Support for diversity and the racial status quo in lay and legal samples.

Jordan G Starck, N Derek Brown, Kyneshawau Hurd, Victoria Plaut, Helen Tian, Drew Jacoby-Senghor
{"title":"Support for diversity and the racial status quo in lay and legal samples.","authors":"Jordan G Starck, N Derek Brown, Kyneshawau Hurd, Victoria Plaut, Helen Tian, Drew Jacoby-Senghor","doi":"10.1038/s44271-025-00242-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While attacks on diversity in higher education have clear ramifications for preserving the racial status quo in the U.S., the impact of embracing diversity is less clear. People may value diversity for some combination of the instrumental benefits diversity provides or their moral commitments to certain values. While decades of court precedent have contributed to the predominance of instrumental over moral rationales, little is known about the psychological factors underlying this differential popularity. Across two observational studies (N<sub>Total</sub> = 1101) and one experiment (N = 197) with lay samples of White Americans, attitudes that favor the racial status quo undergirded participants' inclination toward instrumental over moral rationales. Studies 4 & 5 (N<sub>Total</sub> = 285) yield a more complex picture of the potential association between an inclination towards instrumental rationales and endorsement of the status quo in judges' rulings and lawyers' defenses of universities' rights to race-conscious practices. These findings illustrate how university diversity practices-and the law governing them-can reflect dominant group preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":501698,"journal":{"name":"Communications Psychology","volume":"3 1","pages":"67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12008222/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communications Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-025-00242-5","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

While attacks on diversity in higher education have clear ramifications for preserving the racial status quo in the U.S., the impact of embracing diversity is less clear. People may value diversity for some combination of the instrumental benefits diversity provides or their moral commitments to certain values. While decades of court precedent have contributed to the predominance of instrumental over moral rationales, little is known about the psychological factors underlying this differential popularity. Across two observational studies (NTotal = 1101) and one experiment (N = 197) with lay samples of White Americans, attitudes that favor the racial status quo undergirded participants' inclination toward instrumental over moral rationales. Studies 4 & 5 (NTotal = 285) yield a more complex picture of the potential association between an inclination towards instrumental rationales and endorsement of the status quo in judges' rulings and lawyers' defenses of universities' rights to race-conscious practices. These findings illustrate how university diversity practices-and the law governing them-can reflect dominant group preferences.

支持非专业和法律样本的多样性和种族现状。
虽然攻击高等教育的多样性对维持美国的种族现状有明显的影响,但拥抱多样性的影响就不那么明显了。人们重视多样性可能是由于多样性所提供的工具性利益或他们对某些价值观的道德承诺的某种组合。虽然几十年的法庭先例促成了工具理性凌驾于道德理性之上的优势,但人们对这种受欢迎程度差异背后的心理因素知之甚少。在两项观察性研究(NTotal = 1101)和一项针对非专业美国白人样本的实验(N = 197)中,支持种族现状的态度强化了参与者对工具而非道德理由的倾向。研究4和研究5 (NTotal = 285)给出了一幅更复杂的图景,即倾向于工具理性与支持法官裁决和律师为大学的种族意识实践权利辩护的现状之间的潜在联系。这些发现说明了大学的多样性实践——以及管理它们的法律——是如何反映主导群体的偏好的。
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