Content uploaded by Sarah E. Gaither
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sarah E. Gaither on Mar 21, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 00, No. 0, 2013, pp. 1--15
This paper is part of an ASAP special collection on the Social Psychology of the 2012 US
Presidential Election
Perceiving a Presidency in Black (and White): Four
Years Later
Sarah E. Gaither*
Tufts University
Leigh S. Wilton and Danielle M. Young
Rutgers University
When Barack Obama became the “first Black President” of the United States in
2008, researchers examined how his election impacted Americans’ views of racial
progress. When he was reelected in 2012, the minority status of the president
had become less novel. In the present study, we investigated whether perceptions
concerning racial progress varied: (1) before and after President Obama’s reelec-
tion; (2) by whether President Obama was labeled as biracial or Black; and (3)
among White and Black individuals. We replicated past findings to demonstrate
that after Obama’s reelection, White participants reported that our country had
made racial progress and decreased their support for equality programs (e.g.,
affirmative action). Our results also revealed that labeling President Obama as
either biracial or Black did not affect views of racial progress. Additionally, Black
participants categorized President Obama as Black more than White participants,
while White participants categorized President Obama as White more than Black
participants. We discuss these results in terms of the impacts of racial beliefs that
stem from exposure to a minority leader.
∗Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Sarah E. Gaither, De-
partment of Psychology, Tufts University, 490 Boston Avenue, Medford, MA 02155 [e-mail:
sarah.gaither@tufts.edu].
This work was supported by an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship and a Grant in Aid Award
from SPSSI awarded to Sarah Gaither.
We would like to thank Sam Sommers and Negin Toosi for feedback on previous drafts of this
manuscript.
1
DOI: 10.1111/asap.12018 C2013 The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues
2 Gaither, Wilton, and Young
“Tonight is a particular honor for me because, let’s face it, my presence on this stage is
pretty unlikely. . . . My parents shared not only an improbable love. . . . They would give
me an African name, Barack, or ‘blessed,’ believing that in a tolerant America your name
is no barrier to success. . . . I stand here today, grateful for the diversity of my heritage . . . ”
—Barack Obama at the 2004 Democratic National Convention
“I recognize that times have changed since I first spoke to this convention. The times have
changed—and so have I. I’m no longer just a candidate. I’m the President.”
—President Barack Obama at the 2012 Democratic National Convention
The 2008 and 2012 Presidential elections were landmark election years; they
marked the first time that voters voted for and then reelected a president with
Black ancestry. Although Barack Obama has biracial ancestry, he was primarily
described and thought of as Black by both White and Black individuals throughout
the Democratic primaries and the 2008 election. Discussion of Obama’s levels of
“Blackness,” or lack thereof, was part of a larger conversation during the 2008 race
regarding how his election might signify the beginning of a postracial (i.e., without
racial discrimination) society. The 2012 Presidential election again invoked a
number of questions regarding Obama’s race and its impact on society. The present
research revisits findings surrounding the 2008 election to explore whether, four
years after Obama’s first successful presidential election, attitudes associated with
racial progress have remained the same, whether calling attention to Obama’s
biracial ancestry impacts those perceptions, and whether these perceptions vary
between White and Black individuals.
Racial Progress in 2012?
Due to Obama’s racial background, his 2008 election ignited a conversation
about the beginning of a “post-racial America” (e.g., Gallup/USA Today, 2008;
Gomstyn, 2008; Miller, 2008; Peery & Bodenhausen, 2009; Pitts, 2008; Smith,
2009). More specifically, Americans felt having a Black leader was a sign that poli-
cies addressing racial inequalities (i.e., affirmative action) were no longer needed
(Kaiser, Drury, Spalding, Cheryan, & O’Brien, 2009; Valentino & Brader, 2011;
Williams & Negrin, 2008). This nationwide conversation about racial progress was
supported by studies demonstrating that the implicit bias of Whites toward Blacks
decreased following Obama’s first election (e.g., Plant et al., 2009). Furthermore,
opinion polls showed that twice as many Blacks said they felt optimistic about
race relations after, in comparison to before, Obama’s 2008 election (Stolberg &
Connelly, 2009).
Contradictory to these findings, after Obama’s first election, CBS News (2009)
reported that racially motivated incidents, including cross burnings and occur-
rences of children chanting “assassinate Obama,” actually increased across the
nation. Other research also presented evidence that racial prejudice still persisted
and continued to negatively influence perceptions of both Obama and Blacks more
Obama Perceptions Four Years Later 3
generally (Dovidio, Gaertner, Saguy, & Heman, 2011; Kaiser et al., 2009; Schmidt
& Nosek, 2010). Therefore, the views of sweeping racial progress and reduced
racial bias heralded by Obama’s election as the nation’s first Black president were
not entirely accurate.
But four years later, after Obama’s reelection, what is the status of America’s
perceptions of racial progress? Given the mixed reports concerning interracial
relations following Obama’s 2008 election, as well as his prominence in the
American political and cultural scene for the past four years, it is not yet known
whether beliefs about racial progress have continued to change, and in which
direction. For example, continued exposure to the positive exemplar of a Black
president may have directly improved opinions about racial progress, or even
perceptions regarding the strict racial boundaries we utilize within our racially
dichotomized society such as Whites always being leaders. In support of these
possibilities, past instances involving the election of Black mayors have shown that
experiences with a Black leader reduces racial tensions, increases racial sympathy,
and increases support for Black leaders (Hajnal, 2001). Alternatively, although
some of the population still associates the dismal economic situation in the United
States with former President George Bush, the majority of the country largely
blamed this fiscal crisis on Obama during his first term (Killough, 2011), which
could have negatively colored perceptions of both racial progress and voters’
willingness to identify with Obama. Therefore, it is unclear how perceptions
regarding racial progress and Obama may have changed.
Does It Matter if Obama Is Biracial or Black?
Although some attention was drawn to Obama’s biracial ancestry during his
first election (e.g., Arana, 2008; Kristoff, 2008; Malahy, Sedlins, Plaks, & Shoda,
2010), Obama was primarily described and thought of as America’s first Black
President (e.g., Block Jr., 2011; Halberstadt, Sherman, & Sherman, 2011; Squires
& Jackson, 2010). This cultural trend to classify Obama as our nation’s first Black
president is consistent with the prominence of hypodescent in racial categorization
of biracial minorities (i.e., categorizing an individual with any minority ancestry
as such; e.g., Banks & Eberhardt, 1998; Ho, Sidanius, Levin, & Banaji, 2011;
Peery & Bodenhausen, 2008). Nevertheless, racial labels can significantly alter
people’s judgments of others (e.g., Darley & Gross, 1983; Eberhardt, Dasgupta, &
Banaszynski, 2003), change the characteristics that a person thinks apply to a given
target (Hilliar & Kemp, 2008; Levin & Banaji, 2006; Macrae & Bodenhausen,
2000), and shift views about race, racial categories, and racial attitudes (Gaither,
Babbitt, & Sommers, under review; Pauker, Weisbuch, & Ambady, in preparation;
Young, Sanchez & Wilton, in press). For example, previous work has found
that individuals who labeled Obama as Black implicitly perceived race as more
categorical than those who labeled Obama as multiracial (Malahy et al., 2010).
4 Gaither, Wilton, and Young
However, the consequences of labeling Obama as multiracial, such as how his
racial label may impact perceptions of racial progress and racial attitudes more
generally, have not been explored. We argue that since mere exposure to biracial
or minority stimuli of individuals who are complete strangers has caused racial
attitudes and perceptions to change, exposure to a prominent and well-known
political biracial or minority figure such as Obama should lead toward similar
changes regarding race-related political perceptions.
In general, few studies have explicitly measured if and when people willingly
apply biracial or multiracial labels. Perceivers are also less likely to use multiracial
labels (see Chen & Hamilton, 2012), which further limits our ability to predict
how biracial (vs. Black) labels may or may not impact perceptions of Obama.
Moreover, previous work exploring the effects of racial labeling has involved only
biracial individuals who were unknown to participants or computer-generated
(i.e., not even real people; for an exception see Malahy et al., 2010), so we do
not know whether these same effects will apply for biracial individuals who are
readily recognized such as Obama. Thus, it is unclear whether changing the racial
label would affect how either Whites or Blacks perceive Obama’s racial identity,
or issues pertaining to racial progress.
How do Whites and Blacks Perceive Obama?
Beyond the influence of racial labels, person perception is a complex process,
so even if an explicit biracial label does not alter Whites’ and Blacks’ perceptions of
racial progress, there still may be perceiver differences by race regarding opinions
of Obama. Research has shown that Whites are more likely to associate positive
traits with White candidates over Black candidates (Terkildsen, 1993; Williams,
1990), and are often more wary or have more fear of Black than White candi-
dates (Fiske, Bergsieker, Russell, & Williams, 2009; Ford, Johnson, & Maxwell,
2010). Additionally, although Whites with strong egalitarian norms generally will
not make racist or racially charged comments about Blacks (Devos & Banaji,
2005; Dovidio & Gaertner, 2004), around the 2008 election non-Black individ-
uals were more likely to attribute incorrect information to, or associate negative
attitudes with, Obama. For example, McCain (but not Obama) supporters who
were predominately White showed faster reaction times when judging Muslim-
related items if they were primed with Obama’s name but not with McCain’s
name (Kosloff, Greenberg, Schmader, Dechesne, & Weise, 2010), and Whites
with higher levels of implicit prejudice evaluated healthcare plans more nega-
tively when it was associated with Obama versus Bill Clinton (Knowles, Lowery,
& Schaumber, 2010).
While Whites were expressing concern over Obama’s minority status, Blacks
were also debating Obama’s “Blackness” (e.g., McIlwain, 2007; Walters, 2007).
For example, Stanley Crouch, a Black columnist for the New York Daily News,
Obama Perceptions Four Years Later 5
wrote, “Other than color, Obama did not—does not—share a heritage with the
majority of Black Americans, who are descendants of plantation slaves” (Crouch,
2006). Moreover, a CNN poll in April 2007 showed that Hillary Clinton was
favored by Black voters over Obama with 88% of Blacks believing that Clinton
“understands the problems of people like me” while only 77% of Blacks expressed
similar views about Obama (Poll: Presidential Races, 2007). This finding suggests
that Clinton was viewed by Black voters as more attuned to the needs of Black
Americans than Obama, emphasizing the question in some Black voters’ minds
concerning whether Obama was “Black enough” to represent their demographic.
So what do White and Black voters think of Obama’s racial background now?
In comparison to Obama’s first election four years ago, would Blacks be more
inclined to include Obama in their ingroup? Moreover, would Whites be less likely
to perceive Obama strictly as an outgroup member, or would they be more likely
to embrace a shared (i.e., White) ingroup identity? Social identity theory (Hogg,
2005; Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986) contends that social group identification is
an important component of the self from which the individual derives value and
an important sense of belonging (Brewer, 1991; Correll & Park, 2005). It further
explains how self-identification with a particular ingroup (i.e., Obama supporter)
significantly affects one’s thoughts and behaviors such as how much we stereotype
and categorize others (Hogg, 2005; Tajfel & Turner, 1979). However, individuals
face a constant tension between a need for social connection and a need for group
distinctiveness in any social group (Brewer, 1991), and an ideal social group is
one that provides social belonging and connection with others but also maintains
clear and distinct boundaries between ingroup and outgroup members (Brewer,
2007). For example, including biracial individuals may meet the need for social
inclusivity and belonging, but excluding biracial individuals highlights that one’s
ingroup is truly distinct. This contention may be heightened for perceivers in the
case of Obama (or any biracial individual), as he straddles racial boundaries.
Interestingly, levels of social identification with an ingroup can also be radi-
cally altered if that particular social identity is seen either as successful or unsuc-
cessful. This tendency, known as BIRGing (Basking in Reflected Glory; Cialdini
et al., 1976), outlines that when a group is successful, people tend to more strongly
identify and claim that social ingroup. For example, recent work showed that after
Obama’s first election, people who supported Obama left their campaign signs up
longer in their yards than those supporting his opponent (Miller, 2009; see also
Boen & Vanbeselaere, 2002). Similarly, past work using the American National
Election Studies data demonstrated that in general, voters of winning candidates
positively increased their ratings of those candidates (Miller, 2006). Furthermore,
immediately following the 2012 election, Obama’s approval and favorability rat-
ings were the highest they had been since 2009 (Holyk, 2013; Reilly, 2013),
suggesting that overall the nation viewed Obama more positively after his suc-
cessful reelection than immediately before when his victory was still in question.
6 Gaither, Wilton, and Young
Therefore, after a successful reelection in 2012, perhaps both White and Black
individuals may want to claim Obama as part of their racial ingroup, showing a
clear shift in the racial boundaries seen within Obama’s presidency.
Overview of Research
The present research examines how perceptions of Obama’s racial back-
ground (i.e., biracial or Black) may affect views of racial progress, how these
views may compare to those from 2008, and whether these outlooks differed both
before and after the 2012 Presidential election. Additionally, since Obama’s racial
background proved to be an influential factor both among White and Black voters
during the 2008 election, we recruited White and Black participants to compare
possible differences in views of Obama based on the racial background of voters.
More specifically, this study investigated the following: (1) Would Obama’s re-
election produce changes in views of racial progress and need for programs such as
affirmative action (e.g., Kaiser et al., 2009)?; (2) Would labeling Obama as either
biracial or Black impact these perceptions?; and (3) After the second successful
election, would participants shift racial categorizations to claim Obama for their
racial ingroup?
Method
Participants
A total of 324 participants were recruited via Mechanical Turk in exchange
for a small payment. Participants who failed either the instructional manipulation
check (4%; see Oppenheimer, Meyvis, & Davidenko, 2009) or who failed to
accurately recall information from the article (6%) were removed from analysis.
This left 169 White (91 female) and 121 Black (71 female) participants for analysis.
Of those individuals, 89 White (48 female) and 63 Black (44 female) individuals
completed the survey 1–2 weeks before the election (age range: 18–75, M=34.47,
SD =12.35) and reported the following political affiliations: 90 Democrat, 26
Republican, 22 unaffiliated, 13 other, and 1 not sure. Approximately 1–2 weeks
after the election, 80 White (43 female) and 58 Black (27 female) individuals
completed the survey (age range: 18–71, M=33.42, SD =12.34) and reported
the following political affiliations: 76 Democrat, 22 Republican, 25 unaffiliated,
14 other, and 1 not sure preelection.
Procedure
Participants thought the study was examining the role of online media com-
munication in the presidential election and were told they would read an excerpt
Obama Perceptions Four Years Later 7
of a recent article from an online source and then answer questions about the
presidential election and their personal beliefs. In order to assess whether la-
beling Obama as either Black or biracial affected racial perceptions, upon pro-
viding informed consent, participants were randomly assigned to one of three
conditions. Participants either read an article that described President Obama
as African American, an article that described President Obama as Biracial
Black/White, or they read a control article about global warming that did not
include any mention of Obama. Each of the two articles that manipulated Presi-
dent Obama’s racial identity mentioned his racial identity twice (e.g., “he is the
first African American [Biracial Black/White] president to hold office”), as well
as described his personal background (e.g., that he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii,
and graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School) and outcomes
of his prior political elections (e.g., that he served three terms representing the
13th District in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2004). Politically polarizing or
controversial aspects of his presidency (e.g., recent support for marriage equality)
were not mentioned. All articles were matched on word length and tone. Partici-
pants were asked to recall the racial background that the article described Obama
as, and participants failing this manipulation check were excluded from analyses.
After reading the online article, participants completed all of the measures
described below at either 10 or fewer days prior to the 2012 presidential election or
10 or more days following this election to examine whether after Obama’s second
victory caused voters to shift their focus on how far we have come in relation to
racial progress (Eibach & Ehrlinger, 2006). Lastly, participants were also asked
to racially categorize Obama as both White and Black so that we could measure
whether White or Black participants claimed Obama as more of a member of their
racial ingroup (vs. outgroup) both before and after his second election. Thus, the
study employed a 3 (condition: Black, Biracial, Control) ×2(time: preelection,
postelection) between subjects design. Finally, participants were fully debriefed
and thanked for participating.
Measures
Unless otherwise noted, all measures were completed on a scale of 1 (strongly
disagree)to7(strongly disagree).
U.S. racial progress (α=.68). To determine if participants felt both during
and after Obama’s second election that the United States had made more racial
progress, we measured participants’ views on the current levels of racial progress
and their perceived need for further racial progress in the United States using six-
items from Kaiser et al. (2009). Example items included, “Since the Civil Rights
Movement of the 1960s, great progress has been made toward racial equality in
the United States.”
8 Gaither, Wilton, and Young
Tab le 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
All participants M(SD) 1 234
1. U.S. racial progress 4.19 (.98) – – – –
3. ATAA 4.81 (1.58) –0.47** 0.77** – –
4. Black categorization 5.37 (1.52) –0.09 0.21** 0.16** –
5. White categorization 2.28 (1.40) 0.03 0.07 0.10 –0.13*
Note.*p≤.05, **p<.01.
Racial equality policy support (α=.89). Relatedly, to measure racial policy
support and whether these varied based on condition or pre-/postelection times,
participants completed Kaiser et al.’s (2009) four-item measure of support for
policies to increase racial equality, with items such as, “Businesses should increase
their efforts to promote diversity in the workplace” and “Efforts should be made
to promote equal access to healthcare for minorities.”
Attitudes toward affirmative action (ATAA; α=.85). To measure attitudes
and endorsement of affirmative action policies since the 2012 election was again
involving a racial minority candidate, we administered four items from Kravitz
and Platania’s (1993) ATAA scales including statements to measure affirmative
action beliefs such as “The goals of affirmative action are good.”
Racial categorization. Lastly, to measure how both White and Black partic-
ipants racially viewed or categorized Obama to see if participants’ inclusion of
Obama as a member of their racial ingroup varied based on pre- and postelec-
tion times, we used a scale adapted from Sanchez, Good, and Chavez (2011), to
measure participants’ racial categorization of Obama across four questions asking
participants to indicate the extent to which they categorized Obama as Black (two
items, α=.93) and as White (two items, α=.89).
Results
See Table 1 for overall means, standard deviations, and correlations of all
dependent variables. All analyses, unless otherwise stated, were conducted using
individual 2 (race) ×2 (time) ×3 (condition) ANOVAs on all study dependent
variables.
Perceptions of Racial Progress and Equality around the 2012 Election
U.S. racial progress. The three-way ANOVA on racial progress revealed
significant main effects for both participant race, F(1, 291) =25.80, p<.001,
η2partial =.08, and time, F(1, 291) =5.09, p=.03, η2partial =.02. Black participants
Obama Perceptions Four Years Later 9
saw less racial progress (M=3.89, SD =.79) than White participants (M=4.44,
SD =1.05), and participants at Time 2 believed there was more racial progress
(M=4.29, SD =.98) than those at Time 1 (M=4.04, SD =.96). No other main
effects or interactions approached significance, all Fs<2.06, all ps>.10.
Racial equality policy support. There was a significant main effect of partic-
ipant race such that Black participants expressed more need for equality support
(M=5.41, SD =1.45) than White participants (M=4.33, SD =1.61), F(1, 287)
=35.31, p<.001, η2partial =.11. There was also a marginal effect of time, F(1,
287) =2.80, p=.10, η2partial =.01; support for equality policies decreased from
Time1(M=5.02, SD =1.61) to Time 2 (M=4.72, SD =1.65). No other main
effects or interactions approached significance, all Fs<1.56, all ps>.20.
ATAA. There were significant main effects for both race of participant, F(1,
287) =26.72, p<.001, η2partial =.09, and time, F(1, 287) =5.58, p=.02, η2partial
=.02. Black participants had more support for affirmative action (M=5.31, SD
=1.34) than White participants (M=4.40, SD =1.64). However, regardless of
race, there was less support for affirmative action at Time 2 (M=4.65, SD =
1.67) than Time 1 (M=5.07, SD =1.46). No other main effects or interactions
approached significance, all Fs<1, all ps>.30.
Racial Perceptions of Obama
Racial categorization. The three-way ANOVA found no significant main
effect of, or interaction with, racial label condition on racial categorization of
Obama as either Black or White, all F’s <2.06, all ps>.28. These null results
suggest that the racial label assigned to Obama does not impact participants’ race-
related perceptions, but our sample size may have precluded a sensitive test of this
variable.
Ingroup categorization. To examine whether participants’ racial categoriza-
tion of Obama varied depending on their race or time relative to the election, we
conducted a mixed model 2 (Participant race) ×2(Time)×3 (Condition) ×
2 (Racial categorization: White and Black) mixed-model ANOVA. A significant
main effect of racial categorization, F(1, 292) =610.50, p<.001, η2partial =.68,
was qualified by a two-way interaction between race and racial categorization,
F(1, 292) =8.86, p=.003, η2partial =.03. Follow-up analyses demonstrated that
Black participants perceived Obama as more Black (M=5.62, SD =1.65) than
White participants (M=5.16, SD =1.39), F(1, 292) =6.81, p=.01, η2partial =
.02. Similarly, White participants viewed Obama as more White (M=2.40, SD
=1.14) than Black participants (M=2.21, SD =1.38), though this effect was
marginal, F(1, 292) =3.29, p=.07, η2partial =.01. Overall, these results suggest
10 Gaither, Wilton, and Young
that White and Black perceivers alike included Obama within their respective
racial ingroups.
Discussion
Our results replicate those from Obama’s first election in that both White and
Black voters perceived the election of Obama in 2012 to be a sign of increased
racial progress while simultaneously serving as a signal for a reduced need for
programs designed to address racial inequalities such as affirmative action. Our
findings also show four years later, that the belief persists that having a minority
president offsets other pervasive racial disparities that exist in our country. That
being said, that a country rife with racial tension reelected a Black president is
symbolic enough to represent racial progress in some form.
Additionally, our results demonstrate that perceptions of Obama do not differ
when he is labeled as either Biracial or Black. In contrast to previous research
demonstrating the impact of biracial labels, categorizations of Obama in the present
study did not shift in concordance with his racial label, revealing that racial labels
do not always affect racial perceptions. Though previous work has demonstrated
that labels affect expectancies of minority targets (Young et al., in press), these
effects have only been shown with novel and unknown individuals. As Obama is
not an unknown target, expectancies may not apply in the same manner. Therefore,
we suggest that this result demonstrates an important limitation regarding the effect
a racial label can have in social perception, while also serving as a significant
contribution toward the efforts in fully exploring the effects of multiracial labels.
Since previous research on label effects have found small effect sizes (η2∼.1)
associated with these label effects, future work should recruit a larger sample to
more sensitively test this hypothesis and to explore the boundary effects linked
with social labeling and multiracial perceptions.
Most interestingly, despite seeing Obama generally as a “Black” president,
our results suggest that both Whites and Blacks have shifted their own racial
categorization of Obama in concordance with their respective racial ingroups.
This unique finding could be due in part to several reconcilable theories. First,
exposure to Obama as a positive exemplar of a racial minority who was elected
to a position strongly associated with Whites may have served as a bridge across
the majority and minority racial divide. Supporting this theory, recent work argues
that positive exposure to a counter-stereotypic group member can alter implicit
attitudes about race (Conrey, Sherman, Gawronski, Hugenberg, & Groom, 2005;
Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006; Plant et al., 2009). Such research suggests
that exposure to Obama through various media outlets which highlight positive
qualities, such as being well-educated, motivated, successful, and well-spoken,
could aid in combating the negative stereotypes commonly associated with Blacks
(e.g., that they are unintelligent or unsuccessful; Bodenhausen, Schwarz, Bless,
Obama Perceptions Four Years Later 11
&W
¨
anke, 1995; Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001; Devine & Elliot, 1995; Fiske
et al., 2009). For example, participants who were either exposed to or asked to
think about positive Black exemplars (i.e., Martin Luther King Jr. and Oprah
Winfrey) showed less racial bias toward that group than those exposed to or asked
to think about nonrace-related exemplars (Bodenhausen et al., 1995; Dasgupta &
Greenwald, 2001). This work therefore implies that exposure to Obama’s positive
qualities may also have reduced the racial distance seen between Whites and
Blacks, which may in turn have impacted racial categorization.
Relatedly, BIRGing may also have been involved in the shifting of racial
boundaries surrounding Obama. As stated earlier, the 2008 election showed a
lack of support among both White and Black voters for a candidate that was per-
ceived as either “too Black” or “not Black enough.” BIRGing predicts that while
Obama was successful (as he was after his two election victories), individuals
would be eager to share an in-group with him. Additionally, some analysts sug-
gested that Obama’s biracial heritage and his ability to call on his “Whiteness”
when needed allowed him to navigate between his racial identities purposefully,
giving voters the opportunity to adjust their categorizations of him as best fit for
their needs at that given moment (e.g., Brown, 2011; Daniel, 2009; Ford et al.,
2010; Friedman, 2008). These notions suggest that Obama’s potential flexibil-
ity in racial identification enables both White and Black perceivers to categorize
or claim Obama as their ingroup. Future work, however, should examine these
identification shifts with minority candidates who are not viewed as success-
ful to illuminate how BIRGing may work either to a candidate’s advantage or
disadvantage.
As the focus of our study was to examine perceptions of Whites and Blacks,
we have no data for other racial groups. Future research should also examine
non-Black and non-White participants’ perceptions of racial progress as impacted
by Obama. For example, it would be interesting to see if Asians as a “higher
status minority” see Obama as more White than Black and if Latinos would, as
a “lower status minority,” view Obama as more Black than White. Additionally,
the majority of our participant sample was politically liberal, limiting the general-
izability of our findings toward more politically conservative individuals. Future
work should examine these effects among these populations so that we can more
fully understand the role that race plays within a political arena among all types
of voters.
In conclusion,our results suggest that two major segments of the U.S. popu-
lation now choose to identify with President Obama through racial categorization.
While some contend that the mere act of electing a minority president is clear evi-
dence of racial progress, we argue that seeing an increase in both White and Black
individuals’ racial identification with a minority president shows a different form
of racial progress, as it signals their willingness to associate a minority president
with both of their racial ingroups. In other words, Obama may symbolize a form
12 Gaither, Wilton, and Young
of racial progress regardless of the way that his racial identity is represented and
perceived. However, the path toward racial progress is long and multifaceted, and
electing a minority president represents only one step closer to racial equality.
References
Arana, N. (2008). He’s not Black. The Washington Post. Retrieved February 2013 from http://articles.
washingtonpost.com/2008-11-30/opinions/36902533_1_first-black-president-barack-obama-
racial-ties.
Banks, R. R., & Eberhardt, J. L. (1998). Social psychological processes and the legal bases of racial
categorization. In J. L. Eberhardt & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Confronting racism: The problem and
the response (pp. 54–75). Thousands Oak, CA: Sage.
Block, R., Jr. (2011). Backing Barack because he’s black: Racially motivated voting in the 2008
election. Social Science Quarterly,92, 423–446
Bodenhausen, G. V., Schwarz, N., Bless, H., & W¨
anke, M. (1995). Effects of atypical exemplars on
racial beliefs: Enlightened racism or generalized appraisals? Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology,31, 48–63.
Boen, F., & Vanbeselaere, N. (2002). The impact of election outcome on post-election display: A
replication during communal elections in Flanders. Political Psychology,23, 385–391.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin,17, 475–482.
Brewer, M. (2007). The importance of being we: Human nature and intergroup relations. American
Psychologist,62, 728–738.
Brown, C. B. (2011). Barack Obama as the great man: Communicative constructions of racial tran-
scendence in White-male elite discourses. Communication Monographs,78, 535–556.
CBS News (2009). Post-racial USA? Not so fast. CBS News. RetrievedFebruary 2013 from http://www.
cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-4607062.html.
Chen, J. M., & Hamilton, D. L. (2012). Natural ambiguities: Racial categorization of multiracial
individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,48, 152–164.
Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A.,Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking
in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
34, 366–375.
Conrey, F. R., Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., Hugenberg, K., & Groom, C. J. (2005). Separating
multiple processes in implicit social cognition: The quad model of implicit task performance.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,89, 469–487.
Correll, J., & Park, B. (2005). A model of the ingroup as a social resource. Personality & Social
Psychology Review,9, 341–359.
Crouch, S. (2006). What Obama isn’t: Black like me. New York Daily News. Retrieved February 2013
from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1730861/posts.
Daniel, G. R. (2009). Race, multiraciality, and Barack Obama: Toward a more perfect union? The
Black Scholar,39(3), 51–59.
Darley, J. M., & Gross, P. H. (1983). A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology,44, 20–33.
Dasgupta, N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating
automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,81, 800–814.
Devine, P. G., & Elliot, A. J. (1995). Are stereotypes really fading? The Princeton trilogy revisited.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,21, 1139–1150.
Devos, T., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). American =White? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
88, 447–466.
Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2004). Aversive racism. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experi-
mental social psychology,36, 1–52). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
Obama Perceptions Four Years Later 13
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Saguy, T., & Hehman, E. (2011). Obama’s potential to transform the
racial attitudes of White Americans. In G. S. Parks & M. Hughey (Eds.), The Obamas and a
post-racial America. New York: Oxford University Press.
Eberhardt, J. L., Dasgupta, N., & Banaszynski, T. L. (2003). Believing is seeing: The effects of racial
labels and implicit beliefs on face perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29,
360–370.
Eibach, R. P., & Ehrlinger, J. (2006). Keeping your eyes on the prize: Reference points and racial
differences in assessing progress toward equality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
32, 66–77.
Fiske, S. T., Bergsieker, H. B., Russell, A. M., & Williams, L. (2009). Images of Black Americans.
Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race,6, 83–101.
Ford, P. K., Johnson, T. A., & Maxwell, A. (2010). “Yes we can” or “Yes we did?” Prospective and
retrospective change in the Obama presidency. Journal of Black Studies,40, 462–483.
Friedman, E. (2008). Is being biracial an advantage for Obama? ABCNews.com. Retrieved February
2013 from http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4490194.
Gaither, S. E., Babbitt, L. G., Toosi, N. R., Sommers, S. R. (under review). I see mixed people:
Exposure to biracial faces reduces colorblindness.
Gallup/USA Today (2008). Americans see Obama election as race relations milestone. Retrieved
February 2013 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation:
An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin,132,
692–731.
Gomstyn, A. (2008). Obama as a role model: Students, educators share excitement. ABC news online.
Retrieved February 2013 from http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=6184328&page=1.
Hajnal, Z. (2001). White residents, Black incumbents, and a declining racial divide. American Political
Science Review,95, 603–617.
Halberstadt, J., Sherman, S. J., & Sherman, J. W. (2011). Why Barack Obama is Black: A cognitive
account of hypodescent. Psychological Science,22, 29–33.
Hilliar, K. F., & Kemp, R. I. (2008). Barack Obama or Barry Dunham? The appearance of multiracial
faces is affected by the names assigned to them. Perception,37, 1605–1608.
Ho, A. K., Sidanius, J., Levin, D. T., & Banaji, M. R. (2011). Evidence for hypodescent and racial
hierarchy in the categorization and perception of biracial individuals. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,100, 492–506.
Hogg, M. A. (2005). Social identity. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Self & identity
(pp. 462–479). New York: Guilford Press.
Holyk, G. (2013). Obama’s favorability best since’ 09: 2–1 approval for inaugural address.
ABCNews.com. Retrieved February 2013 from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/01/
obamas-favorability-best-since-09-2-1-approval-for-inaugural-address/
Kaiser, C. R., Drury, B. J., Spalding, K. E., Cheryan, S., & O’Brien, L. T. (2009). The ironic con-
sequences of Obama’s election: Decreased support for social justice. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology,45, 556–559.
Killough, A. (2011). Poll: Majority of Americans blame Obama for economy. CNN.com.Re-
trieved February 2013 from http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/21/poll-majority-of-
americans-blame-obama-for-economy/
Knowles, E. D., Lowery, B. S., & Schaumberg, R. L. (2010). Racial prejudice predicts opposition
to Obama and his health care reform plan. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,46,
420–423.
Kosloff, S., Greenberg, J., Schmader, T., Dechesne, M., & Weise, D. (2010). Smearing the opposition:
Implicit and explicit stigmatization of the 2008 U.S. Presidential candidates and the current
U.S. President. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,139, 383–398.
Kravitz, D. A., & Platania, J. (1993). Attitudes and beliefs about affirmative action: Effects of target
and of respondent sex and ethnicity. Journal of Applied Psychology,78, 928–938.
Kristoff, N. (2008). Should we call Obama ‘black’ or ‘biracial’? The New York Times. Retrieved
February 2013 from http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/should-we-call-obama-
black-or-biracial/
14 Gaither, Wilton, and Young
Levin, D. T., & Banaji, M. R. (2006). Distortions in the perceived lightness of faces: The role of race
categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,135, 501–512.
Macrae, C. N., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others.
Annual Review of Psychology,51, 93–120.
Malahy, L.W., Sedlins, M., Plaks, J., & Shoda, Y. (2010). Black and white, or shades of gray? Racial
labeling of Barack Obama predicts implicit race perception. Analyses of Social Issues and
Public Policy,10, 207–222.
McIlwain, C. D. (2007). Perceptions of leadership and the challenge of Obama’s Blackness. Journal
of Black Studies,38, 64–74.
Miller, C. B. (2006). Strategic self presentation in political survey response. Poster session presented
at annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Palm Springs, CA.
Miller, M. (2008). Obama’s victory an inspiration to those hoping to heal America’s racial divide, Lans-
ing State Journal. Retrieved February 2013 from http://www. lansingstatejournal.com/article/
20081106/ELECTIONS01/811060350.
Miller, C. B. (2009). Yes we did! Basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected failure in the
2008 Presidential Election. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy,9, 283–296.
Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detect-
ing satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,45,
867–872.
Peery, D., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2008). Black +White =Black: Hypodescent in reflexive catego-
rization of racially ambiguous faces. Psychological Science,19, 973–977.
Peery, D., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2009). Ambiguity and ambivalence in the voting booth and beyond:
A social-psychological perspective on racial attitudes and behavior in the Obama era. Du Bois
Review,6, 71–82.
Pitts, B. (2008). Obama effect touching a new generation. CBS News online. Retrieved February 2013
from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/26/eveningnews/main4386451.shtml.
Plant, E. A., Devine, P. G., Cox, W. T. L., Columb, C., Miller, S. L., Goplen, J., & Peruche, M.B. (2009).
The Obama effect: Decreasing implicit prejudice and stereotyping. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology,45, 961–964.
Poll: Presidential races tighten on both sides. (2007). CNN.com. Retrieved February 2013 from
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/16/poll.2008/index.html.
Reilly, M. (2013). Obama rating reaches 3-year high in Bloomberg Poll. The Huffington
Pos t. Retrieved February 2013 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/20/obama-
approval-rating_n_2729342.html.
Sanchez, D. T., Good, J. J., & Chavez, G. (2011). Blood quantum and perceptions of Black-White
biracial targets: The Black ancestry prototype model of affirmative action. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin,37, 3–14.
Schmidt, K., & Nosek, B. A. (2010). Implicit (and explicit) racial attitudes barely changed during
Barack Obama’s presidential campaign and early presidency. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology,46, 308–314.
Smith, J. (2009, June 17). Obama, role model for all. The State News. Retrieved February 2013 from
http://www.statenews.com/index.php/article/2008/06/obama__role_model_for_all_.
Squires, C. R., & Jackson, S. J. (2010). Reducing race: News themes in the 2008 primaries. The
International Journal of Press/Politics,15, 375–400.
Stolberg, S. G., & Connelly, M. (2009, April 27). Obama is judging views on race, a survey finds.
The New York Times. Retrieved February 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/us/
politics/28poll.html?_r=0.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin &
S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup conflict. In S. Worchel &
W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Terkildsen, N. (1993). When White voters evaluate Black candidates: The processing implications of
candidate skin color, prejudice, and self-monitoring. American Journal of Political Science,
37, 1032–1053.
Obama Perceptions Four Years Later 15
Valentino, N. A., & Brader, T. (2011). The sword’s other edge: Perceptions of discrimination and racial
policy opinion after Obama. Public Opinion Quarterly,75, 201–226.
Walters, R. (2007). Barack Obama and the politics of Blackness. Journal of Black Studies 38, 7–29.
Williams, L. F. (1990). White/Black perceptions of the electability of Black political candidates.
National Political Science Review,2, 145–164.
Williams, J., & Negrin, M. (2008). Affirmative action foes point to Obama, say candidate is proof effort
no longer needed. The Boston Globe. Retrieved February 2013 from http://www.boston.com/
news/nation/articles/2008/03/18/affirmative_action_foes_point_to_obama/?page=full
Young, D. M., Sanchez, D. T., & Wilton, L. S. (in press). At the crossroads of race: Racial ambiguity
and biracial identification influence psychological essentialist thinking. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology.
SARAH E. GAITHER is a doctoral student in the Psychology Department at
Tufts University. Her research interests include intergroup relations, perceptions
and experiences of biracial individuals, and the development of racial biases in
children.
LEIGH S. WILTON is a doctoral student in the Psychology Department at Rutgers
University. Her research interests include multiracial categorization and fostering
diversity in organization contexts.
DANIELLE M. YOUNG is a post-doctoral scholar in the Psychology Department
at Rutgers University. Her research interests include implicit attitudes, stereotyping
and prejudice.
