The purpose of this study was to look at how people's cognitive resources were depleted when they were faced with cues about racial prejudice. The examiners had subjects review hiring decisions that were motivated by blatant and ambiguous prejudice and not at all motivated by racial prejudice. The subjects, who were 250 Princeton undergraduates (122 blacks, 128 whites), had to review recent hiring decisions made by a company. The subjects received a resume and job description and had to rate four candidates. They were then asked to start a second experiment during which they were administered a Stroop color-naming test, which measures cognitive impairment.
The results showed that Black subjects experienced significantly more interference effects than did whites in the ambiguous prejudice condition. Whites, on the other hand, experienced more interference than black subjects did in the blatant prejudice condition. The groups had comparable interference in the no-prejudice condition. Black subjects experienced more interference in the ambiguous prejudice condition than in the other two conditions, and white subjects experienced more interference in the blatant-prejudice condition than in the other two conditions.
The results suggested that whites are not as able to handle blatant prejudice as blacks are in the short term (though blacks can develop mental and physical issues as a result of long-term blatant prejudice). Blacks, on the other hand, are more affected by ambiguous prejudice, a level of prejudice that whites may not even register. The effects of this cognitive impairment may be widespread, as there are many ambiguously prejudicial cues in the work world.
This study, published in 2007, took 250 Princeton undergraduates, split almost equally between blacks (122) and whites (128), and studied how their cognitive functioning was impacted by cases of blatant and ambiguous hiring discrimination. In the case of blatant discrimination, a hiring manager recommended hiring an obviously less qualified candidate because he was white (the more qualified candidate was black). In the ambiguous case, the reasons for choosing the less qualified white candidate were not obviously tied to race.
Blacks were less likely to have their cognitive functioning impaired by blatant racism than whites were, probably, the study's authors concluded, because blacks were more used to blatant racism as a reality, and, thus, more psychologically prepared for it. Blacks were more likely than whites, on the other hand, to have their cognitive functioning impaired by ambiguous racism (whites sometimes didn't even register it at all.)
The study concludes that:
Future research should focus on useful interventions that minimize this disruption [caused by racism], so that individuals of all ethnicities can be better equipped to anticipate and cope with prejudice without incurring individual costs.
This research article attempts to address the effect that exposure to prejudice has on an individual’s cognitive development and performance across two races, blacks and whites. It especially looks at the depletion of cognitive resources due to exposure to various kinds of racial prejudice.
Two kinds of prejudice are looked at: blatant and ambiguous.
Blatant/overt prejudice is a hot and direct kind of prejudice. Most groups of people targeted by this kind of prejudice have developed coping strategies over the years. Unlike blatant prejudice, the ambiguous kind is indirect and difficult to put a finger on. Targets of the ambiguous kind of prejudice struggle with coping skills since it is difficult to classify the kind of prejudice being faced. For instance, when faced with blatant sexism, women act in a hostile and engaged manner, whereas ambiguous sexism brings forth anxiety and a lack of action.
The article is based on a study where participants analyze fictional hiring recommendations that either are or are not blatantly or ambiguously inspired by racial prejudices. Afterwards, participants undergo a Stroop (1935) color-naming task so that their cognitive impairment levels can be assessed. The levels of cognitive impairment were analyzed for two racial groups: blacks and whites. Participants consisted of 250 undergraduate students from Princeton University.
Findings
Study results showed the following:
Among whites, blatant prejudice depleted cognitive performance more than ambiguous prejudice, suggesting that this group could be less prepared to dealing with the latter in professional settings. Their black counterparts, on the other hand, appeared better equipped to cope with blatant prejudice.
Blacks are at a higher risk of cognitive impairment as a result of ambiguous prejudice as compared to their white counterparts.
https://equity.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Salvatore-Shelton-2007.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment