Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
Messages about the uniqueness and similarities of people: Impact on U.S. Black and Latino youth☆
Introduction
In the 21st Century, intergroup tensions continue to create barriers to the learning, development, and future outcomes of children of all backgrounds (e.g., National Science and Technology Council, 1997). Favoring one's own group (ingroup) over other groups (outgroups) begins in childhood, and cross-race friendships that do form tend to dissipate by early adolescence (see Aboud & Amato, 2001, for a review). Fortunately, researchers and educators continue to develop and test anti-bias strategies (see Levy et al., 2004, Stephan, 1999), and organizations continue to fund public anti-bias announcements and materials (e.g., Anti-defamation League, 2004, Southern Poverty Law Center, 2004). One long-standing conceptual controversy across basic and applied anti-bias work is whether to focus people's attention on their similarities to others or differences with others (e.g., Allport, 1954, Banks, 1995, Stephan, 1999). Some contemporary work has tested a hybrid anti-bias message focusing on how people are both similar and different (e.g., Gaertner et al., 1993, Jones & Foley, 2003, Wolsko et al., 2000). Fueling the controversy, there is some evidence supporting the effectiveness of all three approaches.
Yet anti-bias efforts, especially those funded by private agencies that impact millions of U.S. children (e.g., Anti-defamation League, 2004, Southern Poverty Law Center, 2004), are often implemented without an assessment of their effectiveness, and, when assessed, the sample of participants tends to be predominately White (e.g., see Levy et al., 2004, Stephan, 1999). Although attempting to increase social tolerance among Whites is consistent with the idea of targeting those who have historically been the perpetuators of racism in the U.S., an understanding of how these commonplace anti-bias messages are perceived by all members of society who receive them is needed (see Shelton, 2000), especially with the increasing diversity of our youth (U. S. Bureau of the Census, 2002). Moreover, anti-bias messages emphasizing similarities (e.g., “everyone is basically the same”), differences (e.g., “each person is unique”), or both (e.g., “all people are the same in a way, but each person is also unique”) likely have different implications for members of different groups (e.g., Van Oudenhoven et al., 1998, Verkuyten, 2005; also see Markus et al., 2002, Stephan, 1999).
Thus, a primary goal of the present investigation was to assess the impact of these ways of framing messages about uniqueness and similarity on the social attitudes of Blacks and Latinos, two of the largest racial and ethnic numerical minority groups in the U.S.
The message that “everyone is basically the same” blurs the distinctions between groups, presumably removing the basis for prejudice (e.g., Allport, 1954, Gaertner et al., 1989). Similarity generally leads to liking (e.g., Byrne, 1971) and thus should facilitate liking of others who otherwise would be viewed as outgroup members. In popular discourse, the “melting pot” metaphor suggests that differences between people immigrating to the U.S. will eventually melt away as they all become Americans (Allport, 1954, p. 517). Educators, for example, have attempted to assimilate and “Americanize” immigrant children (e.g., see Garcia & Hurtado, 1995). The utility of the similarities message is supported by some developmental and social psychological research.
According to the cognitive developmental approach (e.g., Aboud, 1988, Bigler & Liben, 1993, Katz, 1973), at around age eight, children acquire the ability to perceive similarities between members of different groups and, in turn, their prejudice decreases (e.g., Black-Gutman & Hickson, 1996, Doyle & Aboud, 1995). Once achieved, the skill may not always be utilized; thus, it can be strengthened through intervention (e.g., see Levy, 1999). The “similarities” message in diverting people's attention from group information (e.g., race information) also achieves a goal of the long-standing colorblind approach. That is, the colorblind approach suggests that race differences are superficial, irrelevant, and uninformative bases to make judgments of people; hence, race should be ignored (e.g., Jones, 1997, Neville et al., 2000, Schofield, 1986). In one supportive experiment, Houser (1978) examined the effects of viewing films that suggested that “appearance or color should not be considered important in relating to others” (p. 119) on the prejudice of five- to nine-year-old racially and ethnically diverse U.S. children (Black, Mexican, Asian, & White). One film depicted the story of two puppets that were best friends until they realized that one had stripes and the other had spots. The toymaker reunited the friends by emphasizing their similarities, namely that they were both created by him. Although the film clips were brief (each 10–15 min), children who watched either or both films, compared to children who did not view any films, assigned more positive (e.g., hardest worker) and less negative (e.g., steals) attributes to drawings of Black, Asian, and Latino children, relative to drawings of White children. Analyses were not conducted separately by the ethnicity of the children; therefore, it is unclear whether social tolerance was improved for all participants.
Focusing on the similarity of people is also a main component of the Common Ingroup Identity Model of Gaertner et al. (e.g., Gaertner et al., 1989, Gaertner et al., 1993), which has been tested mostly with White adults, showing that a common ingroup identity (“we”), which transcends intergroup distinctions (“us” vs. “them”), can improve intergroup attitudes. For instance, in a four-week field experiment, Houlette et al. (2004) exposed U.S. children, ages six to eight, to classroom lessons encouraging the formation of a larger “circle of caring” to include people with various diverse characteristics (e.g., race, gender, body shape) and qualities, all of whom “share the same human feelings” (p. 40). Participants' preference for people who differed from themselves increased between pre- and post-test. Control participants, who received no such lessons, instead demonstrated the opposite pattern, preferring people similar to themselves to a greater degree at post-test relative to pre-test. Participants were mostly White; thus, Houelette et al. were limited in their ability to examine the effects of the participant's race on the results.
Although promising both in theory and in the evidence with mostly White children and adults, the similarities message appears less suited to members of disadvantaged groups. A similarities message, in blurring group distinctions in a society still wrought with racism, can communicate that one does not notice or care about persistent racism (e.g., Jones, 1997, Neville et al., 2000, Schofield, 1986). From a young age, disadvantaged and stigmatized group members are indeed aware that their group is viewed and treated differently — even more aware than more advantaged group members (e.g., McKown, 2004, McKown & Weinstein, 2003). Further, emphasizing a common identity seems inappropriate for ethnic youth, such as African Americans, whose ethnicity can be key to their identity development and who rate their ethnic identity as more important than do White students (e.g., see Gonzales & Cauce, 1995).
Accordingly, the similarities theory could have a negative impact on people's views of discriminated-against groups, including their own group, and could lead to negative feelings toward the dominant group, for trying to “cover up” persistent racism and for threatening their valued group identity (e.g., see Jones, 1997, Markus et al., 2002). There is some evidence that more advantaged racial/ethnic group members show stronger endorsement of the similarities view (see Gonzales & Cauce, 1995, Van Oudenhoven et al., 1998, Verkuyten, 2005). Further, educational efforts to assimilate diverse communities, implicitly into a “white, middle-class mainstream culture,” have not been successful (see Garcia & Hurtado, 1995, p.163).
A message about differences among people represents the opposite end of the spectrum and thus directly addresses some weaknesses of the similarities message. Like its counterpart, the differences message has a long history in social discourse in the U.S. and is supported by some developmental and social psychological research. One version of the differences message, which is a focus of the present investigation, is the uniqueness of people. It is captured by popular U.S. proverbs such as “You can't tell a book by its cover,” and fits with the American emphasis on the individual. The unique message is also a derivative of the colorblind approach in that ignoring racial group information can be expressed by stressing individual differences.
The main message of a key intergroup contact model in social psychology, Brewer and Miller's Decategorization Model (Brewer & Miller, 1984), is that individualizing or personalizing members of other groups can improve relations by taking the focus off group membership, thereby facilitating cooperation and friendship. Furthermore, the unique message has roots in the cognitive developmental theorizing that the abilities to perceive differences within the same group (Doyle & Aboud, 1995, Katz et al., 1975) and classify others on multiple dimensions (Bigler & Liben, 1993, Katz et al., 1975) develop around age eight, are related to reduced prejudice, and can be strengthened as part of prejudice reduction interventions.
In one supportive experiment, Katz (1973) trained seven- and eleven-year-old Black and White U.S. children to attend to the unique characteristics of people. In one condition, the uniqueness of individuals within a racial group was highlighted by having children associate names with a photograph of a child of a different race. In the other condition, children were explicitly prompted to determine whether pairs of photographs were the same (thus to attend to individual differences). Both experimental conditions led to reduced reported social distance and prejudice among both Black and White children of both age groups studied, when compared to a control condition in which children simply viewed the photographs. Katz and Zalk (1978) replicated these findings in an experiment combining the two experimental conditions among White students of the same age groups.
Aboud and Fenwick (1999) further extended these results via an eleven-week curriculum unit. Ten-year-old Canadian children were encouraged to learn the names and individual preferences (likes and dislikes, personality traits) of thirty unfamiliar, racially diverse children. Control participants followed the standard curriculum. White children in the experimental condition, compared to those in the control condition who all scored high on prejudice at the pre-test, demonstrated less prejudice toward Blacks (e.g., assigned more positive attributes such as “friendly”) at a four-month delayed post-test. There were no significant findings for Black participants, which Aboud and Fenwick attributed to their overall low pre-test prejudice levels.
All in all, a unique version of the differences approach has shown some promise in facilitating social tolerance, although the results are less conclusive for groups other than Whites (see Brown & Hewstone, 2005, Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000). Like the similarities approach, the unique approach is problematic because it does not support the valued identity of members of racial and ethnicity groups. Also, in general, the unique message does not seem feasible as a long-term anti-bias strategy because it works against people's needs for affiliation (e.g., see Baumeister & Leary, 1995) and to divide their world into distinct social categories (e.g., Gelman & Koenig, 2003, Turner et al., 1987). Furthermore, even when attending to the unique features of outgroup members, children and adults often fail to notice stereotype-disconfirming evidence (e.g., Bigler & Liben, 1993, Wilder, 1993) and, when they do, are likely to view stereotype-disconfirming group members as an exception or a subcategory, leaving group stereotypes intact (for review, see Hewstone, 1996).
A combination anti-bias approach has been championed in social psychology by several complementary models of intergroup contact that each point to the weaknesses of a pure similarities or pure differences message. For example, Brown and Hewstone (2005) and Hewstone & Brown (1986), in their Intergroup Contact Model, which has a substantial body of supportive evidence, propose that both similarities among and differences between groups need to be kept salient during intergroup contact situations so a positive contact experience reflects on both the outgroup member and his or her group. In a similar vein, Gaertner et al. (1993) advocated “dual identities,” suggesting that a “common in-group identity,” as proposed by their model of the same name, can be simultaneously highlighted while people maintain an original group identity (e.g., their racial identity). Indeed, emphasizing dual identities (simultaneous focus on subgroup identity as well as shared superordinate identity) has been shown to be more effective than emphasizing a common ingroup identity alone (focus on shared superordinate identity), especially for members of the numerical minority group (see Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000). Dual identities would also satisfy people's conflicting needs for both assimilation (feeling part of a larger collective) and individuation (feeling differentiated from others; Optimal Distinctiveness Theory, see Brewer, 1991, Brewer, 2003).
Thus, a combined similarities and differences message, such as one suggesting that “all people are the same in a way, but each person is also unique,” likely combines the positive aspects of both the similarities and differences messages while minimizing the negative aspects. The similarities part of the message provides a common identity for the former ingroup and outgroup members, thus fostering the benefits of ingroup positivity on those that had previously been outgroup members. Yet, the combination message does not completely blur boundaries between individuals because, with the inclusion of the unique part of the message, it acknowledges the unshared characteristics among people. Also, the combined message strengthens two cognitive-developmental skills rather than one skill strengthened by either the similarities or differences message.
Accordingly, drawing on both the Common Ingroup Identity model (e.g., Gaertner et al., 1989) and the Decategorization Model (Brewer & Miller, 1984), Jones and Foley (2003) recently tested the similar-unique message among children. Eight-to eleven-year-old U.S. children received lessons in biology and anthropology, highlighting similarities and individual differences among humans. A lesson entitled “The Melting Pot” suggested “we are all different and that is what we all have in common’ (p. 559). Children in the experimental condition, relative to those in the control condition (who read a story by Dr. Seuss), demonstrated more positive beliefs about and positive feelings toward people differing in race or ethnicity. Although Jones and Foley (2003) found no significant difference when comparing Whites (75% of total sample) to a combined group that included Blacks (9%), Asians (3%) and other ethnicities (12%), collapsing the data likely obscures differences that could be evident between the different groups.
Research with college students has also shown that a similar–unique message can increase some forms of social tolerance among Whites. Wolsko et al. (2000) found that U.S. White college students who were exposed to a message suggesting that “intergroup harmony can be achieved if we recognize that at our core we are all the same, that all men and women are created equal, and that we are first and foremost a nation of individuals” reported less negative affect toward Blacks compared to a control condition that received no message (p. 638; also see Richeson & Nussbaum, 2004).
Because messages about the similarities and differences among people are being readily espoused in society and have the potential for both positive and negative implications, it is essential that we understand their impact on members of all groups (see Shelton, 2000). Prior work has tended to focus on Whites with no firm conclusions for other groups; thus, as a step toward expanding our understanding of these messages, we studied Blacks and Latinos, two of the largest U.S. racial and ethnic numerical minority groups. We assessed the impact of three anti-bias messages, as reviewed above, on the social attitudes of these groups. We selected children approximately 12 years old because, by this age, children are knowledgeable about groups (e.g., McKown, 2004, McKown & Weinstein, 2003) and are able to perceive cross-group similarities and individual differences (e.g., Aboud, 1988, Katz, 1973).
Past work, mainly with White participants, would suggest that each of the three anti-bias messages (relative to a control condition) would promote greater social tolerance. Based on our critical review of the literature above, we predicted that the combined similar–unique message would be the most effective in promoting greater social tolerance (as assessed by an egalitarianism measure) without negatively impacting Black and Latino children's attitudes toward their own group or toward the numerical majority group in society (as assessed by measures of social distance and perceptions of racial discrimination).
Section snippets
Participants
Participants were recruited from sixth grade classrooms in a New York City middle school. The curriculum at the school did not include a prejudice reduction unit. The school was located in a low socioeconomic area, with 99% of the children eligible for a free lunch, compared to approximately 70% at the average city school. According to a school report posted the year before the experiment was conducted, students were predominately Latino (62.5%) and Black (34.5%), with backgrounds from
Preliminary analyses
We began by examining whether participants perceived the books in similar ways. We first conducted a multi-analysis of variance (MANOVA) assessing enjoyment and understanding of the books as a function of participant condition (similarities, unique, similar–unique, control) and ethnicity (Black, Latino). This analysis revealed nonsignificant effects of condition on participants' reported levels of enjoyment and understanding of the books F(3, 119) = .0.28, ns, and F(3, 119) = 0.79, ns, respectively.
General discussion
The present investigation examined prevalent anti-bias messages at the heart of a long-standing conceptual debate regarding whether U.S. intergroup relations can be best improved by emphasizing the similarities among people or differences between people, or, newer to the debate, by emphasizing both similarities and differences. We aimed to demonstrate that a combined message would yield positive effects on the social attitudes of two understudied and large racial/ethnic groups in the U.S.,
References (61)
- et al.
Beyond the contact hypothesis: Theoretical perspectives on desegregation
- et al.
An integrative theory of intergroup contact
Age and ethnic variation in children's thinking about the nature of racism
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
(2004)- et al.
The impact of multiculturalism versus color-blindness on racial bias
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
(2004) The role of anxiety in facilitating stereotypic judgments of out-group behavior
Children and prejudice
(1988)The formation of ingroup favoritism and outgroup prejudice in young children: Are they distinct attitudes?
Developmental Psychology
(2003)- et al.
Developmental and socialization influences on intergroup bias
- et al.
Evaluating school-based interventions to reduce prejudice in preadolescents
Journal of Social Issues
(1999) The nature of prejudice
(1954)
Anti-bias education and training
Multicultural education for young children: Racial and ethnic attitudes and their modification
The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation
Psychological Bulletin
The use of multicultural curricula and materials to counter racism in children
Journal of Social Issues
A cognitive-developmental approach to racial stereotyping and reconstructive memory in Euro-American children
Child Development
The relationship between racial attitudes and social-cognitive development in children: An Australian study
Developmental Psychology
The social self
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate?
Journal of Social Issues
Optimal distinctiveness, social identity, and the self
The attraction paradigm
Children's lay theories about ingroups and outgroups: Reconceptualizing research on prejudice
Personality and Social Psychology Review
A longitudinal study of white children: Racial prejudice as a social-cognitive development
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly
The role of emotions in determining willingness to engage in intergroup contact
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
The immigration dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice, and national identity
Journal of Social Issues
Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model
The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias
European Review of Social Psychology
Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Becoming American: A review of current research on the development of racial and ethnic identity in children
Theory-based categorization in early childhood
Dramatic plays: A vehicle for prejudice reduction in the elementary school
Journal of Educational Research
Cited by (0)
- ☆
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0213660 to the first and third author.