A Meta-Analysis of the "Erasing Race" Effect in the United States and Some Theoretical Considerations.

Michael A Woodley Of Menie,Michael D Heeney,Mateo Peñaherrera-Aguirre,Matthew A Sarraf,Randy Banner,Heiner Rindermann

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01635

Abstract

The “erasing race” effect is the reduction of the salience of “race” as an alliance cue when recalling coalition membership, once more accurate information about coalition structure is presented. We conducted a random-effects model meta-analysis of this effect using five United States studies (containing nine independent effect sizes). The effect was found (ρ = 0.137, K = 9, 95% CI = 0.085 to 0.188). However, no decline effect or moderation effects were found (a “decline effect” in this context would be a decrease in the effect size over time). Furthermore, we found little evidence of publication bias. Synthetically correcting the effect size for bias stemming from the use of an older method for calculating error base rates reduced the magnitude of the effect, but the it remained significant. Taken together, these findings indicate that the “erasing race” effect generalizes quite well across experimental contexts and would, therefore, appear to be quite robust. We reinterpret the theoretical basis for these effects in line with Brunswikian evolutionary-developmental theory and present a series of predictions to guide future research in this area.

Highlights

Various conceptualizations of “race”1 as corresponding to or capturing population structure or taxonomic categories among a group of individuals who share ancestry have been proposed; these are often used as synonyms for “subspecies” when applied to human taxonomy (e.g., Garn, 1961)
All effects are positive in sign, but seven of them do not reach conventional significance when this effect size is estimated using study degrees of freedom
The possible loss in significance might stem from interconversion of effects between d and r and from rounding down to two decimal places, both of which may make marginally significant d values reported in one study marginally non-significant when recomputed for meta-analysis

Summary

Introduction

Various conceptualizations of “race” as corresponding to or capturing population structure or taxonomic categories among a group of individuals who share ancestry have been proposed; these are often used as synonyms for “subspecies” when applied to human taxonomy (e.g., Garn, 1961). A body of sociological theory has challenged historical biologized conceptions of “race” and has advanced the idea that “race” is a purely socially constructed phenomenon, functioning as a source of personal identity and (in some cases) social privilege (Zack, 2018) Such arguments have tended to draw on the observation that there is more genetic variation within “races” than between them, which has been employed as evidence that “races,” as historically conceptualized in anthropology, are taxonomically meaningless and that the concept persists for social and cultural reasons [Lewontin, 1972; but see the criticisms of Lewontin’s argument from Reich (2018)].

Methods

Results

Conclusion