Affirming Affirmative Action: Morality, Identity and Cultural Cognition

• In Event: 3155 - Inequality, Policy and Affirmative Action

Abstract

Comparative research suggests that group-based affirmative action is more effective than a class-based approach to addressing racial inequalities. Yet Americans overwhelmingly and consistently disapprove of this form affirmative action. Three major hypotheses have emerged to explain this sentiment: economic anxiety, racial tension and principled opposition. Here, we developed scales corresponding to each of these theories, utilizing variables from the 2016 General Social Survey. Through a series of regressions, we determined the relative explanatory power of each hypothesis, as reflected in the R2 of the regressions. The findings suggest that principled opposition best explains the variance in attitudes about affirmative action: Americans seem to find policies such as these to be fundamentally unfair, even as a means of rectifying previous injustice. The next most explanatory hypothesis was racial tension. Economic anxiety seemed to explain very little of the variance. Next, we delve into the meaning and implications of these findings are contextualized, drawing on contemporary research on social psychology and cultural cognition in order to explore the rich interplay between apparently objective moral stances and discriminatory views and practices. We close with suggestions for how advocates of group-based affirmative action might be able to draw from our findings in order to more effectively promote their cause to an intensely skeptical public.

Author

• Moses Adams, Columbia University