WHITES UNDERESTIMATE THE COSTS OF BEING BLACK, STUDY FINDS
COLUMBUS, Ohio – How much do white Americans think it “costs” to be black in our society, given the problems associated with racial bias and prejudice?
The answer, it appears, is not much.
When white Americans were asked to imagine how much they would have to be paid to live the rest of their lives as a black person, most requested relatively low amounts, generally less than $10,000.
In contrast, study participants said they would have to be paid about $1 million to give up television for the rest of their lives.
The results suggest most white Americans don't truly comprehend the persisting racial disparities in our country, said Philip Mazzocco, co-author of the study and assistant professor of psychology at Ohio State University's Mansfield campus.
“The costs of being black in our society are very well documented,” Mazzocco said. “Blacks have significantly lower income and wealth, higher levels of poverty, and even shorter life spans, among many other disparities, compared to whites.”
For example, white households average about $150,000 more wealth than the typical black family. Overall, total wealth for white families is about five times greater than that of black families, a gap that has persisted for years.
“When whites say they would need $1 million to give up TV, but less than $10,000 to become black, that suggests they don't really understand the extent to which African Americans, as a group, are disadvantaged,” Mazzocco said.
These results also offer insight as to why more than 9 out of 10 white Americans reject proposals to give reparations to the descendants of slaves, said study co-author Mahzarin Banaji, the Cabot Professor of Social Ethics at Harvard University.
“Our data suggest that such resistance is not because white Americans are mean and uncaring, morally bankrupt, or ethically flawed,” Banaji said.
“White Americans suffer from a glaring ignorance about what it means to live as a black American.”
The study appears in the current issue of Harvard's Du Bois Review.
The researchers did a series of studies in which a total of 958 whites of different ages and from different parts of the country were asked variations of the same question: “How much should you be paid to continue to live the rest of your life as a black person?”
In most cases, the participants were told to imagine they were actually black, but had always passed for white. The imagined race change required no physical transformation, just a change in public status.
They were also asked how much they should be paid for giving up television, and how much they should be given to change their officially listed state residency (without having to move). These questions were asked, Mazzocco said, to compare what people requested for relatively trivial changes, like a new listed state residency, as compared to a more life-changing request, like giving up television.
Results suggest white people considered a race change as relatively trivial, along the lines of a change in official state residency, as opposed to the seemingly big sacrifice of giving up television.
In some of the studies, the researchers changed the scenario in order to learn more about what white Americans thought about the costs of racial disparities.
One issue with the previous scenario is that participants may minimize the disparities they would face as a black person, because they had always passed as white. So in one study, whites were told to imagine that they were about to be born as a random white person in America, but they were being offered a cash gift to be born as a random black person. Once again, white participants requested relatively small sums to make a life-long race-change. In addition, some were given a list of some of the costs of being black in America, such as the racial wealth disparity. The result was that whites in this latter scenario requested significantly higher amounts than those in the previous studies – about $500,000.
Finally, some participants were given a similar scenario except all references to blacks, whites and America were taken out. They were asked to imagine they were born into the fictional country of Atria, and were born either into the “majority” or “minority” population. They were given a list of the disadvantages that the minority population faced in Atria (which were identical to the real disadvantages faced by blacks in America). In this case, white participants in the study said they should be paid an average of $1 million to be born as a minority member in Atria.
“When you take it out of the black-white context, white Americans seem to fully appreciate the costs associated with the kinds of disparities that African Americans actually face in the United States,” Mazzocco said. “In this case, they asked for a million dollars, similar to what they want for giving up television.”
Mazzocco said blatant prejudice was not the reason for the findings. Results showed that whites who scored higher on a measure of racial prejudice did not answer significantly differently than others in the study.
The researchers are conducting new studies to examine more closely why whites do underestimate the costs of being black. Mazzocco believes many white Americans have a perception that race bias in the United States has been virtually eliminated, and that blacks are no longer disadvantaged.
“While there has been progress in making racial conditions in American more equal, there's clearly a lot more work to be done,” he said. “Blacks and whites are not experiencing the same America.”
When whites do understand the extent of racial disparities in the United States, they are more likely to support reparations. The findings showed that whites who wanted more money to be publicly recognized as black – suggesting they understood the true costs of racial disparity – were more likely than others to say they would support reparations.
But there are many reasons why nearly all whites oppose reparations. Mazzocco said some whites may believe slavery happened so long ago that slave descendants today don't deserve to be compensated. The researchers examined the “too long ago” rationale in another study.
The researchers asked participants to imagine that their great, great grandfather, a wealthy shipping magnate, had been kidnapped about 150 years ago. The kidnappers demanded and received a large ransom that bankrupted the shipping magnate. That ransom was used to start a successful company that still survives today and is worth $100 million. Participants were asked whether they would be willing to be a part of a large suit against the present-day company that could net them each about $5,000.
In this scenario, 61 percent agreed to have their names listed on the lawsuit. The researchers noted that this is about the percentage of blacks today who support reparations for slave descendants.
“When white Americans find it within themselves to say ‘I must be compensated for a past injustice done to me' but the same logic evaporates when the injustice concerns black Americans, they are staring straight at bias,” Banaji said.
Mazzocco said the results of this research have implications for the fledgling reparations movement in America. “Surveys show that 90 to 96 percent of white Americans are against slave descendant reparations. It is nearly impossible to get that many people to agree on anything, so it is an issue that really deserves attention to see why that is. We wanted to take a heated and emotional issue and look at it through a scientific lens,” he said.
The research was facilitated by a postdoctoral fellowship to Mazzocco from Ohio State's Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity.
Other co-authors of the study included Timothy Brock of Ohio State, Gregory Brock of Georgia Southern University and Kristina Olson of Harvard.
Joined: 13 Mar 2007 {Posts: 261 } Location: Canada
Posted: Mon 06 Aug 2007 14:05 Post subject:
"One could infer from the article that bias against blacks is the sole reason for lower average incomes, higher school drop out rates, etc."
Bias need not be a matter of direct immediate bias. It can also be historical and accumulative. Unless one believes that people of African origin are geneticly wired to fail in modern society, then bias is the force that shapes the failures that can occur.
(I'd like to add as a footnote that the world is full of thieves, con-artists, adulterers, cheats, etc. it doesn't mean that there are more of these people in poorer communities only that the poor do not work their trespasses within a system or have a social support net to put a spin on their weaknesses. Examples of what I mean would be the high ranking evangelist who was buying drugs and male sex or the Republican who was propositioning the underage Congress pages. Their conduct was horrendous but they will still be supported within their communities to some extent. They were born within a system of support.)
"The author also seems to be suggesting that if whites were more aware of the cost of being black, then somehow these costs would decrease."
I think it would decrease, (although not as much as if "white" people suddenly realized that there are no such things as "white" and "black".) "White" as a social contruct involves a way of thinking and a way of seeing the world. One important component of being "white" is the disconnect from "black." Any lessening of this disconnect in even tiny expressions of empathy would make things better.
Also some of the most harmful racial biases are not from direct racism like the nut-job neo-nazi but are unrecognized daily interactions as well as systemic.
"Finally, as Salassin alluded to above, these kinds of studies assume that there are no differences within groups only between them."
I think that these kinds of "racial" studies operate within existing American thought patterns. There is "white" and there is "black" and it's as simple as that.
What I found important about this study was that it clearly demonstrated the disconnected "white-think" that I've been thinking about recently.
I think that these kinds of "racial" studies operate within existing American thought patterns. There is "white" and there is "black" and it's as simple as that.
Which would be highly inaccurate.
Quote:
What I found important about this study was that it clearly demonstrated the disconnected "white-think" that I've been thinking about recently.
Is it a disconnect? Or do they see the disparity within their own population and therefore question the claims of the studies themselves. Until those differences are factored in, one cannot make a claim of disconnect with reality as reality has not been directly addressed.
Bias need not be a matter of direct immediate bias. It can also be historical and accumulative. Unless one believes that people of African origin are geneticly wired to fail in modern society, then bias is the force that shapes the failures that can occur.
It's a common assumption to conclude that the problems of blacks (actually the problems of a segment of the black population) if not due to genetics must be due primarily or exclusively to some kind of bias (immediate, historical, or accumulative). It cannot, for example, be due to public policy failures or things of that nature. If bias were THE cause of myriad problems facing black America we would have to come up with reasons why most black people in the U.S. aren’t poor and such things as crime rates, teenage pregnancy, homicide rates, etc., were much lower in the past when bias was more rampant and blatant.
Patience wrote:
(I'd like to add as a footnote that the world is full of thieves, con-artists, adulterers, cheats, etc. it doesn't mean that there are more of these people in poorer communities only that the poor do not work their trespasses within a system or have a social support net to put a spin on their weaknesses. Examples of what I mean would be the high ranking evangelist who was buying drugs and male sex or the Republican who was propositioning the underage Congress pages. Their conduct was horrendous but they will still be supported within their communities to some extent. They were born within a system of support.)
I have no idea what being born within a system of support means or which communities you are referring to in this context. Would this extend to, say, Marion Barry who is unequivocally supported by large segments of Washington DC’s black community when he was busted for smoking crack?
Patience wrote:
I think it would decrease, (although not as much as if "white" people suddenly realized that there are no such things as "white" and "black".) "White" as a social contruct involves a way of thinking and a way of seeing the world. One important component of being "white" is the disconnect from "black." Any lessening of this disconnect in even tiny expressions of empathy would make things better.
Your statement assumes that everyone believes that white (and race) is a social construct and that part of this construct is a “disconnect” from black. Additionally, it is assumed that white also involves a way of looking at the world. The statement fails to take into consideration that many people believe race is real and white and black represent races plain and simple. Furthermore, many people who see themselves as white have nevertheless committed themselves in one way or another to the advancement of blacks in U.S. society. For example, New England Baptist missionaries who established schools for the freedmen after the civil war, white civil rights workers, etc. All of these people were white, saw themselves as such, but were hardly disconnected from blacks.
Also, one need not be or think “white” to be disconnected from blacks or lack empathy for them. Many newer Americans from non-western societies are not above voicing their lack of empathy for American blacks, despite not seeing themselves as white people. Indeed, some have shown themselves recently to be capable of unabashed violence towards black Americans that would have been commonplace in some parts white America 40 years ago.
Finally, the quoted paragraph concludes that the “costs” of being black as defined by the article could be ameliorated simply by whites recognizing these costs. Putting aside the fact that many whites already recognize these costs and more do today than in the past, how would the cost of poor schools black many black children attend be addressed if whites simply recognized this as a cost for black Americans? How about the cost of high homicide rates in the black community? In the past when whites were less empathetic, some of these costs that affect black America were less severe or non-existent.
Joined: 13 Mar 2007 {Posts: 261 } Location: Canada
Posted: Mon 06 Aug 2007 19:04 Post subject:
"It's a common assumption to conclude that the problems of blacks (actually the problems of a segment of the black population) if not due to genetics must be due primarily or exclusively to some kind of bias (immediate, historical, or accumulative). It cannot, for example, be due to public policy failures or things of that nature. If bias were THE cause of myriad problems facing black America we would have to come up with reasons why most black people in the U.S. aren’t poor and such things as crime rates, teenage pregnancy, homicide rates, etc., were much lower in the past when bias was more rampant and blatant."
Our understanding of the word 'bias' is different. To me it includes institutions and public policy that are born out of a society were individual and group bias prevails.
"I have no idea what being born within a system of support means or which communities you are referring to in this context. Would this extend to, say, Marion Barry who is unequivocally supported by large segments of Washington DC’s black community when he was busted for smoking crack?"
I don't know this story, but accepting it as you tell it, then yes this would be an example of similar social support net. The same thing can be seen in the "black" community for those who have attained a certain level of social status and have made the right connections.
"Your statement assumes that everyone believes that white (and race) is a social construct and that part of this construct is a “disconnect” from black. Additionally, it is assumed that white also involves a way of looking at the world. The statement fails to take into consideration that many people believe race is real and white and black represent races plain and simple."
I'm well aware that there are many people who believe in race, but believing does not make it real. Race was a scientific theory that has long been discounted. It is my opinion that people who still believe whole heartedly in the theory of racial divisions, do so for their own personal satisfaction.
Perhaps I am just an evolutionist on a creationist website and should move on?
"Furthermore, many people who see themselves as white have nevertheless committed themselves in one way or another to the advancement of blacks in U.S. society. For example, New England Baptist missionaries who established schools for the freedmen after the civil war, white civil rights workers, etc. All of these people were white, saw themselves as such, but were hardly disconnected from blacks."
Can we know how these long dead individuals would view themselves in terms of racialism? I'm certain there were some who felt a deep and sincere human connection to those they wished to help. For others it was a matter of indulging in the power of patronization ---- taking pity on lesser creatures of God. In their Christian beliefs they were completing tasks which they believed would get them to heaven.
"Also, one need not be or think “white” to be disconnected from blacks or lack empathy for them. Many newer Americans from non-western societies are not above voicing their lack of empathy for American blacks, despite not seeing themselves as white people. Indeed, some have shown themselves recently to be capable of unabashed violence towards black Americans that would have been commonplace in some parts white America 40 years ago."
I'm sure this happens but it's not the topic at hand.
"Finally, the quoted paragraph concludes that the “costs” of being black as defined by the article could be ameliorated simply by whites recognizing these costs. "
Unfortunately I don't have access to the actual study itself, but their conclusion seems only to be that in America "white" people have very little concept of the costs of being "black." I guess there is an assumption that bridging this gap would be a positive achievement socially.
There are some political overtones in the article especially in the comments about reparation payments, but overall I think there are several very important observations made.
"Your statement assumes that everyone believes that white (and race) is a social construct and that part of this construct is a “disconnect” from black. Additionally, it is assumed that white also involves a way of looking at the world. The statement fails to take into consideration that many people believe race is real and white and black represent races plain and simple."
I'm well aware that there are many people who believe in race, but believing does not make it real. Race was a scientific theory that has long been discounted. It is my opinion that people who still believe whole heartedly in the theory of racial divisions, do so for their own personal satisfaction.
Perhaps I am just an evolutionist on a creationist website and should move on?
Actually my point was if white is simply a way of thinking that involves a "disconnect' from blacks, then as A.D. Powell mentioned in an earlier topic/post, there can be no such thing as an anti-racist white. Also, for many people white is simply a racial group that doesn't denote any kind of way of looking at the world unique to those so labeled. Much of what we don’t like about white people can be found in other races or groups.
Patience wrote:
Can we know how these long dead individuals would view themselves in terms of racialism? I'm certain there were some who felt a deep and sincere human connection to those they wished to help. For others it was a matter of indulging in the power of patronization ---- taking pity on lesser creatures of God. In their Christian beliefs they were completing tasks which they believed would get them to heaven.
But if we cannot accurately discern the motivations behind whites engaged in behavior we find positive, how then can we conclude with certainty that being white is a mindset that consists of a particular way of looking at the world and involves a disconnect from black people? Moreover, are non-whites who can be even more disconnected from blacks acting white if they are "disconnected" from them? Or are they simply acting tribal like most humans? For example, are Chicanos in Los Angeles who are violently pushing black people out of areas they wish to control acting white, even though they proudly proclaim themselves Aztecs? Are whites who feel empathy for blacks acting non-white?
Joined: 13 Mar 2007 {Posts: 261 } Location: Canada
Posted: Tue 07 Aug 2007 13:25 Post subject:
"Actually my point was if white is simply a way of thinking that involves a "disconnect' from blacks, then as A.D. Powell mentioned in an earlier topic/post, there can be no such thing as an anti-racist white. Also, for many people white is simply a racial group that doesn't denote any kind of way of looking at the world unique to those so labeled. Much of what we don’t like about white people can be found in other races or groups."
I believe that this disconnect from people considered "black" is a big part of the "white" identity but not its entirety. Outside of the mind, "white" really does not exist. It cannot be proven to exist. So I have begun to analyze what makes up the thought of "I am white."
Note: I think the ideas of "white" and "black" are equally harmful but because the social status involved in being "white" gives them more power to make change, that's where my thinking is. Also in my own personal life I am surrounded by people who if not directly than indirectly have the "white" idenity, so I have more practical knowledge on this subject than on the thought "I am black."
"But if we cannot accurately discern the motivations behind whites engaged in behavior we find positive, how then can we conclude with certainty that being white is a mindset that consists of a particular way of looking at the world and involves a disconnect from black people? Moreover, are non-whites who can be even more disconnected from blacks acting white if they are "disconnected" from them? Or are they simply acting tribal like most humans? For example, are Chicanos in Los Angeles who are violently pushing black people out of areas they wish to control acting white, even though they proudly proclaim themselves Aztecs? Are whites who feel empathy for blacks acting non-white?"
It's true that we cannot see into the souls of any other human being, and people all the time have hidden agendas and motivations. In the end only God knows who is lying and who is not.
The identity of "white" is very much a tribal concept, the same as is "black." I can't say how the Chicanos have been influenced by these opposing identities because I know nothing about their culture. Perhaps the existence of these constructs assisted in the creation of the Aztec identity. America cannot be a true melting pot when all people are forcefully slotted into racial/ethnic identities.
You ask if "whites who feel empathy for blacks are acting non-white?" It's not really a question of acting "non-white" or "non-black." I think that if there is a sincere empathy, human for human, than those people would be moving away emotionally and mentally from the "white" and "black" constructs.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
