Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election

被引:130
作者
Payne, B. Keith [1 ]
Krosnick, Jon A. [2 ]
Pasek, Josh [2 ]
Lelkes, Yphtach [2 ]
Akhtar, Omair [2 ]
Tompson, Trevor [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Dept Psychol, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Associated Press, Washington, DC 20005 USA
关键词
Implicit prejudice; Political psychology; Attitudes; Social cognition; ASSOCIATION TEST; PREDICTIVE-VALIDITY; RACIAL-ATTITUDES; VARIABILITY; BEHAVIOR;
D O I
10.1016/j.jesp.2009.11.001
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The 2008 US presidential election was all unprecedented opportunity to study the role of racial prejudice in political decision making Although explicitly expressed prejudice has declined dramatically during the last four decades. more subtle implict forms of prejudice (which come to mind automatically and may influence behavior unintentionally) may still exist In three surveys of representative samples of American adults, explicit and Implicit prejudice were measured during the months preceding the election Both explicit and implicit prejudice were significant predictors of later vote choice Citizens higher in explicit prejudice were less likely to vote for Barack Obama and more likely to vote for John McCain After controlling for explicit prejudice. citizens higher in Implicit prejudice were less likely to vote for Obama, but were not more likely to vote for McCain Instead. they were more likely to either abstain or to vote for a third-party candidate rather than Obama The results Suggest that racial prejudice may continue to influence the voting process even among people who would not endorse these attitudes (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:367 / 374
页数:8
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   Attributions of implicit prejudice, or "would Jesse Jackson 'fail' the implicit association test?" [J].
Arkes, HR ;
Tetlock, PE .
PSYCHOLOGICAL INQUIRY, 2004, 15 (04) :257-278
[2]   THE MODERATOR MEDIATOR VARIABLE DISTINCTION IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL-RESEARCH - CONCEPTUAL, STRATEGIC, AND STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
BARON, RM ;
KENNY, DA .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (06) :1173-1182
[3]  
BECK G, 2008, VOTING OBAMA DOESNT
[4]   A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice [J].
Crandall, CS ;
Eshleman, A .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2003, 129 (03) :414-446
[5]   Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction [J].
Dovidio, JF ;
Kawakami, K ;
Gaertner, SL .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 82 (01) :62-68
[6]   Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use [J].
Fazio, RH ;
Olson, MA .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2003, 54 :297-327
[7]   VARIABILITY IN AUTOMATIC ACTIVATION AS AN UNOBTRUSIVE MEASURE OF RACIAL-ATTITUDES - A BONA-FIDE PIPELINE [J].
FAZIO, RH ;
JACKSON, JR ;
DUNTON, BC ;
WILLIAMS, CJ .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1995, 69 (06) :1013-1027
[8]   Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change [J].
Gawronski, Bertram ;
Bodenhausen, Galen V. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2006, 132 (05) :692-731
[9]  
GREENWALD AG, 2008, ANAL SOCIAL IN PRESS
[10]   Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity [J].
Greenwald, Anthony G. ;
Poehlman, T. Andrew ;
Uhlmann, Eric Luis ;
Banaji, Mahzarin R. .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2009, 97 (01) :17-41