Perceptions of Confronters of Racist Remarks Towards Interracial Couples: The Effects of Confronter Race, Assertiveness, Explicit Bias, and Participant Race

Jada Copeland, Cheryl L. Dickter
{"title":"Perceptions of Confronters of Racist Remarks Towards Interracial Couples: The Effects of Confronter Race, Assertiveness, Explicit Bias, and Participant Race","authors":"Jada Copeland, Cheryl L. Dickter","doi":"10.33921/ajgh1683","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research demonstrates that confronting prejudicial comments reduces bias towards minority groups and that perceptions of those who confront prejudicial comments differ as a function of factors such as confronter race. The current study extends on previous research examining how participants’ race, confronters’ race, assertiveness, and racial bias affect the perceptions of individuals who confront prejudice towards interracial couples on Twitter. Black and White participants throughout the United States (N=154) viewed a Twitter post from a Black-White interracial couple followed by a racist comment and a confronting comment varying by confronter race and assertiveness. Results indicated that confronters were perceived more positively when using a low assertive than a high assertive approach and were rated more negatively by Black compared to White participants. Additionally, those with more explicit biases towards the outgroup perceived the confronter more negatively. This work can inform interventions focused on increased confronting and highlights the importance of allyship.","PeriodicalId":419892,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interpersonal Relations, Intergroup Relations and Identity","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interpersonal Relations, Intergroup Relations and Identity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33921/ajgh1683","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous research demonstrates that confronting prejudicial comments reduces bias towards minority groups and that perceptions of those who confront prejudicial comments differ as a function of factors such as confronter race. The current study extends on previous research examining how participants’ race, confronters’ race, assertiveness, and racial bias affect the perceptions of individuals who confront prejudice towards interracial couples on Twitter. Black and White participants throughout the United States (N=154) viewed a Twitter post from a Black-White interracial couple followed by a racist comment and a confronting comment varying by confronter race and assertiveness. Results indicated that confronters were perceived more positively when using a low assertive than a high assertive approach and were rated more negatively by Black compared to White participants. Additionally, those with more explicit biases towards the outgroup perceived the confronter more negatively. This work can inform interventions focused on increased confronting and highlights the importance of allyship.
种族主义言论对抗者对跨种族伴侣的感知:对抗者种族、自信、显性偏见和参与者种族的影响
先前的研究表明,面对带有偏见的评论会减少对少数群体的偏见,而面对带有偏见的评论的人的看法会因种族等因素而有所不同。目前的研究扩展了之前的研究,研究了参与者的种族、对抗者的种族、自信和种族偏见如何影响个人在推特上对跨种族伴侣的偏见的看法。美国各地的黑人和白人参与者(N=154)观看了一对黑白混血夫妇的推特帖子,随后是种族主义评论和对抗评论,这些评论因对抗种族和自信而有所不同。结果表明,当使用低自信的方式时,对抗者比使用高自信的方式更积极,而黑人比白人对对抗者的评价更消极。此外,那些对外群体有更明显偏见的人对对抗者的看法更消极。这项工作可以为加强对抗的干预措施提供信息,并突出盟友关系的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信