Content uploaded by Brian S. Lowery
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Brian S. Lowery on Jan 15, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
!
1!
Obama and the denial of White privilege
Rebecca L. Schaumberg & Brian S. Lowery
Stanford Graduate School of Business
2nd Year Paper
April 26, 2010
!
2!
Obama and the art of hierarchy maintenance: The motivated endorsement of beliefs about
Obama’s election in response to White privilege
Abstract
In the wake of Barack Obama’s presidential election, many wondered what his election indicates
about the importance of race in the United States. In this paper, we explore whether a desire to
protect the racial hierarchy motivated Whites to endorse the belief that Obama’s election means
that race is no longer a problem. The results from two studies align with this possibility. Among
Whites who are high in social dominance orientation (SDO) the more White privileged they
perceived at the time of the 2008 Presidential election, the more they endorsed the belief that
Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem. However, this relationship only held
when high SDO Whites were concerned that minority group members viewed the racial
hierarchy as illegitimate. The findings suggest that beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s
election may be strategically employed as a way of managing potential threats to—and
ultimately preserving—the racial hierarchy.
!
3!
The election of Barack Obama marked a significant moment in this country’s social
history. For many Americans, Obama’s election represented more than a change in politics, it
represented a change in society. As they watched this country’s first Black president take office,
people from around the world wondered what President Obama’s election would mean for race
relations in the United States.
Many cited Obama’s election as a testament to this country’s commitment to the goal of
racial equality. The media and researchers alike became enthralled with the “Obama effect” or
the ability of Obama’s election to transform the dreams and aspirations of this country’s minority
youth (e.g., Cox, 2009). Obama’s election was credited with eradicating stereotype threat (Plant,
et al., 2009) and implicit racial bias (Marx, Ko, & Friedman, 2009), and for generally lifting the
spirits of young students (Cox, 2009).
But, Obama’s election may have been perceived more as evidence of this country’s
achievement of racial equality than its commitment to it. Americans’ support for race-based
social policies, such as affirmative action, waned, and their perceptions of racial inequality
weakened in the wake of Obama’s election (Kaiser, Drury, Spalding, Cheryan, & O'Brian, 2009).
Furthermore, it was the belief that their support for Obama had substantiated their racial
tolerance that lead Obama’s supporters to express more racial prejudice after casting their vote
than before they went to the ballot box (Effron, Cameron, & Monin, 2009). Indeed, for some
Americans, it was the belief that Obama’s election would obviate actions aimed at addressing
racial inequality that motivated their favorable vote for Obama in the 2008 Presidential election
(Knowles, Lowery, & Schaumberg, 2009).
!
4!
It has been noted that the belief that race is no longer problem could stunt efforts aimed at
increasing racial equality as it denies the importance of the conditions that legitimate these
efforts (Eibach & Ehrilinger, 2006; Kluegel, 1985; Knowles, et al., 2009). This points to the
possibility that to the extent that people want to minimize efforts to attenuate racial differences
they might promote beliefs that minimize the importance of race, such as the belief that Obama’s
election means that race is no longer a problem. In two studies, we explore whether white
Americans use beliefs about Obama’s election as a means of protecting the racial hierarchy. If
this is the case, then we would expect endorsement of the belief that Obama’s election means
that race is no longer a problem to vary as a function of Whites’ desire for group-dominance and
their perceptions of the security of their group’s dominance.
Obama’s Election as a Hierarchy-Maintenance Belief
In the United States, there is general consensus that Whites sit atop the racial hierarchy
(Kahn, Ho, Sidanius, & Pratto, 2009; Sidanius, Levin, Liu, & Pratto, 2000). This position affords
Whites certain privileges such as higher wages and esteem (Levine, et al., 2001; Lowery,
Knowles, & Unzueta, 2007; Shapiro, 2004). Whites, like all dominant social groups are invested
in protecting their place in the hierarchy (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Dominant groups protect the
hierarchy with overt tactics such as physical force and institutional policies and with subtle
strategies such as promoting beliefs that justify why some groups have more and some groups
have less (Sidanius, Levin, Federico, & Pratto, 2001; Sidanius & Pratto, 1993, 1999). Beliefs and
ideologies help to preserve the social hierarchy because subordinate groups are less likely to rise-
up and challenge the dominant group’s position if they believe the dominant group’s position is
deserved and legitimate (Sidanius, et al., 2001; Sidanius & Pratto, 1993, 1999).
!
5!
In addition to promoting beliefs that justify differences between groups, dominant groups
also promote beliefs that deny the existence of these differences. History is ripe with accounts of
dominant group members using denial as a way of protecting their group’s standing. Whereas
denial of atrocities and injustices can stem from ignorance or lack of knowledge, denial can also
arise from more calculated, self-interested means (Auron, 2003; Churchill, 1997). Strategic
denial has taken the form of dominant groups limiting the publication of negative information
about the group, avoiding discussions that implicate the dominant group in atrocities, and
masking evidence of the existence of the atrocities (Auron, 2003; Churchill, 1997). Empirical
accounts of responses to intergroup injustices also suggest that dominant groups may
strategically use denial to protect their group’s standing (Lowery, Knowles, et al., 2007; Saguy,
Dovidio, & Pratto, 2008; von Hippel, et al., 2005). Faced with information of intergroup
injustices, dominant group members have been shown to ignore the injustices, to rationalize the
injustices, and to avoid discussions about the injustices (Lowery, Knowles, et al., 2007; Saguy, et
al., 2008; von Hippel, et al., 2005).
Obama’s election may provide a particular opportunity for Whites to deny the importance
of differences between racial groups. The belief that Obama’s election means that race is no
longer a problem could undermine efforts to attenuate racial differences as it negates the
importance of the very problem these efforts are meant to address (c.f., Eibach & Ehrilinger,
2006; Kluegel, 1985; Knowles, et al., 2009). This leaves open the possibility that beliefs about
the meaning of Obama’s election could be used as a means of protecting the racial hierarchy.
Protecting the Racial Hierarchy
!
6!
If Whites use beliefs about Obama’s election to protect the racial hierarchy then their
endorsement of this belief should vary directly with their concerns about the stability of the
racial hierarchy. The social hierarchy is only secure to the extent that subordinate groups
perceive it to be legitimate. Therefore, dominant groups are more likely to promote beliefs that
protect the social hierarchy when they fear that the social hierarchy could be perceived as
illegitimate (Pratto & Shih, 2000; Sidanius, et al., 2001; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). One particular
threat to the legitimacy of the racial hierarchy in the United States is evidence of White privilege.
Evidence of White privilege threatens the stability of the racial hierarchy as it reveals that
differences between Whites and minorities are not due to legitimate factors such as differences in
merit and ability, but to illegitimate factors such as institutional bias (Branscombe, Schmitt, &
Schiffhauer, 2007; Lowery, Knowles, et al., 2007; Swim & Miller, 1999). One way that Whites
could allay the threat of White privilege, is to endorse beliefs that mask the importance of the
dimension upon which their privilege relies (c.f., Knowles, et al., 2009; von Hippel, et al., 2005).
Therefore, if a desire to protect the racial hierarchy motivates Whites to endorse the belief that
Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem, then the more White privilege that
Whites perceive the stronger they should endorse this belief.
At first blush, this prediction may seem counterintuitive as one might expect that Whites
would see race as more important when they recognize that they receive unfair privileges
because of their race. Perceptions of White privilege have been associated with heightened
collective guilt (Iyer, Leach, & Crosby, 2003; Swim & Miller, 1999) and lowered group esteem
(Lowery, Chow, Knowles, & Unzueta, 2007). Furthermore, the recognition of White privilege
often leads Whites to amend their unfair advantages. When Whites recognize that their group
receives unfair privileges they tend to exhibit less racial prejudice (Case, 2007), to see racism as
!
7!
a greater problem (Case, 2007), and to show more support for affirmative action policies (Iyer, et
al., 2003). Given that perceptions of White privilege attune Whites to extant racial biases, how
could such perceptions lead Whites to assert that race is not a problem?
The answer to this question may reside in Whites’ differing desires for group-based
dominance. Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) captures the degree to which individuals prefer
hierarchical relations between groups and group-based dominance (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth,
& Malle, 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Whereas individuals who are low in SDO endorse
egalitarian ideals and seek to attenuate differences between groups, individuals who are high in
SDO eschew egalitarian ideals and seek to preserve differences between groups (Pratto, et al.,
1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Individuals who are high in SDO perceive the world to be a
“competitive jungle” in which there is nothing wrong with dominant groups fairing better than
subordinate groups (Federico, Hunt, & Ergun, 2009). Evidence that Whites receive unfair
advantages because of their race is less uncomfortable for high SDO Whites than it is for low
SDO Whites (Pratto, et al., 1994). However, evidence of White privilege likely evokes stronger
motives to protect the racial hierarchy for high SDO Whites than for low SDO Whites (Pratto, et
al., 1994). If the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem is motivated
by concerns about the security of Whites dominance, then only among high SDO should
evidence of White privilege be positively associated with this belief.
Hypothesis 1: Among high SDO Whites, perceptions of White privilege will be
positively associated with the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer
important in the United States. Among low SDO Whites, perceptions of White privilege
will be negatively associated with endorsement of this belief.
!
8!
If high SDO Whites endorse beliefs about Obama’s election in order to protect the racial
hierarchy, then their endorsement of this belief should depend on whether minority group
members view the racial hierarchy to be legitimate or illegitimate. The racial hierarchy is secure
only to the extent that minority groups perceive differences between Whites and minorities to be
earned and equitable (Sidanius, et al., 2001). If minority groups believe that such differences
stem not from legitimate means (e.g., hard-work and merit), but rather from illegitimate means
(e.g., racial group membership), then minority groups are more likely to challenge – and attempt
to attenuate – the racial hierarchy (Sidanius, et al., 2001). If subordinate groups perceive the
social hierarchy to be just, they are more likely to accept differences between subordinate and
dominant groups and less likely to subvert the social hierarchy (Sidanius, et al., 2001; Sidanius &
Pratto, 1999). Therefore, when minority groups believe that the racial hierarchy is just, high SDO
Whites should view the racial hierarchy as more secure than when minority groups believe that
the racial hierarchy is unjust.
Hypothesis 2: Only when high SDO Whites believe that minority groups view the racial
hierarchy as illegitimate will their perceptions of White privilege be positively associated
with the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer important in the United
States.
Overview of Studies
In two studies, we test the hypothesis that Whites’ endorsement of the belief that
Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem is motivated by a desire to protect the
racial hierarchy. In Study 1, we test the prediction that Whites’ desire for group dominance (i.e.,
their social dominance orientation) will moderate the relationship between perceived White
!
9!
privilege and beliefs about the importance of race. More specifically, we test the prediction that
whereas low SDO Whites will ascribe more importance to race the more White privilege they
observe, high SDO Whites will ascribe less importance to race the more White privilege they
observe. In Study 2, we further test the prediction that a desire to protect the racial hierarhcy
leads high SDO Whites to endorse beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s election in response to
evidence of White privilege. Specifically, in Study 2 we manipulate the perceived security of
Whites’ dominance by altering information about minority groups’ perceptions of the legitimacy
of racial inequalities. We suggest that among high SDO Whites, perceptions of White privilege
will be positively related to the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer a
problem only when minorities view the racial hierarchy as illegitimate.
Study 1
Evidence of White privilege threatens Whites’ dominance as it suggests that the
differences between Whites and minorities are illegitimate. High SDO dominant group members
often respond to threats to their group’s dominance by endorsing beliefs that help to protect the
social hierarchy. If high SDO Whites use beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s election to help
protect the racial hierarchy then the more they perceive their group’s dominance to be threatened
(i.e., the more White privilege they perceive), the more they should endorse the belief that
Obama’s election means that race is not important. We tested this prediction within the context
of the 2008 presidential election. Prior to the election, participants completed measures of social
dominance orientation and perceptions of White privilege. We used these measures to predict
participants’ beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s election for race relations in the United
States. We expected that perceptions of White privilege would be negatively associated with the
belief that Obama’s election means that race no longer important for low SDO Whites.
!
10!
Conversely, we predicted that perceptions of White privilege would be positively associated with
the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer important for high SDO Whites.
Method
Participants
Participants were 254 (181 Females, 72 Males, 1=unspecified) self-identified
White/European Americans who had a mean age of 37 years. Participants were recruited from a
database, maintained by the Stanford Graduate School of Business, of individuals interested in
completing online studies. As compensation, each participant received a $10 gift certificate to an
online retailer, as well as a chance to win an additional gift certificate in a random drawing.
Procedure
Participants completed the study in 3-phases. The first two phases occurred before the
November 4, 2008 presidential election and the third phase took place approximately 1-2 weeks
after the election. For each of the 3-phases, participants received an email that contained a link to
a survey website that contained the study materials.
Approximately one week prior to the November 4, 2008 presidential election,
participants completed a measure of SDO as well as a demographic questionnaire. Participants
were contacted again a few days before the November 4, 2008 presidential election to complete
the measure of White privilege. Finally, approximately a week and a half after the election of
Barack Obama, participants answered the question, “To what extent does the election of Barack
Obama show that race relations are no longer a problem in the U.S?”
Measures
!
11!
Social Dominance Orientation (SDO): We used a 6-item measure of Social Dominance
Orientation to assess participants desire for group-based dominance (see Knowles, et al., 2009;
Pratto, et al., 1994). A sample item from this measure is: “If certain groups stayed in their place
we would have fewer problems.” Participants reported their disagreement/agreement with each
item on a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree.
Responses to each of the 6-items were averaged to create an overall measure of Social
Dominance Orientation, Cronbach’s alpha α = .86.
Perceptions of White Privilege: To measure perceived White privilege, we assessed the degree to
which participants perceived institutional biases in favor of Whites. Specifically, participants
reported on a 5-point Likert scale whether they disagree or agree that the education system, the
medical care system, the health care system, the criminal justice system, the job market and the
housing system are biased in favor of Whites over minorities. We averaged participants’
responses to the 6-items in order to create a composite score of perceptions of White privilege—
with higher scores indicating higher levels of perceived White privilege, Cronbach’s alpha = .89
Beliefs about the Importance of Race: To assess participants’ beliefs about the importance of
race, we asked participants, “To what extent does the election of Barack Obama show that race
relations are no longer a problem in the U.S?” Participants indicated their level of agreement
with this statement on a 5-point scale ranging from (1) Definitely shows race relations are no
longer a problem to (5) Definitely shows that race relations are still a problem. Responses were
reversed score such that higher scores indicate greater endorsement of the belief that that the
election of Barack Obama means that race relations are no longer a problem in the U.S.
Results
!
12!
Means, standard deviations and correlations among study variables are presented in Table
1.
Hierarchical linear regression was used to assess the hypothesis that the relationship
between perceived White privilege and beliefs about the importance of race would depend on
perceptions of White privilege and social dominance motives. To test this prediction, we first
created an interaction term between SDO and perceptions of White privilege by following the
steps outlined by Aiken and West (1991). In particular, we mean-centered our measure of SDO
and our measure of perceptions of White privilege and then computed the cross-product between
SDO and perceptions of White privilege. We then regressed endorsement of the belief that
Barack Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem in the United States on SDO
and perceptions of White privilege (entered on the first step) and the interaction term between
SDO and perceptions of White privilege (entered on the second step).
We found no overall effect of either SDO or perceptions of White privilege on
endorsement of the belief that Barack Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem
in the United States. However, we observed the predicted interaction between SDO and
perceptions of White privilege on endorsement of this belief (ß=.18, t(250)=2.70, p<.01)
In order to visualize the interaction between SDO x perceptions of White privilege, we
plotted the interaction in accordance with the guidelines that are outlined by Aiken and West
(1991) outline. As can be seen if Figure 1, among low SDO Whites, perceptions of White
privilege were marginally negatively related to endorsement of the belief that Barack Obama’s
election means that race is no longer a problem in the United States (ß=-.14, t(250)=-1.68,
p=.09). Conversely, among high SDO Whites, perceptions of White privilege were marginally
!
13!
positively related to the endorsement of the belief that Barack Obama’s election means that race
is no longer a problem in the United States (ß=.16, t(250)=1.84, p=.07).
Discussion
The results from Study 1 provide initial support that Whites’ dominance motives and
their concerns about the security of Whites’ dominance influenced their endorsement of beliefs
about Barack Obama’s election. Dominance motives altered the relationship between perceptions
of White privilege and beliefs about the importance of race. Among White with low desires for
group-dominance—the more White privilege they perceived the less they endorsed the belief that
Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem. However, among Whites with strong
desire for group-dominance—the more White privilege they perceived the more they endorsed
the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem. High SDO Whites’
response pattern supports the idea that beliefs about Obama’s election may be employed as a
means of protecting the racial hierarchy.
Although Study 1 shows that dominance motives influence beliefs about the importance
of race, it leaves open questions about why high SDO Whites would endorse the belief that
Obama’s election means race is no longer a problem in response to perceptions of White
privilege. We suggest that evidence of White privilege increases high SDO Whites’ concerns
about the security of the racial hierarchy as it reveals differences between Whites and minorities
to be illegitimate. To help secure the racial hierarchy, high SDO Whites cite Obama’s election as
a way to minimize the importance people ascribe to race. If this is the case, then minorities
opinions about the relative legitimacy of racial differences should influence high SDO Whites’
responses to White privilege. If subordinate groups perceive the social hierarchy to be just, they
!
14!
are more likely to accept differences between subordinate and dominant groups and less likely to
subvert the social hierarchy. Therefore, when minority groups believe that the racial hierarchy is
just, high SDO Whites should be less motivated to claim that race is no longer important in the
United States than when minority groups believe that the racial hierarchy is unjust.
To test the prediction that a desire to secure the racial hierarchy motivates high SDO
Whites to endorse the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem, in
Study 2 we manipulated the perceived security of the racial hierarchy. Specifically, we
manipulated Whites beliefs about minorities’ perceptions of the legitimacy of racial differences.
Study 2
Method
Participants
The present sample consisted of 47 “Caucasian/White” individuals (34 females) ranging
in age from 19 to 70 years (M = 35.36, SD = 11.29). Participants were recruited from an email
list of individuals interested in receiving online survey announcements. As compensation, each
participant received a $5 gift certificate from an online retailer.
Procedure
Participants were emailed a link to the experiment website. After linking to the site,
participants were told that the online session would consist of a survey about their perceptions of,
and feelings about, social relations and policies in the United States. After linking to the
experimental website, participants read a fictitious research report about racial inequality in the
United States. Specifically, participants read:
!
15!
A recent review by the Bureau of Labor Statistics found that unfair income disparities
remain between Whites and minorities. Most social scientists agree that, even today,
Whites in America continue to enjoy undeserved advantages that minorities do not,
particularly in the realm of employment and wage earnings. Below are some of the ways
in which economic analyses have shown that the labor market is biased in favor of
Whites. Relative to equally qualified minorities, being White increases the chance of
being hired for a prestigious position. Whites receive higher salaries compared to
equally qualified minorities.
Participants were then linked to page that presented the security of the racial hierarchy
manipulation. Participants were randomly assigned to either the secure racial hierarchy or the
insecure racial hierarchy condition. Participants in the secure racial hierarchy condition read
that minorities view the differences between Whites and minorities to be fair and just.
Specifically, participants in the secure racial hierarchy condition read:
Despite the research on income disparities, empirical evidence shows that most
minorities find the job market and incomes in the United States to be fair and just.
Participants in the insecure racial hierarchy condition were told that minorities view the
differences between Whites and minorities to be unfair and unjust. Specifically, participants in
the insecure racial hierarchy condition read:
In addition to the research on income disparities, empirical evidence shows that most
minorities find the job market and incomes in the United States to be unfair and unjust.
After reading the fictitious research summaries, participants were asked about their perceptions
of the meaning of Barack Obama’s presidency for race relations in the United States. Finally,
!
16!
participants answered questions that assessed their level of social dominance orientation and
their perceptions of White privilege.
Measures
Social Dominance Orientation: We used the same 6-item measure of Social Dominance
Orientation that we used in Study 1, Cronbach’s alpha = .84.
Perceptions of White Privilege: To measure the extent to which participants perceived Whites to
receive unfair benefits because of their race, we used the 5-item White privilege scale (Swim &
Miller, 1999). An example item from this scale is: “I feel that White skin in the United States
opens many doors for Whites during their everyday lives.” Participants indicated their agreement
with each of the 5-items on a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 1=Strongly Disagree to
5=Strongly Agree. We reverse-scored the reverse-coded items and averaged the five items to
create an overall measure of perceived White privilege, Cronbach’s alpha = .84.
Beliefs about the importance of race: To assess participants’ beliefs about the importance of
race, we used a measure that was similar to the measure in Study 1. Specifically, we asked
participants two questions: (1) To what extent does the election of Barack Obama show that race
relations are no longer a problem in the United States? (2) To what extent does the election of
Barack Obama show that the United States does not need to worry about racial differences?
Participants responded to these two questions on 5-point Likert scales in which high scores
indicated greater belief that race is important and lower scores indicated weaker belief that race
is important. To ease interpretability of the results, we reverse scored the two items and then
averaged them together to create an overall assessment of participants’ beliefs about the meaning
of Obama’s election for race relations in the United States. Higher scores on this measure
!
17!
indicate greater endorsement of the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer
important in the United States. The correlation between these two items was r = .59.
Results
Means, standard deviations and correlations among study variables are presented in Table
2.
Because the SDO and White privilege scales were administered after the security of the
racial hierarchy manipulation, we tested whether this manipulation affected participants’ SDO
and White privilege scores. Independent samples t-tests examining the effect of the security of
the racial hierarchy manipulation on SDO and White privilege revealed no significant effect on
either SDO (t(45) = -.05, p = .96), or White privilege (t(45) = .40, p = .69).
We used hierarchical linear regression to evaluate our hypothesis that the relationship
between perceived White privilege and beliefs about the importance of race depends on both
Whites’ dominance motives and Whites’ perceptions of the security of the racial hierarchy.
Analytically, this translates into a three-way interaction among perceived White privilege, social
dominance orientation, and the security of the racial hierarchy manipulation on beliefs about the
importance of race. To test this prediction, we first mean-centered participants’ SDO and White
privilege scores. We also coded the security of the racial hierarchy manipulation as 1 = secure
and -1 = insecure. We created two-way interaction terms for each combination of our three
predictor variables as well as a three-way interaction among our three predictor variables. We
regressed participants’ beliefs about the importance of race on SDO, White privilege, and the
security of the racial hierarchy manipulation (entered on the first step), the two-way interaction
terms for each combination of our predictor variables (entered on the second step), and the three-
!
18!
way interaction of SDO, White privilege, and the security of the hierarchy manipulation (entered
on the third step).
We observed no overall effect of SDO, perceived White privilege, or the security of
hierarchy manipulation on beliefs about the importance of race. Furthermore, we observed no
two-way interactive effects on beliefs about the importance of race. However, as predicted, we
observed a significant SDO x perceived White privilege x security of hierarchy manipulation on
beliefs about the importance of race (β = -.50, t(39) = 2.22, p < .05).
In order to visualize the observed interaction, we plotted it in accordance with procedures
outlined by Aiken and West (1991). As can be seen in Figure 2, there was a significant
interactive effect between SDO and perceived White privilege on beliefs about the importance of
race when Whites perceived the racial hierarchy to be insecure (β = .55, t(18) = 2.30, p < .05),
but not when they perceived the racial hierarchy to be secure (β = -.16, t(24) = .86, p = ns). We
further probed the nature of the SDO x perceived White privilege interaction that emerged when
participants believed the racial hierarchy was insecure. Among low SDO Whites, there was no
relationship between perceived White privilege and beliefs about the importance of race (β = .59,
t(15) = 1.45, p=ns). However, in accordance with our predictions, among high SDO Whites,
there was a positive relationship between perceived White privilege and beliefs about the
importance of the race. Thus, when high SDO Whites perceived the racial hierarchy to be
insecure, the more White privilege they perceived the more they endorsed the belief that race is
no longer important in the United States (β = 1.18, t(15) = 2.36, p < .05).
Discussion
!
19!
Building on the findings from Study 1, Study 2 showed that only when concerns about the
security of the racial hierarchy are high were high SDO Whites’ perceptions of White privilege
and their endorsement of the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no longer a problem
positively related. The results align with the idea that beliefs about the meaning of Barack
Obama’s election for race relations in the United States may be motivated by a desire to protect
the racial hierarchy.
General Discussion
Whereas Obama’s election revealed to many this country’s commitment to racial
progress, for others it rendered obsolete social policies aimed at addressing racial inequalities. In
the wake of Obama’s election, opponents of race-preference policies began to evoke Obama’s
election in support of their opposition. Shannon Goessling, a prominent anti-affirmative action
activist turned to Obama’s election in her appeal to overturn the Voting Rights Act of 1965,
asking, “The question now is, at what point do we as society wipe the slate clean and accept that
we are equals with equal rights, equal treatment, and equal expectations” (Wallsten & Savage,
2009). In his quest to end race-preferences policies, Ward Connerly, questioned, "How can you
say there is institutional racism when people in Nebraska vote for a guy who is a self-identified
black man?" (Williams & Negrin, 2008). Following these examples, the present paper explored
whether the invoking beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s election has become a new way of
protecting the racial status quo.
In two studies, we provide evidence that white Americans—who seek to preserve the
racial hierarchy—use Barack Obama’s election in service of hierarchy-maintenance goals.
Among high SDO Whites, the belief that Whites receive unfair advantages because of their race
!
20!
was positively related to endorsement of the belief that Obama’s election means that race is no
longer a problem in the United States. However, this relationship held when high SDO Whites
believed that the racial hierarchy is insecure. To the extent that high SDO Whites believed that
minority groups viewed the racial hierarchy as legitimate, their perceptions of White privilege
became unrelated to their beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s election for race relations in the
United States. This pattern of results suggests that high SDO Whites may be motivated to
endorse beliefs about the meaning of Barack Obama’s election as a way to allay threats to the
racial hierarchy and to ultimately to protect the advantages that Whites receive because of their
racial group membership.
Although the results from Study 1 and Study 2 align with the contention that high SDO
Whites’ beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s election are motivated by a desire to protect the
racial hierarchy, there are a few limitations of these studies that temper the conclusions that can
be drawn from these results. First, in both studies the data were correlational, which suggest that
inferences of causality should be made with caution. In particular, it is unclear from the present
data if all Whites who have strong dominance motives were to perceive the same amount of
White privilege they would respond by endorsing beliefs that minimize the importance of race.
Without manipulating the level of perceived White privilege it cannot be known whether
endorsing beliefs that minimize the importance of race is a strategy that all high SDO Whites
employ, or whether the strategy is limited to high SDO Whites who also perceive White
privilege. In other words, is there something particular about the behaviors of Whites who both
posses group dominance motives and who admit that Whites receive unfair benefits because of
their race? In order to address this possibility, it is important for future research on this topic to
not just measure perceived White privilege, but to also manipulate it.
!
21!
A related question left unanswered by the present data is why high SDO Whites would
admit that they receive unfair benefits because of their race (an admittance that could potentially
threaten the racial hierarchy) only to then engage in behaviors to help secure the racial hierarchy
from this threat. Why would they not just deny that the existence of White privilege? One
potential explanation for this response pattern is that high SDO Whites want to see Whites as
advantaged, but they do not want others to see that Whites are advantaged. Individuals who are
high in SDO prefer hierarchical relations and desire that their group be on top of the hierarchy
(Pratto, et al., 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). They see nothing wrong with their group receiving
more than other groups, and in fact, they prefer this to be the case (Federico, et al., 2009; Pratto,
et al., 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Evidence that Whites receive advantages because of their
race may align with high SDO Whites’ ideas about how the division of resources between groups
should be, which leads them to acknowledge the existence of such biases. However, high SDO
Whites also recognize that the existence of White privilege could potentially undermine the
stability of the racial hierarchy. Thus, they also respond to evidence of White privilege by
endorsing beliefs that are aimed at altering other peoples’ perceptions of the racial hierarchy.
Although this explanation may seem overly complex, there is growing evidence that
hierarchy maintenance is more subtle and sophisticated than blatant and banal. High SDO
dominant group members have been shown to subvert their immediate short term-interests in the
service of more long-term hierarchy-maintenance goals. High SDO Whites have been shown to
support race-preference policies such as affirmative action if they believe that their support will
appease minority group-members and to secure the racial hierarchy (Hogan, Lowery, & Chow,
2009). Despite their dislike of then-candidate Barack Obama, high SDO Whites voted for Obama
when they saw that his election might be used as a way of minimizing efforts to attenuate the
!
22!
racial hierarchy (Knowles, et al., 2009). It has been suggested that this was due to high SDO
Whites perceiving that Obama’s election could help with hierarchy maintenance (Knowles, et al.,
2009). The results from the present studies substantiate this notion, showing that high SDO
Whites employ beliefs about the meaning of Obama’s election to help protect the hierarchy.
!
23!
Table 1: Means, standard deviations, and correlations about study variables (Study 1)
!
24!
Table 2: Means, standard deviations, and correlations among study variables (Study 2)
!
25!
Figure 1: SDO x perceived White Privilege on Beliefs about the Importance of Race (Study 1)
Perceived White Privilege
!
26!
Figure 2: SDO x perceptions of White privilege x Security of the Hierarchy Manipulation on
Beliefs about the importance of race (Study 2)
INSECURE HIERARHY
SECURE HIERARCHY
Perceived White Privilege
Perceived White Privilege
!
27!
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Auron, Y. (2003). The banality of denial : Israel and the Armenian genocide. New Brunswick,
NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Branscombe, N. R., Schmitt, M. T., & Schiffhauer, K. (2007). Racial attitudes in response to
thoughts of white privilege. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 203-215.
Case, K. A. (2007). Raising white privilege: Awareness and reducing racial prejudice: Assessing
diversity course effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 231-235.
Churchill, W. (1997). A little matter of genocide: Holocaust and denial in the Americas, 1492 to
the present. San Francisco City Lights Books.
Cox, T. (Writer) (2009). The Obama effect on closing the achievement gap [Radio], The Obama
Effect.
Effron, D. A., Cameron, J. S., & Monin, B. (2009). Endorsing Obama licenses favoring Whites.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 590-593.
Eibach, R., & Ehrilinger, J. (2006). "Keep your eyes on the prize": Reference points and racial
differences in assessing progress toward equality. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 32, 66-77.
Federico, C., Hunt, C. V., & Ergun, D. (2009). Political expertise, social worldviews, and
ideology: Translating "competitive jungles" and "dangerous worlds" into ideological
reality. Social Justice Research, 2009, 259–279
Hogan, C. M., Lowery, B. S., & Chow, R. M. (2009). Giving a little to keep a lot: Appeasement
as a hierarchy maintenance maneuver. Unpublished manuscript.
!
28!
Iyer, A., Leach, C. W., & Crosby, F. J. (2003). White guilt and racial compensation: The benefits
and limits of self-focus. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 117-129.
Kahn, K., Ho, A. K., Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (2009). The space between us and them:
Perceptions of status differences. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 591-604.
Kaiser, C. R., Drury, B. J., Spalding, K. E., Cheryan, S., & O'Brian, L. T. (2009). The ironic
consequences of Obama's election: Decreased support for social justice. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 556-559.
Kluegel, J. (1985). "If there isn't a problem, you don't need a solution": The bases of
contemporary affirmative action attitudes. American Behavioral Scientist, 28, 761-784.
Knowles, E. D., Lowery, B. S., & Schaumberg, R. L. (2009). Anti-egalitarians for Obama?
Group-dominance motivation and the Obama vote. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 45, 965-969.
Levine, R. S., Foster, J. E., Fullilove, R. E., Fullilove, M. T., Briggs, N. C., Hull, P. C., et al.
(2001). Black-white inequalities in mortality and life expectancy, 1933-1999:
Implications for healthy people 2010. Public Health Reports, 116, 474-483.
Lowery, B. S., Chow, R. M., Knowles, E. D., & Unzueta, M. M. (2007). When it hurts, let it go:
How inequity frames determine Whites' response to unearned dominance. Unpublished
manuscript.
Lowery, B. S., Knowles, E. D., & Unzueta, M. M. (2007). Framing inequality safely: Whites'
motivated perceptions of racial privilege. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33,
1237-1250.
!
29!
Marx, D. M., Ko, S. J., & Friedman, R. A. (2009). The "Obama Effect": How a salient role
model reduces race-based performance differences. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 45, 953-956.
Plant, E. A., Devine, P. G., Cox, W. T. L., Columb, C., Miller, S. L., Goplen, J., et al. (2009).
The Obama effect: Decreasing implicit prejudice and stereotyping. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 961-964.
Pratto, F., & Shih, M. (2000). Social dominance orientation and group context in implicit group
prejudiceq. Psychological Science, 11, 515-518.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A
personality variable relevant to social roles
and intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-793.
Saguy, T., Dovidio, J. F., & Pratto, F. (2008). Beyond contact: Intergroup contact in the context
of power relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 432-445.
Shapiro, T. M. (2004). The hidden cost of being African American: How wealth perpetuates
inequality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sidanius, J., Levin, S., Federico, C., & Pratto, G. N. (2001). Legitimizing ideologies: The social
dominance approach. In J. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy:
Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice and intergroup relations (pp. 307-331).
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Sidanius, J., Levin, S., Liu, J., & Pratto, F. (2000). Social dominance orientation, anti-
egalitarianism and the political psychology of gender: An extension and cross-cultural
replication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 41-67.
!
30!
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1993). Racisim and support for free-market capitalism: A cross-
cultural analysis. Political Psychology, 14, 381-401.
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Swim, J. K., & Miller, D. L. (1999). White guilt: Its antecedents and consequences for attitudes
toward affirmative action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 500-514.
von Hippel, W., von Hippel, C., Conway, L., Preacher, K. J., Schooler, J. W., & Radvansky, G.
A. (2005). Coping with stereotype threat: Denial as an impression management strategy.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 22-35.
Wallsten, P., & Savage, D. G. (2009, March 18, 2009). Conservatives invoke Obama in Voting
Rights Act challenge. Los Angeles Times,
Williams, J., & Negrin, M. (2008, March 18. 2008). Affirmative action foes point to Obama. The
Boston Globe,