The Relationship Between Racial Prejudice and Cardiovascular Disease Mortality Risk at the State and County Level

Background Robust evidence shows that perceived discrimination among stigmatized groups is associated with negative health outcomes. However, little work has examined whether holding prejudiced attitudes toward others is associated with health risks for prejudiced individuals. Purpose The study is a test of the hypothesis that holding prejudicial attitudes has negative health implications for both the holders and targets of prejudicial attitudes. Methods The project connected data (2003–2015) at the state and county levels on average explicit and implicit prejudice held by White, Black, and Native American respondents from Project Implicit with data on cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality for White, Black, and Native American individuals from the CDC Wonder database. Separate analyses regressed implicit and explicit prejudice on CVD mortality risk for White, Black, and Native American individuals, respectively. Results At the state level, among White individuals, explicit prejudice toward Blacks (β = .431, p =.037) and implicit prejudice toward Native Americans (β = .283, p = .045) were positively associated with greater CVD mortality for Whites. At the county level, White individuals’ implicit prejudice toward Blacks (β =.081, p = .015) and Black individuals’ implicit prejudice toward Whites (β = −.066, p = .018) were associated with greater CVD mortality for Whites. Also, at the county-level, among Black individuals, higher implicit (β = −.133, p < .001) and explicit (β = −.176, p < .001) prejudice toward Whites predicted CVD mortality for Blacks. Moreover, explicit prejudice held by White individuals was positively associated with Blacks’ county-level CVD deaths (β = .074, p = .036). Conclusions This evidence suggests that across racial groups, holding racial prejudice is associated with CVD mortality risk for both the prejudiced and the stigmatized groups. Future research should verify the reliability of this potential public health effect with additional work explicating moderators and mediators to inform surveillance and interventions.

Implicit and Explicit Prejudice Are Related to Explicit Support for Politicians Who are Conservative, but not White or Male, Mostly Because They Promote Inequality

Recent studies show that explicit prejudice is related to explicit support for conservative and opposition for liberal politicians, regardless of their demographics such as race and gender. However, it remains unclear how prejudice is associated with evaluation of candidates on the implicit domain. Furthermore, prior theories assume that these associations exist because of the politicians’ preferences for inequality and status quo, but these assumptions have never been empirically tested. Four pre-registered experiments clarify that politicians’ ideology, not race or gender, determines the association between prejudice and explicit evaluation of politicians, regardless of whether prejudice is measured explicitly or implicitly. These preferences are primarily driven by citizens’ preferences for politicians who support inequality, and to a lesser extent, preferences for those who support the status quo. Together, these findings clarify the political consequences of racism and sexism and further our understanding of the psychological function of prejudice.

Public Attitudes and Private Prejudices: Assessing Voters’ Willingness to Vote for Out Lesbian and Gay Candidates

Our study concerns the factors leading to the electoral success and failure of LGBTQ candidates in the context of the changing nature of prejudices. We hypothesize that more positive views toward “respectability candidates,” as captured by familial status, has replaced explicit prejudice toward out LGBTQ candidates in societies where acceptance of sexual minorities in general has grown. In a survey experiment conducted with a sample of Canadian voters, one of the first countries to legalize marriage equality, we find suggestions that voters are more likely to reward lesbian and gay candidates who adopt heteronormative relationships (married with children vs. single) than those who do not. These patterns become more evident when we explore causal heterogeneity with controls for individual-level characteristics and attitudes that typically predict support toward lesbian and gay candidates. Here we find these predictors rewarded single lesbian and gay candidates, whereas lesbian and gay candidates with families were simply more supported across the board.

My Kind of Guy: Social Dominance Orientation, Hierarchy-Relevance, and Tolerance of Racist Job Candidates

Social psychology suggests that racism, as captured by explicit prejudice and racial discrimination, is perceived negatively in the United States. However, considering the hierarchy-enhancing nature of racism, it may be that negative perceptions of racism are attenuated among perceivers high in anti-egalitarian sentiment. The reported studies support this, suggesting that racist candidates were tolerated more and had relatively greater hireability ratings as a function of perceivers’ social dominance orientation (SDO; Studies 1–4). Candidate race did not impact these evaluations—only the hierarchy relevance of their actions did (i.e., whether the candidate’s behavior was hierarchy enhancing or had no clear implication for the hierarchy; Study 2). Furthermore, anti-racist candidates (e.g., those displaying hierarchy-attenuating behavior) were tolerated less and had lower hireability ratings as a function of perceivers’ SDO (Study 3). Finally, the perceived intentionality of the candidate’s actions affected tolerance toward them as a function of SDO. This suggests hierarchy relevance impacts evaluative outcomes.

How does ageism influence frailty? A preliminary study using a structural equation model

Background Based on the Stereotype Embodiment Theory (SET), this study aims to examine the mechanism of ageism on frailty through the proposed framework of “Experiences of Ageism (EA) → Age Stereotypes (AS) → Attitudes to Ageing (AA) → Frailty” using a structural equation model (SEM). Methods A community-based study involving 630 participants aged 60 years and older was conducted in Shanghai. EA, AS, AA and frailty status were assessed by validated scales. In particular, EA included three parts in this study, as the first part was the experiences of explicit prejudice or discrimination because of age, another two parts were the experiences of witnessed and encountered implicit negative age-based stereotypes. A SEM was performed to examine whether the proposed paths from EA to frailty were supported. Results EA had a significant indirect effect (β’ = .360*-.456*-.576 = .095, p < .001) on frailty through the path of “EA → AS → AA → Frailty” after controlling for covariates. AA had a direct effect (β = −.576, p < .001) on frailty; AS fully mediated the association between EA and AA (indirect effect = .360*-.456 = −.164, p < .001), and AA fully mediated the association between AS and frailty (indirect effect = −.456*-.576 = .263, p < .001). Conclusions These findings demonstrated a mechanism from ageism to frailty, and highlighted the potential threat of negative AS on health. Ageism and frailty are both great challenges for the process of healthy ageing.

Measuring Explicit Prejudice and Transphobia in Nursing Students and Professionals

Trans* people frequently report attitudes of prejudice/transphobia in health professionals. Conversely, health professionals indicate the lack of adequate training to care for these people and its impact on the quality of care provided. Objective: Our objective was to evaluate the explicit prejudices/transphobia of health students and professionals and compare them with the general population in Tenerife. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out with the Genderism and Transphobia Scale (GTS) and the Negative Attitude towards Trans* people Scale (EANT) with a total of 602 participants. Results: We found a low mean level of explicit prejudice/transphobia, with little/no differences between occupation groups. Explicit transphobia was correlated with being a man, less educated, and heterosexual, and not personally knowing a trans* person. Men and women were less transphobic about trans* people whose identities coincided with their own. Conclusion: All participants showed a low mean level of explicit transphobia. This result is not incompatible with unconscious prejudice, which may translate to discriminatory behaviors. Interventions to change negative attitudes are still needed, since even a small percentage of transphobic health professionals could exert a considerable negative impact on health care. In professionals without transphobic attitudes, the barriers identified by trans* people might be a problem due to the lack of specific training.

Giving the right direction: Predictive action cues during an attentional task reduce prejudice

The current work aims to investigate if social cueing during an attentional task is likely to influence prejudice. In three studies we adopted a Posner-like task whereby participants observed an outgroup (vs ingroup) member performing a reach-to-grasp movement. The individual’s action, oriented rightward or leftward toward an object, preceded a peripheral target stimulus requiring a simple categorization response. The action direction could be congruent or incongruent with target location. Unbeknownst to the participants, the action direction predicted the target location with different validities. We measured the identification with the ingroup (i.e., Italians) and the prejudice toward the outgroup (i.e., Iraqi). Results showed that, for highly identified participants, explicit prejudice toward Arabs was lower after predictive-congruent social cues provided by an outgroup member than after predictive-incongruent cues. Thus, these findings suggest that positive experience with an outgroup member, even when subtle, might be effective in changing attitudes toward the entire social category.

How does ageism influence frailty? A preliminary study using a structural equation model

Objectives: Based on the Stereotype Embodiment Theory (SET), this study aims to examine the mechanism of ageism on frailty through the proposed framework of "Experiences of Ageism (EA) → Age Stereotypes (AS) → Attitudes to ageing (AA) → Frailty" using a structural equation model (SEM). Methods: A community-based study involving 630 participants aged 60 years and older was conducted in Shanghai. EA, AS, AA and frailty status were assessed by validated scales. In particular, EA included three parts in this study, as the first part was the experiences of explicit prejudice or discrimination because of age, another two parts were the experiences of witnessed and encountered implicit negative age-based stereotypes. A SEM was performed to examine whether the proposed paths from EA to frailty were supported. Results: EA had a significant indirect effect (β'=.344×-.365×-.333=.023, p<.001) on frailty through the path of "EA → AS → AA → Frailty" after controlling for covariates. AA had a direct effect (β=-.337, p<.001) on frailty; AS fully mediated the association between EA and AA (indirect effect=.344×-.365=-.126, p<.001), and AA fully mediated the association between AS and frailty (indirect effect=-.365×-.333=.122, p<.001). Conclusions: These findings demonstrated a mechanism from ageism to frailty, and highlighted the potential threat of negative AS on health. Ageism and frailty are both great challenges for the process of healthy ageing.

Overestimating Explicit Prejudice Causes Democrats to Believe Disadvantaged Groups are Less Electable

Three studies show that Democrats overestimate the explicit prejudice of the American electorate, and thus see disadvantaged groups as less electable. Study 1 found that Democrats underestimated the percentage of Americans who say they would vote for presidential candidates from disadvantaged groups. Study 2 replicated this finding and demonstrated that Democrats who perceive high levels of explicit prejudice towards a group also believe presidential candidates from that group would be less electable. Moreover, Democrats who frequently interacted with Republicans had more accurate estimations of explicit prejudice. Study 3 found that correcting misperceptions about explicit prejudice made Democrats believe generic presidential candidates from disadvantaged groups would be more electable. We did not find evidence that correcting misperceptions affected beliefs about the electability of specific candidates in the 2020 Democratic Primary or support for these candidates.