Lay theory of race affects and moderates Asian Americans' responses toward American culture.

Abstract

People may hold different understandings of race that might affect how they respond to the culture of groups deemed to be racially distinct. The present research tests how this process is moderated by the minority individual's lay theory of race. An essentialist lay theory of race (i.e., that race reflects deep-seated, inalterable essence and is indicative of traits and ability) would orient racial minorities to rigidly adhere to their ethnic culture, whereas a social constructionist lay theory of race (i.e., that race is socially constructed, malleable, and arbitrary) would orient racial minorities to identify and cognitively assimilate toward the majority culture. To test these predictions, the authors conducted 4 studies with Asian American participants. The first 2 studies examine the effect of one's lay theory of race on perceived racial differences and identification with American culture. The last 2 studies tested the moderating effect of lay theory of race on identification and assimilation toward the majority American culture after this culture had been primed. The results generally supported the prediction that the social constructionist theory was associated with more perceived similarity between Asians and Americans and more consistent identification and assimilation toward American culture, compared with the essentialist theory.

Not Just for Stereotyping Anymore

“…Consequently, factors that increase the tendency for categorical thinking in the social domain may not only increase stereotyping, but may also stifle creativity outside the social domain. In the research reported here, we tested this novel prediction by focusing on racial essentialism, which is associated with overreliance on racial categories and has been consistently shown to result in increased racial stereotyping and discordant intergroup relations (Bastian & Haslam, 2006;Hong, Levy, & Chiu, 2001;Jayaratne et al, 2006;Keller, 2005;No et al, 2008). We suggest that the functional utility derived from this categorical mind-set induces a habitual closed-mindedness that transcends the social domain and hampers creativity.…”

“…Essentialist beliefs lie at one end of this continuum: People with these beliefs hold that racial groups possess an underlying essence (often biological or genetic) that represents deepseated and unalterable properties indicative of traits and abilities. Nonessentialist beliefs lie at the other end of this continuum: People with these beliefs hold that racial categories are arbitrary and malleable social-political constructions (Chao, Chen, Roisman, & Hong, 2007;No et al, 2008). People endorsing racial essentialism partition their social world into discrete racial categories that cannot be combined or altered (Bastian, Loughnan, & Koval, 2011;Hong, Chao, & No, 2009).…”

“…We assessed racial essentialism by asking participants to what degree they agreed with the statement, "To a large extent, a person's race biologically determines his or her abilities and traits" (taken from the racial essentialism scale of No et al, 2008). To assess stereotyping, we measured the degree to which participants believed that African Americans were uneducated, violent, and irresponsible (Levy, Stroessner, & Dweck, 1998;α = .88).…”

“…Of course, we did not design the crosssectional pilot study to test the causal relationship between essentialism and creativity. In our subsequent experiments, we utilized the fact that, like other lay theories (e.g., Chiu, Hong, & Dweck, 1997;Hong et al, 2003), beliefs about racial essentialism are a part of people's declarative knowledge and, therefore, follow the principles of knowledge activation (Higgins, 1996): They can be activated by experimental manipulation (No et al, 2008). This approach capitalizes on the tenet that although there are chronic differences in people's endorsement of racial essentialism, the temporary accessibility of racial essentialist beliefs can be heightened or dampened after reading persuasive arguments that respectively support or undermine those beliefs.…”

Does conflict mediation research keep track with cultural theory?

“…Here, many studies do not equally focus on all aspects of essentialism vs. constructivism as a bipolar dimension. Instead, many of them concentrate on the assumption that individuals' essentialist notions impede intercultural understanding and that they may stimulate (culture-motivated) conflicts, instead (No et al 2008;Gregory et al 2010;Schraml 2014;Dervin & Machart 2015;Goode & Stroup 2015). Gregory et al (2010) present a qualitative theory-based enquiry on essentialist vs. constructivist understandings of culture among nursing students.…”