Changes for page Research at a Glance
Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/06/26 03:09
From 112.1 to 111.1
Show context
Hide context
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 -
-
Banas et al. - 2020 - Meta-Analysis on Mediated Contact and Prejudice.pdf
-
- Author
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -XWiki.AdminAngriff - Size
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -472.9 KB -
Content
-
lai2014.pdf
-
- Author
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -XWiki.AdminAngriff - Size
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -15.4 MB -
Content