Across three experimental studies, we explored how a political candidate's intersections of skin tone, race, and ethnicity affect voting preferences and interpersonal judgments (e.g., warmth, trustworthiness, expertise). Study 1 assessed whether White participants would favor a light‐skinned (vs. dark‐skinned) African American candidate. Study 2 investigated participant (White vs. non‐White) voting preferences based on the interaction between candidate race/ethnicity and relative skin tone (lighter vs. darker). In Study 3, we examined the influence of candidate race/ethnicity on voters’ preferences as well as the accuracy and impact of memory for candidate skin tone. Supporting our hypotheses, White participants generally held more negative attitudes (e.g., expressed less warmth, perceived candidates as less trustworthy) and were less likely to vote for underrepresented candidates with darker skin tones than non‐White participants were. Additionally, voters remembered politicians as having a lighter skin tone, and the extent of such bias predicted warmth, perceived trustworthiness, and expertise of the candidate. While candidate race/ethnicity on its own did not affect voting preferences and attitudes, it significantly influenced voters when race/ethnicity was associated with certain skin tones (i.e., brown skin tone). Theoretical, practical, and political implications for judgments influenced by skin tone and race/ethnicity of candidates are discussed.

Researchers in diverse fields such as psychology, sociology, anthropology, and geography have extensivly researched push and pull factors that lead to human migrations (Castles et al., 2014) and the political and economic consequences that migrations have on both sending and receiving countries (Golash-Boza, 2015). However, experimental investigations of the social categorization of citizenship or legal status are scarce. Given the incidence of hate crimes against immigrants of color and reports of racial profiling of American citizens of color falsely categorized as undocumented immigrants, research on skin tone, perceptions of immigration status, and immigration policy is both timely and important. The purpose of the current study was to explore whether people's skin tone affects how perceivers categorize their immigration and legal status and the potential link between perceivers' support for stringent immigration policies and specific patterns of categorization. Results suggest that people with brown (vs white or black) skin were more likely to be perceived as undocumented immigrants and that perceivers' ratings of an individual with brown skin as more likely to be an undocumented immigrant predicted higher levels of support for harsh immigration policies. Taken together, the findings offer new insight into the importance of skin tone and its impact on the separation and stratification of people, informing research on intergroup relations, support for policy, and, importantly, social justice. Practical and political implications for judgments influenced by the social categorization based on skin tone are discussed.

Pursuing a more equitable political representation of a country's demographics is essential both as a matter of principle and pragmatism (i.e., realpolitik). As such, the goal of the present study was to replicate and expand on research on the impact of voter race/ethnicity and ideology on voting behaviors and interpersonal judgments of political candidates of color from different racial and ethnic groups. After participants (N = 282) saw the same political candidate of color (randomly assigned to identify as Mexican American vs. African American), we assessed interpersonal judgments and behaviors (e.g., expertise, voting intentions), perceived Americanness, and memory for skin tone of the candidate. In support of hypotheses and previous research/theory, white voters expressed more positive interpersonal judgments toward the African American political candidate and rated him to be more American than the Mexican American political candidate. We expanded upon previous research by directly testing the role of perceived Americanness in the differential judgments of political candidates’ race/ethnicity by white voters, with evidence supporting partial mediation. Our findings further showed that judgments toward a political candidate of color were also predicted by voters’ political affiliation. Specifically, conservative (vs. liberal) voters generally expressed less positive interpersonal judgments toward the candidates of color and perceived them to be less American and patriotic. Ramifications related to these findings are discussed.

Across two experimental university studies, we examined how small changes in language embedded in advising communications influence student outcomes (e.g., support, persistence) and explored the utility of advising micromessages congruent with growth mindset and appreciative advising for diverse student populations. We found that micromessages embedded within hypothetical advisor emails increased anticipated positive student outcomes, including feelings of support and persistence. In line with our hypotheses and attribution-based intervention research with nontraditional and/or marginalized students, the positive effect of micromessaging appears greater for first-generation students and students of color. This research highlights opportunities to shape consequential student outcomes through small, strategic language changes. Empowering advisors with thoughtfully crafted language improves students' sense of support and persistence and may reduce achievement gaps.