 2–4 examined the effect of Black participants’ suspicion of Whites’ motives on perceptions of White allies’ sincerity and support for their ally efforts. As predicted, suspicious Black participants perceived White ally protestors, confronters, and political candidates as less sincere than similar Black targets and, in turn, were less supportive of White allies’ efforts. Discussion focuses on how perceived motives of White allies impact perceptions of allies and their ally efforts.
Racial privity judgments – or the perceived causal connection between historical racial discrimination and current suffering among Black Americans – predicts sympathy for the victims of past injustices and perceptions of contemporary racial inequality. Four studies investigated the ideological roots of privity judgments; focusing on subjective temporal perceptions associated with privity judgments (e.g., subjective perceptions that past discrimination occurred more, versus less, recently). Study 1 revealed that liberals perceived historical instances of racial discrimination as having occurred more recently than conservatives, and that temporal perceptions of recency were associated with less anti-Black bias. Studies 2–4 manipulated temporal perceptions of recency by framing past discrimination as having occurred more recently. Results revealed that increasing perceived temporal recency resulted in reduced anti-Black bias and greater sympathy for present-day victims of racial discrimination across political ideology. Discussion surrounds how framing historical information as subjectively recent has implications for prejudice reduction.
Despite the well-documented harmful effects of Native-themed mascots, Native-themed mascots have many supporters who decry the politically correct efforts to remove these mascots. Although ostensibly unrelated to race/racism, we reasoned that invoking anti-PC attitudes allow prejudiced people to indirectly support Native-themed mascots while minimizing the appearance of being biased. Three studies ( N = 587) found that anti-Native bias predicted anti-PC attitudes and, in turn, Native-themed mascot support. In Studies 2 and 3, participants varying in anti-PC attitudes considered a university changing their Native-themed mascot for PC or non-PC reasons. Anti-PC attitudes predicted opposition to changing Native-themed mascots in both conditions. However, the effect of anti-PC attitudes was stronger in the PC condition where social justice norms were salient. These results suggest that, for many, anti-PC attitudes reflect more than just opposition to political correctness and are used by prejudiced people to indirectly defend controversial mascots without appearing prejudiced.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.