Is Multiculturalism or Color Blindness Better for Minorities?

Abstract

A debate is raging in workplaces, schools, universities, and political and legal arenas: Is it better to ignore or acknowledge group differences? Multiculturalism, a pluralistic ideology, stresses recognizing and celebrating group differences, whereas color blindness, an assimilationist ideology, stresses ignoring or minimizing group differences. Both ideologies arguably advocate for equality, but what are their actual consequences for minorities? Previous research documents divergent patterns of relationship between these ideologies and racial bias (see Park & Judd, 2005). Among dominant-group members, multiculturalism— whether experimentally manipulated or measured as an individual difference—predicts lower bias, whereas color blindness predicts greater bias (Neville, Lilly, Duran, Lee, & Browne, 2000; Richeson & Nussbaum, 2004; Verkuyten, 2005; Wolsko, Park, & Judd, 2006). Yet no study has examined how the diversity beliefs of members of the dominant group affect the outcomes of targets. Furthermore, no study has tested this link in the ‘‘real world’’ among majority and minority individuals occupying the same setting. Therefore, in a field study, we investigated the effects of Whites’ diversity beliefs on their minority co-workers’ psychological engagement, a meaningful target outcome. Given that multiculturalism predicts decreased bias, and thus contributes to a positive diversity climate, and color blindness predicts increased bias, and thus contributes to a negative diversity climate, we hypothesized that Whites’ multiculturalism is associated with higher minority engagement and that Whites’ color blindness is associated with lower minority engagement. We tested these hypotheses in 18 work units in a large U.S. health care organization.