Romantic racism: How racial preferences (and beliefs about racial preferences) reinforce hierarchy in U.S. interracial relationships.
Cultural diversity & ethnic minority psychology
OBJECTIVES: In the United States, the two most common interracial marriages are between Asian women and White men, and between Black men and White women. Previous research proposed that the reason for these pairings stems from White Americans' racial preferences, such that White men prefer Asian women over Black women (i.e., the group stereotyped as more feminine), whereas White women prefer Black men over Asian men (i.e., the group stereotyped as more masculine). Here, we argue that focusing solely on White Americans' preferences neglects the reality that Americans of color also have preferences (and beliefs about others' preferences) that contribute to the composition of U.S. interracial relationships.METHOD: We used multiple methodologies (i.e., surveys and experimental manipulations) to examine Asian, Black, and White Americans beliefs about others' preferences.RESULTS: Across three studies (N = 3,728), we reveal that Asian, Black, and White Americans have beliefs about others' preferences (Study 1), that those beliefs mirror their own preferences (Study 2), and that those beliefs have causal implications for their own preferences (Study 3).CONCLUSION: Collectively, these findings reveal that such beliefs (and preferences) advantage White Americans, such that both Asian and Black Americans believe that they are more attractive to White Americans than to each other, which leads them to be more attracted to White Americans. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
View details for DOI 10.1037/cdp0000592
View details for PubMedID 37199957
The Effects of Editorial-Board Diversity on Race Scholars and Their Scholarship: A Field Experiment.
Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science
Psychological science is in a unique position to identify and dismantle the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that maintain and increase racial inequality, yet the extent to which psychological science can do so depends on the extent to which race scholarship is supported in psychological science. We theorized that the lack of racial diversity among editors at mainstream journals might obstruct the advancement of race scholarship by signaling to race scholars that their research is not valued by mainstream journals and that they should submit their research elsewhere for publication. Indeed, in a preregistered field experiment with 1,189 psychology Ph.D. students, we found that under all-White editorial boards, race scholars were less likely than non-race scholars (a) to believe that the journal valued racial diversity, research on race, or their own research; (b) to believe that the journal would publish their research; and (c) to be willing to submit their research to the journal for publication. Under racially diverse editorial boards, however, we find no differences between race scholars and non-race scholars. In fact, we found that under diverse editorial boards, compared with under all-White editorial boards, both race scholars and non-race scholars had more positive perceptions of the journal. We argue that racially diverse editorial boards are good for race scholars and their scholarship and for the field more broadly.
View details for DOI 10.1177/17456916211072851
View details for PubMedID 35839092