Search

Among the many tensions that the year 2020 laid bare, the divisions in beliefs about the continued role of racism in the United States were central. While some of these divisions were drawn along political lines, with liberals far more likely than conservatives to see systemic racism as an ongoing problem, many were also drawn along racial lines. Although Black Lives Matter protests in the wake of George Floyd's and Breonna Taylor's deaths brought together one of the largest multiracial coalitions in recent protest history, the nation remains divided in beliefs about the root causes of racial injustice, what we should do about it, and who is willing to do the work. Recognizing systemic racism is only a first step; dismantling racism will require collective action with support from robust anti-discrimination laws and anti-racist policies. But, recognition is a crucial step, nonetheless. In this article, the author describes research and teaching experiences that have strengthened her belief that teachers can have a positive impact on students' and society's responses to systemic racism. The classroom is a great place to start deepening society's understanding of racism past and present, and a willingness to do something about it.

Environmental assessment of residence halls and the impact of their associated educational and developmental spaces has concerned housing and residential life professionals for a considerable time. Given this understanding, a number of approaches to conduct environmental assessment have emerged. This case study utilized and expanded upon an environmental assessment framework to conduct a sociocultural analysis of four residential academic support spaces. We evaluated these spaces on the dimensions of inclusion and accessibility, scholarship, practicality, community, propriety, and awareness. Recommendations for future research are posited, along with short-, mid-, and long-term changes to apply and practice.

Since the murder of George Floyd in 2020, a renewed and more mainstream attention to systemic racism emerged. Critical Race Theory (CRT) has permeated the larger public discourse around race more than ever before. Yet, social, scientific, and political backlash intended to silence conversations about the systemic and power‐driven nature of racism have also characterized these years. 30+ years have passed since CRT's introduction as a critical analysis of how the legal system fails minoritized groups; 20+ years have passed since CRT's introduction into the social psychological field. Although psychology provides a strong foundation for the CRT tenets, incorporating CRT into the field of psychology has lagged behind many other fields (e.g., sociology, education). In two installments, this special issue (re)introduces psychological researchers to CRT and Psychological Critical Race Theory (PCRT), underscores CRT's importance and limitations in the context of psychological research, features novel applications and directions in CRT, and addresses the current political climate of opposition to discussions of CRT. This second installment looks outward highlighting psychological research applying (P)CRT frameworks to advance racial justice. We conclude with reflections on the history of CRT and PCRT and the shifts necessary in our scholarship‐activism to dismantle systems of racial oppression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, there have been several calls for psychologists to dismantle systemic racism within the field (e.g., Buchanan et al., 2021; Dupree & Boykin, 2021; Wilcox et al., 2022). In this article, we discuss why incorporating critical histories into psychology curricula can be beneficial to this effort. We focus on three potential pathways: critical histories provide counterstories that challenge racist narratives, critical histories promote contexts that encourage antiracism practices (antiracist affordances), and critical histories can signal identity safety and belonging. To adequately integrate critical histories into psychology curricula, we make three recommendations. First, create and support a departmental curriculum that engages critical histories in the field of psychology at the undergraduate and graduate level (we offer some example topics and readings). Second, based on our own training experiences, we recommend that psychology graduate programs facilitate opportunities to take interdisciplinary courses that cover the history of race and racism in domestic and/or global contexts. Finally, we recommend funding research and supporting student projects that produce critical histories in psychology to expand the knowledge base of our field. Public Significance Statement: In this article, we discuss why incorporating critical histories into psychology curricula can be beneficial to dismantling racism in the field. We describe three key ideas: critical histories provide counterstories that challenge racist narratives, critical histories promote contexts that encourage antiracism practices (antiracist affordances), and critical histories can signal identity safety and belonging. This article provides a psychologically informed basis for why scholar–teachers should adapt critical histories into the curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID‐19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that Black and Latinx communities experienced a disproportionate burden of illness. The goal of this study is to investigate laypeople's attribution of these disparities. We hypothesized the following four potential attributions: external causes (e.g. systemic racism), internal causes (e.g. personal choices), cultural causes (e.g., being close knit), or genetic causes (e.g., being more vulnerable for genetic reasons). Data from 447 participants revealed that lay theories involving external factors were the most endorsed, whereas theories relating to genetic causes were the least endorsed. Our analyses further revealed that external attributions predicted broader COVID‐19 relevant outcomes (i.e., perceived threat of COVID‐19, adherence to CDC guidelines, and support for government policies in response to COVID‐19), even after controlling for political orientation, participant race, and other attributions. This research provides insight into how lay people's explanations for disparities can predict their reactions to the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In honor cultures, maintaining a positive moral reputation (e.g., being known as an honest person) is highly important, whereas in dignity cultures, self-respect (e.g., competence and success) is strongly emphasized. Depending on their cultural background, people respond differently to threats to these two dimensions of honor. In two studies, we examined the effects of morality-focused and competence-focused threats on people's goal pursuit in two honor cultures (Turkey, Southern United States, and Latinx) and in a dignity culture (Northern United States). In Study 1, Turkish participants were more likely to reject a highly qualified person as a partner in a future task if that person threatened their morality (vs. no-threat), even though this meant letting go of the goal of winning an award. Participants from the U.S. honor and dignity groups, however, were equally likely to choose the people who gave them threatening and neutral feedback. In Study 2, Turkish and U.S. honor participants were more likely to persist in a subsequent goal after receiving a morality threat (vs. no-threat), whereas U.S. dignity participants were more likely to persist in a subsequent goal after receiving a competence threat (vs. no-threat). These results show that people's responses to honor threats are influenced by the dominant values of their culture and by the tools that are available to them to potentially restore their reputation (e.g., punishing the offender vs. working hard on a different task). This research can have implications for multicultural contexts in which people can have conflicting goals such as diverse work environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Meritocracy is a prominent narrative embedded in America's educational system: work hard and anyone can achieve success. Yet, racial disparities in education suggest this narrative does not tell the full story. Four studies (N = 1,439) examined how applicants for a teaching position are evaluated when they invoke different narratives regarding who or what is to blame for racial disparities (i.e., individuals vs. systems). We hypothesized these evaluations would differ depending on teacher race (Black/White) and evaluator political orientation. Results revealed conservatives evaluated Black and White applicants advocating for personal responsibility more favorably than applicants advocating for social responsibility. Liberals preferred social responsibility applicants, but only when they were White. They were more ambivalent in their evaluations and hiring decisions if the applicants were Black. Our findings suggest that Black applicants advocating for social change are penalized by both liberal and conservative evaluators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Theory and research in cultural psychology highlight the need to examine racism not only “in the head” but also “in the world.” Racism is often defined as individual prejudice, but racism is also systemic, existing in the advantages and disadvantages imprinted in cultural artifacts, ideological discourse, and institutional realities that work together with individual biases. In this review, we highlight examples of historically derived ideas and cultural patterns that maintain present-day racial inequalities. We discuss three key insights on the psychology of racism derived from utilizing a cultural-psychology framework. First, one can find racism embedded in our everyday worlds. Second, through our preferences and selections, we maintain racialized contexts in everyday action. Third, we inhabit cultural worlds that, in turn, promote racialized ways of seeing, being in, and acting in the world. This perspective directs attempts at intervention away from individual tendencies and instead focuses on changing the structures of mind in context that reflect and reproduce racial domination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical Race Theory (CRT) challenges scholars to reveal and dismantle disciplinary conventions that constitute racial power. In this Article, we take up this challenge and consider the potential for a Critical Race Psychology. Although CRT-compatible work has drawn upon psychological scientific research to challenge disciplinary conventions in law, there has been little consideration of disciplinary conventions—including (1) a colorblind epistemology that denies the racially positioned character of scientific knowledge, and (2) an atomistic conception of racism that promotes colorblind ignorance about the ongoing significance of racism—that constitute racial power in psychological science. As steps in this direction, we outline conceptual elements of a Critical Race Psychology, including a critical approach to methodology, identity consciousness in research, and an understanding of race as an epistemological position. We then describe empirical examples of research within psychological science that attempts to identify and counteract colorblind ignorance of racism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on three distinct models used in undergraduate-faculty research which include the traditional model, the consultant model and the joint-section model. It provides the benefits and the drawbacks on each model that are not necessarily identical from the student and the faculty perspectives. It cites that conceptualizing undergraduate-faculty research in terms of the three models is one tool that professors can use in setting clear expectations for students.