0 Votes

Changes for page Research at a Glance

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

From version 116.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 05:43
Change comment: Uploaded new attachment "lai2014.pdf", version 1.1
To version 112.1
edited by Ryan C
on 2025/06/19 03:36
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -1122,76 +1122,6 @@
1122 1122  
1123 1123  = Whiteness & White Guilt =
1124 1124  
1125 -{{expandable summary="Study: Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"}}
1126 -**Source:** *Psychological Science*
1127 -**Date of Publication:** *2014*
1128 -**Author(s):** *Caleb E. Lai, Anthony G. Greenwald, et al.*
1129 -**Title:** *"Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions"*
1130 -**DOI:** [10.1177/0956797614535812](https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614535812)
1131 -**Subject Matter:** *Implicit Bias, Racial Psychology, Psychological Conditioning*
1132 -
1133 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1134 -1. **General Observations:**
1135 - - Tested **17 different interventions** across **6,321 participants**, all measured via IAT (Implicit Association Test).
1136 - - Focused exclusively on reducing **pro-White, anti-Black preferences** — no reciprocal testing on anti-White bias.
1137 -
1138 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1139 - - Educational and exposure-based interventions (e.g., multiculturalism, egalitarian messaging) failed to reduce bias significantly.
1140 - - Most effective short-term results came from **trauma-based or emotionally coercive interventions**.
1141 -
1142 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1143 - - 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.
1144 - - Effects of even the most extreme interventions **dissipated within 24–72 hours**, with no long-term behavioral change.
1145 -{{/expandable}}
1146 -
1147 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1148 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1149 - - The interventions that produced the most dramatic IAT changes used **emotionally graphic narratives** depicting Whites as violent aggressors and Blacks as saviors.
1150 - - Merely showing positive Black images or promoting egalitarian values had minimal effect on implicit associations.
1151 -
1152 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1153 - - 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.
1154 - - 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.
1155 -
1156 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1157 - - 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.
1158 - - The study was **cited by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)** to justify DEI-aligned policy recommendations.
1159 -{{/expandable}}
1160 -
1161 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1162 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1163 - - Large sample size and systematic comparison across diverse intervention types.
1164 - - Clearly shows that **implicit preference is resilient** and not easily changed by education or exposure alone.
1165 -
1166 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1167 - - The most “effective” methods **relied on emotional manipulation, not persuasion or evidence**.
1168 - - Assumes **natural in-group preference is pathological** when expressed by White subjects but makes no effort to test other groups.
1169 - - **Zero attention to pro-Black or anti-White bias** — only White attitudes are pathologized.
1170 -
1171 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1172 - - Test the **psychological harm** and ethical implications of using graphic racial trauma to coerce attitude change.
1173 - - Include interventions that **strengthen ingroup empathy** without demonizing other groups.
1174 - - Disaggregate bias by **class, region, and individual experience**, rather than racially reducing all bias to “Whiteness.”
1175 -{{/expandable}}
1176 -
1177 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1178 -- Provides direct evidence that **DEI-style implicit bias training** is based on emotionally abusive and **anti-White psychological framing**.
1179 -- Shows how **social science selectively targets Whites for attitude correction**, often using fictionalized racial trauma scenarios.
1180 -- Demonstrates that even extreme interventions **fail to achieve long-term change**, undermining the scientific justification for such policies.
1181 -{{/expandable}}
1182 -
1183 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1184 -1. Investigate **implicit bias training outcomes** in real-world institutional settings.
1185 -2. Study **the ethical limits of psychological reprogramming** in DEI policies.
1186 -3. Explore **natural ingroup preference across all races** using morally neutral frameworks.
1187 -{{/expandable}}
1188 -
1189 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1190 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:lai2014.pdf]]
1191 -{{/expandable}}
1192 -{{/expandable}}
1193 -
1194 -
1195 1195  {{expandable summary="Study: Segregation, Innocence, and Protection: The Institutional Conditions That Maintain Whiteness in College Sports"}}
1196 1196  **Source:** *Journal of Diversity in Higher Education*
1197 1197  **Date of Publication:** *2019*
... ... @@ -1324,15 +1324,9 @@
1324 1324  {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1325 1325  1. Study whether **DEI training reduces false beliefs** or simply **induces White guilt**.
1326 1326  2. Investigate **biases against White rural patients**, especially regarding **opioid or pain management stigma**.
1327 -3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**.
1328 -{{/expandable}}
1257 +3. Conduct **clinical outcome studies**, not self-reported vignettes, to test **real-world disparities**.
1329 1329  
1330 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1331 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1073_pnas.1516047113.pdf]]
1332 -{{/expandable}}
1333 -{{/expandable}}
1334 1334  
1335 -
1336 1336  {{expandable summary="Study: Rising Morbidity and Mortality in Midlife Among White Non-Hispanic Americans"}}
1337 1337  **Source:** *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)*
1338 1338  **Date of Publication:** *2015*
... ... @@ -1770,73 +1770,3 @@
1770 1770  [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.2501_JAR-2022-028.pdf]]
1771 1771  {{/expandable}}
1772 1772  {{/expandable}}
1773 -
1774 -{{expandable summary="Study: Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"}}
1775 -**Source:** *Journal of Communication*
1776 -**Date of Publication:** *2020*
1777 -**Author(s):** *John A. Banas, Lauren L. Miller, David A. Braddock, Sun Kyong Lee*
1778 -**Title:** *"Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice"*
1779 -**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqz032](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz032)
1780 -**Subject Matter:** *Media Psychology, Prejudice Reduction, Intergroup Relations*
1781 -
1782 -{{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
1783 -1. **General Observations:**
1784 - - Aggregated **71 studies involving 27,000+ participants**.
1785 - - Focused on how **media portrayals of out-groups (primarily minorities)** affect attitudes among dominant in-groups (i.e., Whites).
1786 -
1787 -2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
1788 - - **Fictional entertainment** had stronger effects than news.
1789 - - **Positive portrayals of minorities** correlated with significant reductions in “prejudice”.
1790 -
1791 -3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
1792 - - Effects were stronger when minority characters were portrayed as **warm, competent, and morally relatable**.
1793 - - Contact was more effective when it mimicked **face-to-face friendship narratives**.
1794 -{{/expandable}}
1795 -
1796 -{{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
1797 -1. **Primary Observations:**
1798 - - Media is a **powerful tool for shaping racial attitudes**, capable of reducing “prejudice” without real-world contact.
1799 - - **Repeated exposure** to positive portrayals of minorities led to increased acceptance and reduced negative bias.
1800 -
1801 -2. **Subgroup Trends:**
1802 - - **White participants** were the primary targets of reconditioning.
1803 - - Minority participants were not studied in terms of **prejudice against Whites**.
1804 -
1805 -3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
1806 - - “Parasocial” relationships with minority characters (TV/movie exposure) had comparable psychological effects to actual friendships.
1807 - - Media framing functioned as a **top-down mechanism for social engineering**, not just passive reflection of society.
1808 -{{/expandable}}
1809 -
1810 -{{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
1811 -1. **Strengths of the Study:**
1812 - - High-quality quantitative meta-analysis with clear design and robust statistical handling.
1813 - - Acknowledges **media’s ability to alter long-held social beliefs** without physical contact.
1814 -
1815 -2. **Limitations of the Study:**
1816 - - Only defines “prejudice” as **negative attitudes from Whites toward minorities** — no exploration of anti-White media narratives or bias.
1817 - - Ignores the effects of **overexposure to minority portrayals** on cultural alienation or backlash.
1818 - - Assumes **assimilation into DEI norms is inherently positive**, and any reluctance to accept them is “prejudice”.
1819 -
1820 -3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
1821 - - Study reciprocal dynamics — how **minority media portrayals impact attitudes toward Whites**.
1822 - - Investigate whether constant valorization of minorities leads to **resentment, guilt, or political disengagement** among White viewers.
1823 - - Analyze **media saturation effects**, especially in multicultural propaganda and corporate DEI messaging.
1824 -{{/expandable}}
1825 -
1826 -{{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
1827 -- Provides **direct evidence** that media is being used to **reshape racial attitudes** through emotional, parasocial contact.
1828 -- Reinforces concern that **“tolerance” is engineered via asymmetric emotional exposure**, not organic consensus.
1829 -- Useful for documenting how **Whiteness is often treated as a bias to be corrected**, not a culture to be respected.
1830 -{{/expandable}}
1831 -
1832 -{{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
1833 -1. Investigate **reverse parasocial effects** — how negative portrayals of White men affect self-perception and mental health.
1834 -2. Study how **mass entertainment normalizes demographic shifts** and silences native concerns.
1835 -3. Compare effects of **Western vs. non-Western media systems** in promoting diversity narratives.
1836 -{{/expandable}}
1837 -
1838 -{{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
1839 -[[Download Full Study>>attach:Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf]]
1840 -{{/expandable}}
1841 -{{/expandable}}
1842 -
lai2014.pdf
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -XWiki.AdminAngriff
Size
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -15.4 MB
Content