Included but Invisible? Subtle Bias, Common Identity, and the Darker Side of "We"

This article discusses how seemingly well‐intended policies and interventions to reduce intergroup bias by emphasizing colorblindness through overarching commonalities between groups may, either unintentionally or strategically, inhibit efforts to address group‐based inequities. First, we discuss th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSocial issues and policy review Vol. 10; no. 1; pp. 6 - 46
Main Authors Dovidio, John F., Gaertner, Samuel L., Ufkes, Elze G., Saguy, Tamar, Pearson, Adam R.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Hoboken Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.01.2016
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:This article discusses how seemingly well‐intended policies and interventions to reduce intergroup bias by emphasizing colorblindness through overarching commonalities between groups may, either unintentionally or strategically, inhibit efforts to address group‐based inequities. First, we discuss the roots of bias in social categorization process, and how changing the way people think about group memberships from separate groups to members of the same group with shared identity improves intergroup attitudes. Second, we describe the subtle nature of contemporary biases, which can help obscure group‐based inequities. Third, we explain how and why majority and minority groups may have different preferences for recategorization and consider the potential consequences of these different perspectives for recognizing and addressing disparity and discrimination. We conclude by considering the policy and structural implications of these processes for achieving more equitable societies, not only in principle but also in practice.
Bibliography:ArticleID:SIPR12017
istex:C0EBEA37F43D572F1A70A1CB028D99366E2151FB
ark:/67375/WNG-9HKZQMFT-9
ISSN:1751-2395
1751-2409
DOI:10.1111/sipr.12017