Negative Racial Affect Predicts Intergroup Contact Attitudes Among White Youth: Variation by Ethnic-Racial Identity Centrality

• In Event: Poster Session 09
  In Poster Session: PS 09 Topic - Race, Ethnicity, Culture, Context

Abstract

As the U.S. becomes more ethno-racially diverse, it is imperative to understand how White youths’ ethnic-racial identity (ERI) informs their ethnic-racial outgroup attitudes. According to social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), White youths’ racial affect (i.e., positive/negative feelings about one’s ERI) and centrality (i.e., importance of ERI for one’s self-concept) may help to explain variation in intergroup contact attitudes. Empirical (e.g., Estrada & Matthews, 2016) and theoretical (i.e., Helms, 1990) work suggests that White individuals’ endorsement of more negative racial affect may relate to more positive out-group contact attitudes. The current longitudinal study examined White adolescents’ negative racial affect and their intergroup contact attitudes across one school year. Following theory suggesting that affective ERI components relate to behaviors and outcomes when ERI is more important to one’s self concept (Rowley et. al, 1998), we also tested ERI centrality as a moderator of these associations.

Participants comprised students who identified as White (N=1,243; Mage=16.09, SD=1.20; 47% female) from two ethno-racially diverse public high schools in the U.S. Southwest and Midwest. Participants completed surveys during class time (T1=October 2017; T2=March/April 2018). Measures included: ERI negative racial affect (Affirmation subscale, Ethnic Identity Scale – Brief; Douglass & Umaña-Taylor, 2015; e.g., “I don’t like my ethnicity”; α=.84); ERI centrality (modified MIBI-t; Scottham et. al, 2008; e.g., “I have a strong sense of belonging to people from my ethnic group”; α=.66) at T1; and intergroup contact attitudes at T1 and T2 (Other-Group Orientation Scale, MEIM; Phinney, 1992; OGO approach, e.g., “I enjoy being around people from ethnic groups other than my own”; T1 α=.81, T2 α=.83; and OGO avoidance, e.g., “I don’t try to become friends with people from other ethnic groups”; T1 r=.48, T2 r=.59). Covariates included gender, parents’ education level, and age.

Path analyses (Figure 1) indicated that T1 ERI negative racial affect did not significantly predict residual change in T2 OGO approach or avoidance. Higher T1 ERI centrality significantly predicted increases in T2 OGO avoidance. Probing the marginally significant interaction revealed that, among youth with the lowest T1 racial centrality, T1 ERI negative racial affect was significantly positively associated with T2 OGO approach (B=.07, p<.05); in contrast, this association was not significant for youth with average (B=.02, p=.42) or higher (B=-.02, p=.62) centrality (Figure 2). Regarding the marginally significant interaction for T2 OGO avoidance, T1 ERI negative racial affect was not significantly associated with this outcome for youth with lower (B=-.01, p=.72), average (B=.03, p=.32) or higher (B=.08, p=.10) centrality.

In sum, ERI negative racial affect and centrality were associated with changes in intergroup contact attitudes over time for White youth. Higher ERI centrality at the beginning of the school year predicted increases in endorsement of avoidance attitudes toward outgroup members over time. Furthermore, among White youth with the lowest ERI centrality, negative racial affect was positively related to increased interest in approaching outgroup members over time. Findings identify directions for future research and may inform efforts to support ERI development and positive intergroup attitudes among White youth.

Authors

• Megan Satterthwaite-Freiman, Harvard University
  Presenting Author

• Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor, Harvard University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Michael R Sladek, University of Oklahoma
  Non-Presenting Author

• Deborah Rivas-Drake, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
  Non-Presenting Author