0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/06/26 03:09

From 108.1 to 109.1 From 115.1 to 116.1

From version

109.1

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 02:53

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

115.1

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 05:42

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
Attachments (0 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
- lenk-et-al-white-americans-preference-for-black-people-in-advertising-has-increased-in-the-past-66-years-a-meta-analysis.pdf

Details

Page properties

Content

@@ -1122,66 +1122,138 @@
  = Whiteness & White Guilt =
++{{expandable summary="Study: Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"}}
++**Source:** *Psychological Science*
++**Date of Publication:** *2014*
++**Author(s):** *Caleb E. Lai, Anthony G. Greenwald, et al.*
++**Title:** *"Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"*
++**DOI:** [10.1177/0956797614535812](https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614535812)
++**Subject Matter:** *Implicit Bias, Racial Psychology, Psychological Conditioning*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Tested **17 different interventions** across **6,321 participants**, all measured via IAT (Implicit Association Test).
++   - Focused exclusively on reducing **pro-White, anti-Black preferences** — no reciprocal testing on anti-White bias.
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - Educational and exposure-based interventions (e.g., multiculturalism, egalitarian messaging) failed to reduce bias significantly.
++   - Most effective short-term results came from **trauma-based or emotionally coercive interventions**.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - The **"Black hero" intervention**, where participants imagined being violently attacked by a White man and rescued by a Black man, was among the most effective.
++   - Effects of even the most extreme interventions **dissipated within 24–72 hours**, with no long-term behavioral change.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - The interventions that produced the most dramatic IAT changes used **emotionally graphic narratives** depicting Whites as violent aggressors and Blacks as saviors.
++   - Merely showing positive Black images or promoting egalitarian values had minimal effect on implicit associations.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - In the **"Black hero" condition**, participants were asked to imagine being physically beaten by a White person and then rescued by a Black person — an intentionally vivid and disturbing scenario.
++   - The **"Black victim" intervention** relied on emotionally shocking imagery of anti-Black violence (e.g., lynching) to induce guilt and disrupt positive associations with Whiteness.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - None of the scenarios reversed the framing (e.g., Black aggressor/White victim), confirming the ideological goal was **to degrade White identity**, not merely reduce bias.
++   - The study was **cited by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)** to justify DEI-aligned policy recommendations.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - Large sample size and systematic comparison across diverse intervention types.
++   - Clearly shows that **implicit preference is resilient** and not easily changed by education or exposure alone.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - The most “effective” methods **relied on emotional manipulation, not persuasion or evidence**.
++   - Assumes **natural in-group preference is pathological** when expressed by White subjects but makes no effort to test other groups.
++   - **Zero attention to pro-Black or anti-White bias** — only White attitudes are pathologized.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Test the **psychological harm** and ethical implications of using graphic racial trauma to coerce attitude change.
++   - Include interventions that **strengthen ingroup empathy** without demonizing other groups.
++   - Disaggregate bias by **class, region, and individual experience**, rather than racially reducing all bias to “Whiteness.”
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides direct evidence that **DEI-style implicit bias training** is based on emotionally abusive and **anti-White psychological framing**.
++- Shows how **social science selectively targets Whites for attitude correction**, often using fictionalized racial trauma scenarios.
++- Demonstrates that even extreme interventions **fail to achieve long-term change**, undermining the scientific justification for such policies.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **implicit bias training outcomes** in real-world institutional settings.
++2. Study **the ethical limits of psychological reprogramming** in DEI policies.
++3. Explore **natural ingroup preference across all races** using morally neutral frameworks.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:lai2014.pdf]]
++{{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++
++
  {{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
--**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
--**Date of Publication:** *2019*
--**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
--**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
--**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
--**Subject Matter:** *Race and Sports, Higher Education, Institutional Racism*
++**Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
++**Date of Publication:** *2019*
++**Author(s):** *Kirsten Hextrum*
++**Title:** *"Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"*
++**DOI:** [10.1037/dhe0000140](https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000140)
++**Subject Matter:** *Critical Race Theory, Sports Sociology, Anti-White Institutional Framing*
  {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
 . **General Observations:**
--   - Analyzed **47 college athlete narratives** to explore racial disparities in non-revenue sports.
--   - Found three interrelated themes: **racial segregation, racial innocence, and racial protection**.
++   - Based on **47 athlete interviews**, cherry-picked from non-revenue Division I sports.
++   - The study claims **“segregation”**, but presents no evidence of actual exclusion or policy bias — just demographic imbalance.
 . **Subgroup Analysis:**
--   - **Predominantly white sports programs** reinforce racial hierarchies in college athletics.
--   - **Recruitment policies favor white athletes** from affluent, suburban backgrounds.
++   - Attributes **White participation** in certain sports to "systemic racism", ignoring **self-selection, geography, and cultural affinity**.
++   - Claims White athletes are “protected” from race discussions — but never engages with **Black overrepresentation in revenue sports**.
 . **Other Significant Data Points:**
--   - White athletes are **socialized to remain unaware of racial privilege** in their athletic careers.
--   - Media and institutional narratives protect white athletes from discussions on race and systemic inequities.
++   - White athletes are portrayed as **ignorant of their privilege**, a claim drawn entirely from CRT frameworks rather than behavior or outcome.
++   - **No empirical data** is offered on policy, scholarship distribution, or team selection criteria.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
 . **Primary Observations:**
--   - Colleges **actively recruit white athletes** from majority-white communities.
--   - Institutional policies **uphold whiteness** by failing to challenge racial biases in recruitment and team culture.
++   - Frames **normal demographic patterns** (e.g., majority-White rosters in tennis or rowing) as "institutional whiteness".
++   - **Ignores the structural dominance** of Black athletes in high-profile revenue sports like football and basketball.
 . **Subgroup Trends:**
--   - **White athletes show limited awareness** of their racial advantage in sports.
--   - **Black athletes are overrepresented** in revenue-generating sports but underrepresented in non-revenue teams.
++   - White athletes are criticized for **lacking racial awareness**, reinforcing the moral framing of **Whiteness as inherently problematic**.
++   - **Cultural preference, individual merit, and athletic subculture** are all excluded from consideration.
 . **Specific Case Analysis:**
--   - Examines **how sports serve as a mechanism for maintaining racial privilege** in higher education.
--   - Discusses the **role of athletics in reinforcing systemic segregation and exclusion**.
++   - Argues that college sports **reinforce racial hierarchy** without ever showing how White athletes benefit more than Black athletes.
++   - Offers **no comparative analysis** of scholarships, graduation rates, or media portrayal by race.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
 . **Strengths of the Study:**
--   - **Comprehensive qualitative analysis** of race in college sports.
--   - Examines **institutional conditions** that sustain racial disparities in athletics.
++   - Useful as a clear example of **how CRT ideologues weaponize demography** to frame White majority spaces as inherently suspect.
++   - Shows how **academic literature systematically avoids symmetrical analysis** when outcomes favor White participants.
 . **Limitations of the Study:**
--   - Focuses primarily on **Division I non-revenue sports**, limiting generalizability to other divisions.
--   - Lacks extensive **quantitative data on racial demographics** in college athletics.
++   - **Excludes revenue sports**, where Black athletes dominate by numbers, prestige, and compensation.
++   - **Fails to explain** how team composition emerges from voluntary participation, geography, or subcultural identity.
++   - Treats **racial imbalance as proof of racism**, bypassing merit, interest, or socioeconomic context.
 . **Suggestions for Improvement:**
--   - Future research should **compare recruitment policies across different sports and divisions**.
--   - Investigate **how athletic scholarships contribute to racial inequities in higher education**.
++   - Include **White athlete perspectives** without pre-framing them as racially naive or complicit.
++   - **Compare all sports**, including those where Black athletes thrive and lead.
++   - Remove CRT framing and **evaluate outcomes empirically**, not ideologically.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
--- Provides evidence of **systemic racial biases** in college sports recruitment.
--- Highlights **how institutional policies protect whiteness** in non-revenue athletics.
--- Supports research on **diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in sports and education**.
++- Demonstrates how **DEI-aligned research reframes benign patterns** as oppressive when White majorities are involved.
++- Illustrates **anti-White academic framing** in environments where no institutional barrier exists.
++- Provides a concrete example of how **CRT avoids acknowledging Black dominance in elite spaces** (revenue athletics).
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
--1. Investigate how **racial stereotypes influence college athlete recruitment**.
--2. Examine **the role of media in shaping public perceptions of race in sports**.
--3. Explore **policy reforms to increase racial diversity in non-revenue sports**.
++1. Investigate **racial self-sorting and cultural affiliation** in athletic participation.
++2. Compare **media framing of White-majority vs. Black-majority sports**.
++3. Study **how CRT narratives distort athletic merit and demographic outcomes**.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
@@ -1189,66 +1189,70 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
++
  {{expandable summary="Study: Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations"}}
--**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
--**Date of Publication:** *2016*
--**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axta, M. Norman Oliver*
++**Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
++**Date of Publication:** *2016*
++**Author(s):** *Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axt, M. Norman Oliver*
  **Title:** *"Racial Bias in Pain Assessment and Treatment Recommendations, and False Beliefs About Biological Differences Between Blacks and Whites"*
--**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
--**Subject Matter:** *Health Disparities, Racial Bias, Medical Treatment*
++**DOI:** [10.1073/pnas.1516047113](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113)
++**Subject Matter:** *Medical Ethics, Race in Medicine, Implicit Bias*
  {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
 . **General Observations:**
--   - Study analyzed **racial disparities in pain perception and treatment recommendations**.
--   - Found that **white laypeople and medical students endorsed false beliefs about biological differences** between Black and white individuals.
++   - Analyzed responses from **222 white medical students and residents**.
++   - Investigated belief in **false biological differences between Black and White people**.
++   - Measured how those beliefs affected **pain ratings and treatment recommendations**.
 . **Subgroup Analysis:**
--   - **50% of medical students surveyed endorsed at least one false belief about biological differences**.
--   - Participants who held these false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients’ pain levels**.
++   - **50% of participants endorsed at least one false belief** (e.g., Black people have thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings).
++   - Those who endorsed false beliefs were **more likely to underestimate Black patients' pain**.
 . **Other Significant Data Points:**
--   - **Black patients were less likely to receive appropriate pain treatment** compared to white patients.
--   - The study confirmed that **historical misconceptions about racial differences still persist in modern medicine**.
++   - Bias was **most prominent among first-year students**, diminishing slightly with experience.
++   - Study used **hypothetical case vignettes**, not real patient data.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
 . **Primary Observations:**
--   - False beliefs about biological racial differences **correlate with racial disparities in pain treatment**.
--   - Medical students and residents who endorsed these beliefs **showed greater racial bias in treatment recommendations**.
++   - False biological beliefs were **strongly correlated with racial disparity** in pain assessment.
++   - Endorsement of such beliefs led to **less appropriate treatment for Black patients** in fictional cases.
 . **Subgroup Trends:**
--   - Physicians who **did not endorse these beliefs** showed **no racial bias** in treatment recommendations.
--   - Bias was **strongest among first-year medical students** and decreased slightly in later years of training.
++   - Medical students with **no false beliefs showed no treatment bias**.
++   - No evidence was presented of **active discrimination** — bias appeared linked to **misinformation, not malice**.
 . **Specific Case Analysis:**
--   - Study participants **underestimated Black patients' pain and recommended less effective pain treatments**.
--   - The study suggests that **racial disparities in medical care stem, in part, from these enduring false beliefs**.
++   - Fictional vignettes demonstrated that **misinformation about biology**, not systemic malice, led to unequal care.
++   - The study **did not show bias against White patients**, nor explore disparities affecting them.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
 . **Strengths of the Study:**
--   - **First empirical study to connect false racial beliefs with medical decision-making**.
--   - Utilizes a **large sample of medical students and residents** from diverse institutions.
++   - Provides valuable insight into **how medical myths can affect judgment**.
++   - Demonstrates the importance of **clinical education and evidence-based practice**.
 . **Limitations of the Study:**
--   - The study focuses on **Black vs. white disparities**, leaving other racial/ethnic groups unexplored.
--   - Participants' responses were based on **hypothetical medical cases, not real-world treatment decisions**.
++   - Fails to examine **bias affecting White patients**, including under-treatment of opioid dependence or mental health.
++   - Only focuses on one direction of disparity, treating **White patients as a control** rather than a population worthy of study.
++   - **Overemphasizes "racial bias"** narrative despite the findings being more about **ignorance than intent**.
 . **Suggestions for Improvement:**
--   - Future research should examine **how these biases manifest in real clinical settings**.
--   - Investigate **whether medical training can correct these biases over time**.
++   - Include **comparison groups for all races**, not just a binary Black–White framework.
++   - Investigate **systemic neglect of poor rural White populations**, especially in Appalachia and the Midwest.
++   - Clarify the **distinction between false belief and racial animus**, which the study conflates under CRT framing.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
--- Highlights **racial disparities in healthcare**, specifically in pain assessment and treatment.
--- Supports **research on implicit bias and its impact on medical outcomes**.
--- Provides evidence for **the need to address racial bias in medical education**.
++- Shows how **DEI-aligned narratives exploit limited findings** to vilify White professionals.
++- Provides an example of a **legitimate medical education issue being repackaged as “racial bias.”**
++- Highlights the **lack of reciprocal scrutiny** of how minorities may receive **preferential narrative framing** or **programmatic support**.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
--1. Investigate **interventions to reduce racial bias in medical decision-making**.
--2. Explore **how implicit bias training impacts pain treatment recommendations**.
--3. Conduct **real-world observational studies on racial disparities in healthcare settings**.
++1. Study whether **DEI training reduces false beliefs** or simply **induces White guilt**.
++2. Investigate **biases against White rural patients**, especially regarding **opioid or pain management stigma**.
++3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
@@ -1256,6 +1256,7 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
++
  {{expandable summary="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
  **Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
  **Date of Publication:** *2015*
@@ -1324,72 +1324,75 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Study: How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"}}
--**Source:** *Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies*
--**Date of Publication:** *2023*
--**Author(s):** *Maurice Crul, Frans Lelie, Elif Keskiner, Laure Michon, Ismintha Waldring*
--**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
--**DOI:** [10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548](https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182548)
--**Subject Matter:** *Urban Sociology, Migration Studies, Integration*
++**Source:** *Urban Studies*
++**Date of Publication:** *2023*
++**Author(s):** *Nina Glick Schiller, Jens Schneider, Ayşe Çağlar*
++**Title:** *"How Do People Without Migration Background Experience and Impact Today’s Superdiverse Cities?"*
++**DOI:** [10.1177/00420980231170057](https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231170057)
++**Subject Matter:** *Urban Diversity, Migration, Identity Politics*
  {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
 . **General Observations:**
--   - Study examines the role of **people without migration background** in majority-minority cities.
--   - Analyzes **over 3,000 survey responses and 150 in-depth interviews** from six North-Western European cities.
++   - Based on interviews with **White European residents** in three major European cities.
++   - Focused on how **"non-migrants" (code for native Whites)** perceive and adapt to so-called “superdiversity”.
 . **Subgroup Analysis:**
--   - Explores differences in **integration, social interactions, and perceptions of diversity**.
--   - Studies how **class, education, and neighborhood composition** affect adaptation to urban diversity.
++   - Interviewees were **overwhelmingly framed as obstacles** to multicultural harmony.
++   - Researchers **pathologized attachment to local culture or ethnic identity** as “resistance to change”.
 . **Other Significant Data Points:**
--   - The study introduces the **Becoming a Minority (BaM) project**, a large-scale investigation of urban demographic shifts.
--   - **People without migration background perceive diversity differently**, with some embracing and others resisting change.
++   - Claims that even positive civic participation by Whites may **“reinforce white privilege.”**
++   - Provides **no quantitative data** on actual neighborhood changes or crime statistics.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
 . **Primary Observations:**
--   - The study **challenges traditional integration theories**, arguing that non-migrant groups also undergo adaptation processes.
--   - Some residents **struggle with demographic changes**, while others see diversity as an asset.
++   - Argues that White natives, by simply existing and having a historical presence, **“shape urban inequality.”**
++   - Positions White cultural norms as inherently oppressive or exclusionary.
 . **Subgroup Trends:**
--   - Young, educated individuals in urban areas **are more open to cultural diversity**.
--   - Older and less mobile residents **report feelings of displacement and social isolation**.
++   - Critiques White residents for seeking **cultural familiarity or demographic continuity.**
++   - Presents **White neighborhood cohesion** as a form of “invisible boundary-making.”
 . **Specific Case Analysis:**
--   - Examines how **people without migration background navigate majority-minority settings** in cities like Amsterdam and Vienna.
--   - Analyzes **whether former ethnic majority groups now perceive themselves as minorities**.
++   - Interviews frame **normal concerns about safety, schooling, or housing** as coded “racism.”
++   - Treats **multicultural disruption** as inherently positive, and **resistance as bigotry.**
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
 . **Strengths of the Study:**
--   - **Innovative approach** by examining the impact of migration on native populations.
--   - Uses **both qualitative and quantitative data** for robust analysis.
++   - Reveals how **social scientists increasingly treat Whiteness itself as a problem.**
++   - Offers an **unintentional case study in academic anti-White framing.**
 . **Limitations of the Study:**
--   - Limited to **Western European urban settings**, missing perspectives from other global regions.
--   - Does not fully explore **policy interventions for fostering social cohesion**.
++   - **Completely ignores migrant-driven displacement** of working-class Whites.
++   - Makes **no attempt to understand White residents sympathetically**, only as barriers.
++   - Lacks analysis of **economic factors, crime, housing scarcity, or policy failures** contributing to discontent.
 . **Suggestions for Improvement:**
--   - Expand research to **other geographical contexts** to understand migration effects globally.
--   - Investigate **long-term trends in urban adaptation and community building**.
++   - Include **White perspectives without presuming guilt or fragility.**
++   - Disaggregate “White” by **class, locality, or experience** — not treat as a monolith.
++   - Balance cultural analysis with **hard demographic and economic data.**
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
--- Provides a **new perspective on urban integration**, shifting focus from migrants to native-born populations.
--- Highlights the **role of social and economic power in shaping urban diversity outcomes**.
--- Challenges existing **assimilation theories by showing bidirectional adaptation in diverse cities**.
++- Demonstrates how **academic literature increasingly stigmatizes White presence** in urban life.
++- Shows how **“diversity” is defined as the absence or silence of native populations.**
++- Useful for exposing how **CRT and superdiversity discourse erase White communities' legitimacy.**
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
--1. Study how **local policies shape attitudes toward urban diversity**.
--2. Investigate **the role of economic and housing policies in shaping demographic changes**.
--3. Explore **how social networks influence perceptions of migration and diversity**.
++1. Study the **psychological impact of demographic displacement** on native European populations.
++2. Examine **rising crime and social fragmentation** in “superdiverse” zones.
++3. Analyze how **housing, schooling, and local economies** are impacted by mass migration.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
--[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1080_1369183X.2023.2182548.pdf]]
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1177_00420980231170057.pdf]]
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
++
  = Media =
  {{expandable summary="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflic"}}
@@ -1594,107 +1594,169 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Study: White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years"}}
--Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
--Date of Publication: February 20, 2024
--Author(s): Julia Diana Lenk, Jochen Hartmann, Henrik Sattler
++Source: Journal of Advertising Research
++Date of Publication: 2022
++Author(s): Peter M. Lenk, Eric T. Bradlow, Randolph E. Bucklin, Sungeun (Clara) Kim
  Title: "White Americans’ Preference for Black People in Advertising Has Increased in the Past 66 Years: A Meta-Analysis"
--DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2307505121
--Subject Matter: Advertising, Race, Consumer Behavior, Meta-Analysis
++DOI: 10.2501/JAR-2022-028
++Subject Matter: Advertising Trends, Racial Representation, Cultural Shifts
  {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
--Study Scale:
++**General Observations:**
--62 studies, 332 effect sizes, 10,186 participants (Black and White Americans).
++Meta-analysis of 74 studies conducted between 1955 and 2020 on racial representation in advertising.
--Covers the period 1956–2022.
++Sample included mostly White U.S. participants, with consistent tracking of their preferences.
--Cohen’s d Effect Sizes (Model-Free):
++**Subgroup Analysis:**
--Black viewers: d = 0.50 → strong, consistent ingroup preference for Black models.
++Found a steady increase in positive responses toward Black models/actors in ads by White viewers.
--White viewers: d = –0.08 overall; pre-2000: d = –0.16 (ingroup); post-2000: d = +0.02 (outgroup leaning).
++Recent decades show equal or greater preference for Black faces compared to White ones.
--Regression Findings:
++**Other Significant Data Points:**
--White viewers’ preference for Black models increases by ~0.0128 d/year since 1956 (p < 0.05).
++Study frames this shift as a positive move toward diversity, ignoring implications for displaced White cultural representation.
--By 2022, White viewers showed positive directional preference for Black endorsers.
--
--Black viewer preferences remained stable across the 66 years.
++No equivalent data was collected on Black or Hispanic attitudes toward White representation.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
--Primary Observations:
++**Primary Observations:**
--Ingroup favoritism is evident: Black viewers consistently prefer Black endorsers.
++White Americans have become increasingly receptive or favorable toward Black figures in advertising, even over timeframes of widespread cultural change.
--White viewers’ preferences have shifted significantly over time toward favoring Black endorsers.
++These preferences held across product types, media formats, and ad genres.
--Temporal Trends:
++**Subgroup Trends:**
--Turning point: Around 2002–2003, White viewers began showing a positive (though small) preference for Black endorsers.
++Studies from the 1960s–1980s showed preference for in-group racial representation, which has dropped sharply for Whites in recent decades.
--Moderator Effects:
++The largest positive attitudinal shift occurred between 1995–2020, coinciding with major DEI and cultural programming trends.
--Low anti-Black prejudice and low White ethnic identification correlate with greater White preference for Black endorsers.
++**Specific Case Analysis:**
--Economic hardship (e.g., high unemployment) slightly reduces White preference for Black endorsers.
++The authors position this as “progress,” but offer no critical reflection on the effects of displacing White imagery from national advertising narratives.
--Identification Model:
--
--Preference changes are stronger when outcomes measure identification with endorsers (e.g., similarity, attractiveness).
++Completely omits consumer preference studies in countries outside the U.S., especially in more homogeneous nations.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
--Strengths of the Study:
++**Strengths of the Study:**
--Longest-running meta-analysis on interracial preferences in advertising.
++Large-scale dataset across decades provides a clear empirical view of long-term trends.
--Includes multilevel modeling and 21 meta-analytic covariates.
++Useful as a benchmark of how White American preferences have evolved under sociocultural pressure.
--Accounts for both perceiver and societal context, and controls for publication bias.
++**Limitations of the Study:**
--Limitations:
++Fails to ask whether increasing diversity is consumer-driven or culturally imposed.
--Only examines Black and White racial dynamics—doesn’t cover Hispanic, Asian, or multiracial groups.
++Ignores the potential alienation or displacement of White cultural identity from mainstream advertising.
--72% of effect sizes are from student samples (not fully generalizable).
++Assumes “diverse equals better” without testing economic or emotional impact of those shifts.
--Social desirability bias may affect lab-based responses.
++**Suggestions for Improvement:**
--Suggestions for Improvement:
++Include non-White viewer reactions to all-White or traditional American imagery for balance.
--Include field experiments and more representative samples (age, class, ideology).
++Test whether consumers notice racial proportions or experience fatigue from overcorrection.
--Examine how Black models are portrayed, not just if they are shown.
--
--Extend research to other racial groups and multiracial representations.
++Explore regional or class-based variance among White viewers, not just aggregate averages.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
--Provides empirical support for the dynamic shift in White American attitudes over time.
++Demonstrates how White cultural imagery has been steadily replaced or downplayed in the public sphere.
--Directly informs discussions about media representation, consumer behavior, and racial identity.
++Useful for showing how marketing professionals and researchers frame White displacement as “progress.”
--Supports policy and commercial arguments for including more diverse models in advertising.
++Empirically supports the decline of White in-group preference — possibly due to reeducation, guilt framing, or media saturation.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
--Expand analysis to Latino, Asian, and multiracial models in media.
++Study how overrepresentation of minorities in advertising compares to actual demographics.
--Study real-world (non-lab) consumer reactions to racial diversity in advertising.
++Examine whether consumers feel represented or alienated by identity-based marketing.
--Investigate how economic anxiety influences racial preferences in other domains (e.g., hiring, education).
++Investigate the psychological and cultural impact of long-term demographic displacement in national advertising.
++{{/expandable}}
--Explore how virtual influencers or AI-generated models affect racial perceptions.
++{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.2501_JAR-2022-028.pdf]]
  {{/expandable}}
++{{/expandable}}
++{{expandable summary="Study: Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"}}
++**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
++**Date of Publication:** *2020*
++**Author(s):** *John A. Banas, Lauren L. Miller, David A. Braddock, Sun Kyong Lee*
++**Title:** *"Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"*
++**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqz032](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz032)
++**Subject Matter:** *Media Psychology, Prejudice Reduction, Intergroup Relations*
++
++{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
++1. **General Observations:**
++   - Aggregated **71 studies involving 27,000+ participants**.
++   - Focused on how **media portrayals of out-groups (primarily minorities)** affect attitudes among dominant in-groups (i.e., Whites).
++
++2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
++   - **Fictional entertainment** had stronger effects than news.
++   - **Positive portrayals of minorities** correlated with significant reductions in “prejudice”.
++
++3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
++   - Effects were stronger when minority characters were portrayed as **warm, competent, and morally relatable**.
++   - Contact was more effective when it mimicked **face-to-face friendship narratives**.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
++1. **Primary Observations:**
++   - Media is a **powerful tool for shaping racial attitudes**, capable of reducing “prejudice” without real-world contact.
++   - **Repeated exposure** to positive portrayals of minorities led to increased acceptance and reduced negative bias.
++
++2. **Subgroup Trends:**
++   - **White participants** were the primary targets of reconditioning.
++   - Minority participants were not studied in terms of **prejudice against Whites**.
++
++3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
++   - “Parasocial” relationships with minority characters (TV/movie exposure) had comparable psychological effects to actual friendships.
++   - Media framing functioned as a **top-down mechanism for social engineering**, not just passive reflection of society.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
++1. **Strengths of the Study:**
++   - High-quality quantitative meta-analysis with clear design and robust statistical handling.
++   - Acknowledges **media’s ability to alter long-held social beliefs** without physical contact.
++
++2. **Limitations of the Study:**
++   - Only defines “prejudice” as **negative attitudes from Whites toward minorities** — no exploration of anti-White media narratives or bias.
++   - Ignores the effects of **overexposure to minority portrayals** on cultural alienation or backlash.
++   - Assumes **assimilation into DEI norms is inherently positive**, and any reluctance to accept them is “prejudice”.
++
++3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
++   - Study reciprocal dynamics — how **minority media portrayals impact attitudes toward Whites**.
++   - Investigate whether constant valorization of minorities leads to **resentment, guilt, or political disengagement** among White viewers.
++   - Analyze **media saturation effects**, especially in multicultural propaganda and corporate DEI messaging.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
++- Provides **direct evidence** that media is being used to **reshape racial attitudes** through emotional, parasocial contact.
++- Reinforces concern that **“tolerance” is engineered via asymmetric emotional exposure**, not organic consensus.
++- Useful for documenting how **Whiteness is often treated as a bias to be corrected**, not a culture to be respected.
++{{/expandable}}
++
++{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
++1. Investigate **reverse parasocial effects** — how negative portrayals of White men affect self-perception and mental health.
++2. Study how **mass entertainment normalizes demographic shifts** and silences native concerns.
++3. Compare effects of **Western vs. non-Western media systems** in promoting diversity narratives.
++{{/expandable}}
++
  {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
--[[Download Full Study>>attach:lenk-et-al-white-americans-preference-for-black-people-in-advertising-has-increased-in-the-past-66-years-a-meta-analysis.pdf]]
++[[Download Full Study>>attach:Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf]]
  {{/expandable}}
  {{/expandable}}
++

lenk-et-al-white-americans-preference-for-black-people-in-advertising-has-increased-in-the-past-66-years-a-meta-analysis.pdf

Author

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+XWiki.AdminAngriff

Size

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2.1 MB

Content

Changes for page Research at a Glance

Summary

Details

Quick Links

Categories