 |
Implicit Bias, Implicit Closeness, and Explicit Support for Blacks. Representative Survey and Online-Reaction Time Study
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
1
Implicit Bias, Implicit Closeness, and Explicit Support for Blacks.
Representative Survey and Online-Reaction Time Study.
Thomas Craemer
University of Connecticut, Department of Public Policy
1800 Asylum Avenue, West Hartford, CT 06117-2697
Telephone: (860) 570-9344, Fax: (860) 570-9114
e-mail: thomas.## email not listed ##
June 25, 2008
Abstract. When it comes to racial issues, Americans are often suspected of a “split personality” holding different explicit and implicit attitudes. This study goes one step further and suggests that implicit racial attitudes may be split: Implicit word associations (e.g., Fazio et al. 1995, Greenwald et al. 1998) may betray a culturally shared anti-Black bias, even when people experience an implicit sense of closeness toward Blacks (Craemer 2008).
The study combines a representative RDD-telephone survey (n=1,200) with an online
reaction time study (n=1,341) on affirmative action, government aid to Blacks, and reparations for slavery. The telephone survey serves as a baseline for comparison to evaluate the validity of online results. The online study allows comparing explicit racial attitudes to the two types of implicit racial attitudes. Culturally shared implicit word associations are measured using a subliminal priming procedure (Fazio et al. 1995). Implicit closeness to Blacks is conceptualized as mental overlap between an individual’s self-concept and that individual’s mental representation of African Americans as a group. It is measured using a timed self-rating task developed by Aron et al. (1991).
The results suggest that implicit closeness toward Blacks plays a powerful and consistent
role in predicting support for a broad range of pro-Black policies. In contrast, implicit word associations display a powerful pro-White and anti-Black bias across all racial and ethnic groups and are less predictive of racial policy preferences. Political and methodological implications are discussed.
|
| | Authors: Craemer, Thomas. |
|
| |
|
|
1
Implicit Bias, Implicit Closeness, and Explicit Support for Blacks.
Representative Survey and Online-Reaction Time Study.
Thomas Craemer
University of Connecticut, Department of Public Policy
1800 Asylum Avenue, West Hartford, CT 06117-2697
Telephone: (860) 570-9344, Fax: (860) 570-9114
e-mail: thomas.## email not listed ##
June 25, 2008
Abstract. When it comes to racial issues, Americans are often suspected of a “split personality”
holding different explicit and implicit attitudes. This study goes one step further and suggests that
implicit racial attitudes may be split: Implicit word associations (e.g., Fazio et al. 1995,
Greenwald et al. 1998) may betray a culturally shared anti-Black bias, even when people
experience an implicit sense of closeness toward Blacks (Craemer 2008).
The study combines a representative RDD-telephone survey (n=1,200) with an online
reaction time study (n=1,341) on affirmative action, government aid to Blacks, and reparations
for slavery. The telephone survey serves as a baseline for comparison to evaluate the validity of
online results. The online study allows comparing explicit racial attitudes to the two types of
implicit racial attitudes. Culturally shared implicit word associations are measured using a
subliminal priming procedure (Fazio et al. 1995). Implicit closeness to Blacks is conceptualized
as mental overlap between an individual’s self-concept and that individual’s mental
representation of African Americans as a group. It is measured using a timed self-rating task
developed by Aron et al. (1991).
The results suggest that implicit closeness toward Blacks plays a powerful and consistent
role in predicting support for a broad range of pro-Black policies. In contrast, implicit word
associations display a powerful pro-White and anti-Black bias across all racial and ethnic groups
and are less predictive of racial policy preferences. Political and methodological implications are
discussed.
|
|
 Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 28 
