In the Eyes of the Beholder: Perception of Colorblind Ideology Depends on the Identities of Both Endorser and Perceiver

Abstract

Colorblindness ideology suggests that we should minimize our attention to race in social discourse. Research on colorblindness is contradictory: it may lead to increased racial prejudice and legitimizing racial inequality in some cases, while diminishing preference for hierarchy in others. This paper investigates whether making colorblind statements (e.g. “I don’t see color”) increases the perception that a speaker is racially prejudiced, and whether this depends on the speaker’s race. We also test whether the underlying meaning of colorblind statements depend on the speaker’s race. In Study 1a (N = 86) and 1b (N=25), we ask participants to rate 8 speakers, who made either colorblind statements or control statements unrelated to race. The speakers who made each type of statements appeared to be either Black or White. Colorblind speakers were rated as more racially prejudiced when compared to control speakers. In Study 1a, this effect was clearly stronger for White speakers compared to Black speakers. In both 1a and 1b, White speakers were perceived to be more in denial of the social reality of race than Black speakers. Study 2 asked college students (N=192) to generate a single colorblind statement based on sample statements, This study presents results of exploratory analyses which suggest that colorblindness is interpreted differently by American vs. non-American students. Our findings suggest that (i) speaker’s race and (ii) perceiver’s cultural background contextualizes the interpretation of colorblind ideology, highlighting the role of perceived meaning as a potential mediator in evaluating a speaker’s perceived prejudice.