The role of explanatory context for racial disparities in predicting sociopolitical attitudes during COVID‐19

Abstract

Abstract The COVID‐19 pandemic placed preexisting racial health disparities in stark relief. Recent studies have already established that, among prejudiced Whites, exposure to such racial disparities reduced concern about the pandemic and support for mitigation policies (Harrel & Lieberman, 2021; Stephens‐Dougan, 2022). In response to such results, one cautionary line of reasoning argues that communicating the disparity figures without explanatory context can perpetuate (or at least not undermine) myths that African Americans are more likely to contract COVID‐19 due to genetic predispositions or maladaptive behavioral tendencies (Chowkwanyun & Reed, 2020). In two studies, we test the claims that (a) explanatory context mitigates the tendency to attribute racial disparities to essential racial differences and (b) that perceptions of racial disparities are attuned to specific racial inequalities in the U.S., and not merely expressions of outgroup bias. In Study 1, we found that exposure to racial disparities with explanatory context (vs. without explanatory context) did not reduce racial essentialism or stereotyping, but did promote support for healthcare equity. In Study 2, we found that black disadvantage frames (vs. white vs. Hispanic) uniquely promoted support for equitable healthcare and multicultural inclusion. Importantly, and contrary to other recent findings, exposure to black disadvantage did not preclude support for equity.