Psychology Cannot Afford to Ignore the Many Harms Caused by Microaggressions

Abstract

In an ongoing debate, Scott Lilienfeld (2019) continues to question the merits and meaning of microaggressions research. Key issues include how to define microaggressions, whether microaggressions cause measurable harm, whether microaggression education is helpful, and defining the most important next steps in the microaggressions research agenda. I discuss the importance of understanding microaggressions in context and as they relate to pathological stereotypes about groups, given that this is critical to identifying them. I summarize some of the many longitudinal studies linking psychological and medical problems to experiences of everyday discrimination. In addition, the literature indicates that victims of microaggressions experience further harms when trying to respond to offenders, but there is little research to support any specific interventions, including those advanced by Lilienfeld. I discuss the importance of believing and supporting those reporting experiences of microaggressions. I conclude that there is a need for more research examining (a) how to reduce the commission of microaggressions, (b) how to best respond to offenders in the moment in a way that mitigates harm for all persons involved, and (c) how clinicians can best help those who are suffering as a result of microaggressions as the next frontier in this important work.

A qualitative study of microaggressions against African Americans on predominantly White campuses

“…Given the many harm of microaggressions [48], it is critical that we understand the experience of the targets of microaggressive actions. As the field moves towards the development of effective tools for the reduction of racial microaggressions, our taxonomies must be based increasingly on empirical findings for greatest utility in identifying both their occurrence and the harms that occur as a result.…”

Racial Incivility in Everyday Life: A Conceptual Framework for Linking Process, Person, and Context

“…In his critique, Lilienfeld (2017a) raised a number of concerns regarding the scientific status of microaggression research and training programs. In response, commentaries have argued for greater qualitative investigations that capture the interiority of socially devalued groups (Sue, 2017), as well as intervention efforts to reduce the commission of microaggressions and their invidious effects on mental health (M. T. Williams, 2020aWilliams, , 2020b. Others have argued that engaging in critical microaggression dialogue in professional and public settings demands social action-praxisthat is grounded ab initio in the perspectives of marginalized groups and communities (Huber & Solorzano, 2018;Sue, Lin, Torino, Capodilupo, & Rivera, 2009).…”

The Logic of Microaggressions Assumes a Racist Society

“…Whereas controversy and disagreement over concepts and methods has existed since microaggressions entered mainstream psychology 1 and popular culture (Sue et al, 2007, see commentaries by Harris, 2009Schacht, 2008;Thomas, 2008), the situation hit a fever pitch with Lilienfeld's (2017) detailed critique and subsequent responses (e.g., Kraus & Park, 2017). Most recently, Williams (2020aWilliams ( , 2020b and Lilienfeld (2020) engaged in a lengthy back-and-forth concerning concepts and evidence, reaching little agreement on some of the core debates.…”

“…As is clear from papers by Williams (2020aWilliams ( , 2020b and other microaggressions researchers (Solórzano, 1998;Sue et al, 2007), the starting assumption is one of a racist society. Indeed, a great deal of research and theorizing on microaggressions that occurred between Pierce (1970) and Sue et al, (2007) was situated within Critical Race Theory, a framework that takes an explicitly structural view to understand the causes and consequences of racism (Solórzano et al, 2000;Solórzano et al, 2002).…”