Date of Award

5-2025

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Honors Thesis

Department

Psychology

First Advisor

Conor O'Dea

Second Advisor

Rhea Myerscough

Abstract

Experiencing racism is associated with negative outcomes, including obesity and poor mental health (Berger & Sarnyai, 2015). Therefore, exploring strategies like interpersonal confrontation, which has been shown to reduce prejudice, is essential (Czopp et al., 2006; Paluck & Green, 2009). We examined what more internally (affected by personal values) and externally motivated (affected by social reward) people consider when deciding when confronting racism. White participants (n = 270) viewed hypothetical scenarios with a racist remark or non-racist remark. They decided whether to confront these scenarios and indicated their motivations, reasonings, and methods. Results showed that more internally and externally motivated individuals perceived and confronted prejudice when it was present, but those higher in external motivations also perceived prejudice and confronted in nonprejudiced situations. Additionally, more internally motivated individuals considered personal responsibility (personal obligation to confront) and agency (the ability to confront) when they chose and failed to confront racism, and they considered prejudice malleability (viewing prejudice as minimizable through confrontation) when confronting racism. Alternatively, more externally motivated individuals considered social reward (social benefit for confrontation) and prejudice malleability in both decisions, and they considered agency when they failed to confront racism. Higher levels of both motivations were linked to greater perceived effectiveness of activism and confrontation strategies, with different correlations possibly reflecting unique evaluation factors. Overall, this study helped us learn about when, how, and why people choose to confront racism based upon the source of their motivation.

Download

Included in

Psychology Commons

Share

COinS