2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2016.05.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

“Yuck, you disgust me!” Affective bias against interracial couples

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
67
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(74 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
6
67
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Multilevel modeling provides an appropriate alternative that does not suffer from these limitations because it incorporates and adjusts for each participant's reaction time on each individual trial using random effects of both participants and stimuli, greatly reducing Type I error rates (Judd, Westfall, & Kenny, 2012). Consequently, because the multilevel modeling approach leverages both within-and between-person variation in reaction times (Curran, Lee, Howard, Lane, & MacCallum, 2012), its use is becoming increasingly common in social psychology (e.g., Cho & Knowles, 2013;Van Bavel, Packer, Haas, & Cunningham, 2012;Zayas, Greenwald, & Osterhout, 2011) and has now been applied successfully to implicit bias data (e.g., Dunham, Baron, & Banaji, 2006;Skinner & Hudac, 2017;Van Bavel & Cunningham, 2009). In the current study the SAS PROC MIXED procedure (with Satterthwaite df) was used to implement multilevel models with random effects for both participants and IAT stimuli following the procedures outlined by Judd, Westfall, and Kenny (2012).…”
Section: Scoring and Analysis Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Multilevel modeling provides an appropriate alternative that does not suffer from these limitations because it incorporates and adjusts for each participant's reaction time on each individual trial using random effects of both participants and stimuli, greatly reducing Type I error rates (Judd, Westfall, & Kenny, 2012). Consequently, because the multilevel modeling approach leverages both within-and between-person variation in reaction times (Curran, Lee, Howard, Lane, & MacCallum, 2012), its use is becoming increasingly common in social psychology (e.g., Cho & Knowles, 2013;Van Bavel, Packer, Haas, & Cunningham, 2012;Zayas, Greenwald, & Osterhout, 2011) and has now been applied successfully to implicit bias data (e.g., Dunham, Baron, & Banaji, 2006;Skinner & Hudac, 2017;Van Bavel & Cunningham, 2009). In the current study the SAS PROC MIXED procedure (with Satterthwaite df) was used to implement multilevel models with random effects for both participants and IAT stimuli following the procedures outlined by Judd, Westfall, and Kenny (2012).…”
Section: Scoring and Analysis Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Romantic partners of similar physical attractiveness, in particular, are widely seen as having better relationships (e.g., deeper, happier, more balanced and cooperative) than dissimilar partners (Forgas 1993(Forgas , 1995. Likewise, romantic partners of similar racial appearance elicit more positive evaluations than dissimilar partners (Skinner and Hudac 2017;Skinner and Rae 2018). Even the same interpersonal behavior (e.g., an ambiguous shove) tends to be evaluated more favorably (e.g., more playful, less aggressive) when it unfolds between two people who look racially alike rather than different (Duncan 1976).…”
Section: The Psychological Properties Of Encounter-based Impressionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is also good reason to believe that variance in terms of impression functionality may not only be determined by what an impression is about, but also by what it feels like. Numerous studies indicate that spontaneous encounter-based impressions are often accompanied by rapid affective responses, ranging from anxiety, disgust, and eeriness (Neumeister et al 2017;Quadflieg et al 2016;Skinner and Hudac 2017;Vrtička et al 2012) to admiration, enjoyment, and warmth (Hamilton and Meston 2017;Seibt et al 2018). These affective responses seem to guide perceivers' own social intentions and/or actions particularly strongly.…”
Section: The Role Of Content Attributes In Forming Encounter-based Immentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, recent evidence suggests that individuals in interracial, versus same-race relationships, face additional burdens that may place them at greater risk for psychological distress (Childs 2005;Dalmage 2000;Tillman and Miller 2017;Wong and Penner 2018). Although interracial ties have become more accepted, a substantial portion of Americans continue to disapprove of interracial romance (Carroll 2007;Herman and Campbell 2012;Skinner and Hudac 2017). Consequently, individuals in interracial relationships are likely to face microaggressions, discrimination, and stigma from people who disapprove of their union (Solsberry 1994;Bonilla-Silva and Forman 2000;Skinner and Hudac 2017).…”
Section: Depression In Same-race and Interracial Relationshipsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although interracial ties have become more accepted, a substantial portion of Americans continue to disapprove of interracial romance (Carroll 2007;Herman and Campbell 2012;Skinner and Hudac 2017). Consequently, individuals in interracial relationships are likely to face microaggressions, discrimination, and stigma from people who disapprove of their union (Solsberry 1994;Bonilla-Silva and Forman 2000;Skinner and Hudac 2017). For example, Dalmage (2000) finds that many interracially dating White youth report experiencing racism in ways that undermines their ideas of fairness and equality, and many young adults engaged in interracial unions report hiding their relationship from friends and family (Wang et al 2006).…”
Section: Depression In Same-race and Interracial Relationshipsmentioning
confidence: 99%