Objective: The current work explores the effects of racial miscategorization (incongruence between other people's racial categorization of an individual and that individual's racial self-identification) and subjective well-being of multiracial individuals in Hawai'i versus California. We set out to examine how multiracial individuals experience racial miscategorization in more or less ethnically diverse environments and how this experience shapes the extent to which they feel a sense of belonging and inclusion. Method: The study consisted of interviews with 55 multiracial undergraduate and graduate students conducted in Hawai'i (20 selfidentified women and 9 self-identified men, with ages ranging from 18 to 47 years; M = 22.93, SD = 6.40) and California (16 self-identified women, 9 self-identified men, and 1 self-identified gender nonbinary person, with ages ranging from 18 to 31 years; M = 20.96, SD = 2.76). Results: Thematic analysis identified two central themes relevant to subjective well-being: (a) racial miscategorization and its consequences and (b) contextual differences in the experiences of miscategorization. Results suggest that racial miscategorization is a pervasive experience among multiracial people and is associated with negative psychological well-being. We also found that environments with greater representation of multiracial individuals, such as Hawai'i, are associated with less racial miscategorization, more inclusion, and better psychological well-being among multiracial individuals. Conclusions: Racial miscategorization is a prominent and aversive experience among multiracial individuals, but multiracial environments can serve as a psychological buffer. Racial miscategorization has important theoretical and practical implications for racial and ethnic identity research, which we discuss. Public Significance StatementThis study advances the idea that multiracial individuals frequently face situations in which others' racial categorizations of them (e.g., White) differ from their own racial identification (e.g., White and Black). We label this phenomenon as "racial miscategorization" and find evidence that these frequent experiences negatively affect multiracial people's well-being. Contrasting qualitative data from focus groups in California to Hawai'i, this study reveals that racial miscategorization is less common in Hawai'i than in California, and that the social and demographic contexts of each location (e.g., representation of multiracial people) shape multiracial people's incorporation of these experiences. Together, these findings highlight the importance of studying processes related to miscategorization by others, and to include environmental factors in the analysis. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

No abstract

We leverage the emerging multiracial population to reexamine prominent theories of the American color line. A Black exceptionalism hypothesis suggests that Black heritage will be more restrictive of biracials' social and political assimilation prospects than Asian or Latino heritage. Black exceptionalism better explains biracials' sorting into the racial hierarchy than does classic assimilation theory or a people‐of‐color hypothesis. In the American Community Survey, Black heritage dominates subjective racial self‐identification among biracial adults and identity assignments to children of interracial marriages. In the 2015 Pew Survey of Multiracials, Black‐White biracials' social identity, social networks, perceptions and experiences of discrimination, and political attitudes relevant to race resemble those of monoracial Blacks, whereas Latino‐Whites and Asian‐Whites are more similar to monoracial Whites than to their minority‐group counterparts. Results suggest that even in a more racially mixed future, Black Americans will continue to be uniquely situated behind a most impermeable color line.

Today, identity expression and acceptance represent an important area of political advocacy and representation. Yet, how responsive are voters to new racial identity cues promoted by political leaders? Using candidates with interracial backgrounds as a case study, we assess whether voters are responsive to candidates who assert a mixed-race identity or if voters primarily rely on other traits, such as the candidate’s family background, in determining their support of that candidate. Using an experimental design, this study presents participants with various hypothetical candidates who vary both in their racial heritages (i.e., candidates with Asian and White interracial parents or Black and White interracial parents) and identity choices (i.e., as single-race minority, single-race White, or biracial). We then compare how the mixed-race, single-race minority, and White participants evaluate the candidate. We expect that the mixed-race participants will be most supportive of candidates who signal a common in-group identity by identifying specifically as “biracial”. On the other hand, the single-race minority and White participants should be more likely to adhere to the one-drop rule or hypodescent in their evaluations, meaning they will provide more positive evaluations of interracial candidates who identify as a single-race minority. Our study finds that the single-race minority and White participants completely overlook racial identity cues and instead focus on the description of the candidate’s family heritage along with their own assumptions about hypodescent. The mixed-race participants, on the other hand, show strong support for biracial-identified, in-group political candidates This study adds to a burgeoning literature on racial perception and on political representation.

No abstract