Consensus and consistency: Exposure to multiple discrimination claims shapes Whites' intergroup attitudes

Abstract

Research suggests that intergroup disagreement about the prevalence of subtle racial bias in America occurs because Whites are not often exposed to minorities' experiences with this type of discrimination, due to housing, school, workplace, and friendship segregation. Although the objective of social movements (e.g., “I, too, am Harvard”) is to illuminate a consistent pattern of bias and to spur social action, it is possible that these movements may exacerbate the derogatory judgments (i.e., as complainers) found in previous research when a single claimant describes experiences with bias. Five studies are the first to draw on the consensus and consistency principles of Kelley's Covariation Model (1973) to investigate how exposure to multiple experiences of subtle bias brought by Black or White claimants affects Whites' perceptions of subsequent discrimination claimants and racial bias prevalence. The results supported the consensus and consistency hypothesis for Black claimants, as increased exposure to Blacks' discrimination experiences mitigated Whites' derogation of Black discrimination claimants as complainers and increased perceptions of the prevalence of anti-Black bias. Conversely, increased exposure to Whites' discrimination experiences supported the derogation hypothesis: exposure exacerbated complainer attributions for those claimants and had no effect on the perceived prevalence of anti-White bias. These results suggest increased exposure may be an effective tool for changing Whites' perceptions of and attitudes toward minorities' subtle bias experiences. We also discuss the contribution of these studies to our understanding of differences between intergroup and intragroup perceptions of discrimination.