Explicit Appeals to Prejudice in the Trump Era

Session Submission Type: Roundtable

Session Description

Explicit appeals to prejudice came to the forefront of American politics in the 2016 election. Donald Trump's successful presidential campaign made several incendiary comments about immigrants and Muslims including banning all Muslims from entering the US. Yet, even before the 2016 election explicit appeals to anti-minority sentiments were on the rise. After the election of Barack Obama in 2008, explicitly racist posters began regularly appearing at Tea Party rallies. During the 2012 election, the Right made numerous explicit appeals to race, comparing Barack Obama to a chimpanzee and explicitly evoking the stereotype of African American laziness (Mcllwain and Calliendo 2014).

Recent scholarship has indicated that explicit racial appeals may not be any less effective at activating racial predispositions than implicit appeals (Huber and Lapinski 2006; Valentino, Neuner, and Vandenbroek 2017). However, several questions remain unclear. When and how are explicit appeals able to activate racial attitudes? Which ethnic groups are most likely to be targeted by explicitly prejudicial appeals? Who is most susceptible to these appeals? Participants will explore these questions and also discuss what the rise in explicitly prejudicial messages says about norms of equality in contemporary US society.

Sub Unit

• Theme Panel

Cosponsor

• DIVISION 5: Political Psychology

Chair

• Michael Tesler UC Irvine

Presenters

• Maneesh Arora University of California, Irvine

• Ashley E. Jardina Duke University

• Antoine J. Banks University of Maryland

• Lafleur Stephens

• Fabian Guy Neuner University of Michigan, Ann Arbor