A colorblind ideal and the motivation to improve intergroup relations: The role of an (in)congruent status quo

Abstract

Social psychologists have long debated the meaning of treating people as unique individuals for intergroup relations, as empirical evidence on the topic has been rather mixed. In the present research, we examine a normative explanation for this mixed evidence by focusing on colorblindness as an ideal for managing diversity that suggests people should be treated as individuals independently of their group membership. To do so, we contrast colorblindness as a utopian, future-oriented ideal based on individual justice principles from a descriptive observation of society's current functioning (the status quo; i.e., one's point of reference reflecting whether people are currently treated by virtue of their individual characteristics versus group membership). We argue that endorsing a colorblind ideal should be associated with a motivation to improve intergroup relations specifically when people are currently perceived to be treated according to their group membership (incongruent status quo) instead of as individuals (congruent status quo). Four studies and a preliminary study (3 pre-registered; N = 2049) support this hypothesis, using a measure, experimental manipulations, and a quasi-experimental manipulation of an individual- vs. group-focused status quo, three indexes for the motivation to improve intergroup relations, as well as an internal meta-analysis. Results suggest that, despite widespread claims that colorblindness is at the root of group-based tensions and disparities, endorsing such an ideal can be understood as either perpetuating or working to improve such issues, depending on its (in)congruity with the (perceived) status quo. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.