Individuals vary in how they approach diversity; some emphasize relationship-building across groups ( bridging ), while others favor driving systemic change ( dismantling ). White participants ( N = 1224) evaluated an employee who embraced or forewent these approaches. Participants low in social dominance orientation (SDO)—those less supportive of hierarchy—evaluated targets who endorsed bridging (Study 1a) and dismantling (Study 1b) approaches more positively (i.e., warmer, more competent, preferred for leadership) than targets who opposed either of these approaches. However, when directly comparing targets who strongly endorsed both approaches, participants high in SDO distinguished between targets, preferring the target who endorsed bridging over the target who endorsed dismantling approaches (Study 2). This effect was mediated by anticipated discomfort. While both bridging and dismantling can promote equality, these studies uncover a subtle way structural change may be curtailed, even when not outright dismissed, thus limiting the full potential of diversity approaches.

A person's race and ethnicity influences how they socialize their children about such topics. Yet little is known about how the growing population of Multiracial adults, who are members of multiple racial/ethnic groups, socialize their children about their ethnic/racial backgrounds. In two preregistered online studies, U.S. parents (S1: MAge = 37.85; 52.85% female; S2: MAge = 37.85; 84.21% female) responded to open-ended questions about the interactions they have/intend to have with their 3- to 18-year-old children about racial/ethnic identities. In Study 1, Multiracial parents' (n = 96) ethnic/racial socialization practices were more similar to monoracial parents of color (n = 99) than White parents (n = 138). However, Multiracial parents also showed distinguishing ethnic/racial socialization patterns: they expressed a greater number of coded socialization themes overall, and reported ethnic/racial identity multiplicity as a joy, significantly more than monoracial parents. There was also some evidence that the frequency with which Multiracial parents are perceived as racial/ethnic minority shapes their race/ethnic socialization practices. In Study 2, 209 new Multiracial parents reported their socialization practices in response to two different racial identity frames, overall replicating Study 1 findings. Our findings highlight the importance of studying Multiracial parents specifically when exploring ethnic/racial socialization, helping inform fully inclusive models of ethnic/racial socialization.

Across five pre-registered studies (three main text, two supplement, one single-paper meta-analysis; Ntotal = 5,051), we test how adults' beliefs about children's engagement with race are shaped by children's specified race. We argue that specifying a child's race activates race-specific considerations that disrupt adults' default assumption that "children" (in generic terms) do not notice race or racial differences. As a result, adults perceive both Black children and White children as significantly more likely to notice race than "children." We also argue that the particular racial group specified shapes adults' perceptions of when race-related capacities develop. This causes adults to perceive Black children as developing race-related capacities earlier than both White children and "children." We connect these effects to differences in the timing and content of adult-child conversations about race and racism, showing that how adults construe children can change when and how they talk with them about race.

U.S. policies increasingly limit lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or another marginalized gender identity or sexual orientation (LGBTQ +) education topics for children under the guise of age-appropriate curriculum, placing the responsibility of educating children about LGBTQ + identities and experiences on parents. We examined parents’ beliefs about the age-appropriateness of LGBTQ + topics for children, with implications for parent–child conversations and support for restricted LGBTQ + curriculum. In two studies, LGBTQ + and cisgender-heterosexual parents’ ( N = 837) belief that LGBTQ + topics are age-appropriate for children at an older age was related to fewer parent–child conversations about LGBTQ + topics and greater anticipated discomfort having such conversations (Studies 1 and 2). Counter to hypotheses, exposure to restrictive LGBTQ + education policies did not affect age-appropriateness beliefs (Studies 1 and 2). In line with hypotheses, parents’ belief that sexual orientation discussion should be minimized was associated with later age-appropriateness beliefs and greater support for restricting LGBTQ + curriculum (cisgender-heterosexual parents; Study 2). These studies highlight age-appropriateness beliefs as a key mechanism hindering critical parent–child LGBTQ + conversations.

Background: Teaching students about race and racism is critical to and relevant in psychology classrooms. Objective: We explored whether direct instruction dismantling ideas that race is genetic affects students' race essentialist and other related beliefs. Method: Undergraduate students enrolled in four social psychology courses completed measures of race essentialism and other related beliefs before and after engaging in course-directed activities designed to reduce endorsement of biological essentialist beliefs about race. Results: After class activities, students reported lower levels of general racial essentialist beliefs and estimated that more progress is needed to reduce racial inequality. However, attitudes towards racially minoritized groups or perceived need for anti-racist actions did not shift, and colorblind ideology may have increased. Conclusion: These data provide evidence that essentialism shifts can be accomplished in the psychology classroom, but shifting related beliefs may require additional instruction. Teaching Implications: The class activities described in this research provide a way for instructors to introduce students to a new concept (race essentialism) and change students' beliefs in the genetic underpinning of race.

Which factors shape adults' perceptions of the appropriateness of child-facing messaging about race? In an online survey, U.S. adults (N = 715 Black; N = 780 White; Mage = 47 y; 60% parents) read an interaction between a hypothetical parent and their child. The hypothetical child was described as a [Black/White] [5/13]-year-old. The parent conveyed either race-homogenizing (e.g. minimizing racial differences), multicultural (e.g. valuing racial diversity), or structural fairness (e.g. connecting fairness to laws) messaging about race. Participants perceived all of the messages to be appropriate (i.e. above the midpoint of the scale). Generally, Black participants rated messages as more appropriate than White participants, and participants rated all messages as more appropriate for 13-year-olds than 5-year olds. These effects were largest for messages that connected laws to fairness (i.e. structural fairness). There were few effects of the target child's race, including no target child race interactions.

Researchers from a range of disciplines emphasize that effectively socializing children about race and racism is vital to promoting positive outcomes, such as disrupting the development of racist attitudes and beliefs. While parents and guardians influence children's racial attitudes and beliefs, children also learn about race and racism from many other important adults in their lives, such as teachers, community leaders, and librarians. Yet race‐related topics are largely absent or underdeveloped from child‐facing programming, policies, and procedures. In this paper, we describe three major barriers to effectively socializing children about race and racism within child‐facing institutions like libraries, museums, and schools: (1) adults’ (often inaccurate) beliefs about children's social and cognitive race‐related development, (2) adults’ knowledge and comfort discussing race and racism with others, and (3) social norms that minimize explicit discussion of race and racism in institutional and interpersonal contexts. To contextualize these barriers, we address how children can process and reason about race across childhood and outline the evidence‐based benefits of socializing children about race and racism inside and outside the home. Finally, we provide recommendations aimed at translating this research to child‐focused spaces and provide general guidelines to consider when implementing such practices in their own spheres of influence. In sum, we argue that effective socialization about race and racism benefits all children and can (and should!) be achieved successfully outside of the home; and that adults who interact with children must interrogate their own beliefs, biases, and perspectives, work to develop cultural competence, and invest in and continually reassess practices and policies to facilitate effective socialization about race and racism.

For group discussions about fraught racial topics between Black and White Americans to be beneficial, conversation participants must view the person who facilitates as effective at communicating both the perspectives of Black and White Americans. We identify a biracial advantage in this domain. In three studies (total N = 710), we tested how a facilitator’s race affects their perceived effectiveness in communicating with both Black and White Americans. Both Black and White participants expected Black and White monoracial facilitators to more effectively engage with racial in-group than racial out-group members. However, they expected biracial facilitators to be equally effective in communicating with both Black and White groups. Both Black and White participants also expected biracial facilitators to use productive learning strategies (perspective taking, showing empathy) more than White facilitators, and either more than or equally to Black facilitators, suggesting one reason why people expect biracial facilitators to perform well in these moments.

Anti-racist efforts require talking with children about race. The present work tested the predictors of U.S. adults' (N = 441; 52% female; 32% BIPOC participants; Mage  = 35 years) conversations about race with children across two timepoints in 2019. Approximately 60% of adult participants talked to their children (3-12 years) about race during the preceding week; only 29% talked to other adults about race during the same period. This paper describes the content and predictors of conversations about race, revealing how conversations differ depending on the participant's race, a child's age, and whether the conversation occurs with children or another adult. These data have important implications for theorizing about when, why, and how adults actually talk about race with children and adults.

The study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/individualism and moral dilemma judgements. Including participants from 45 countries, Bago et al. find that the situational factors that affect moral reasoning are shared across countries, with diminished observed cultural variation.

To help children navigate their social environments, adults must understand what children know about race, and when they acquire this knowledge. Across three pre-registered studies, we tested US adults’ knowledge of when children first use race to categorize and ascribe traits to others. Participants wildly—and uniquely—misjudged children’s abilities to process race. This inaccuracy was consequential: it was a stronger predictor of the preference to delay conversations about race with children than other factors previously theorized to underlie adults’ reluctance to talk about race. And, this relation was causal. Our data suggest that fundamental misunderstandings about children’s capacities to process race are pervasive in the US population and may delay when adults engage children in important conversations about race.

Transgender individuals experience stigmatization through the application of gender stereotypes. In Study 1, cisgender individuals (N = 212) produced unique stereotypes, such as "mentally ill" and "confused," about transgender, but not cisgender, populations. Stereotypes for transgender individuals also included stereotypes related to both cisgender men and cisgender women. In Study 2, transgender people (N = 330) rated the unique stereotypes about their group more negatively than cisgender people (N = 193) rated the same stereotypes. These data highlight distinct ways that transgender people, who represent one of the most stigmatized social groups, experience stigma through stereotype application. Discussion includes how research including nontraditional gender identities broadens and advances diversity and identity science.

Organizations aim to convey that they are diverse and inclusive, in part, to recruit racial minorities. We investigate a previously unexamined downside of this recruitment strategy: diversity dishonesty, that is, belief that an organization is falsely or incorrectly inflating its actual diversity. In four studies (total N = 871), we found that diversity dishonesty heightened minorities’ concerns about fitting in, being authentic, and performing well at the organization. We also found that evidence-based cues (which “show” observers whether the organization has a positive or negative diversity climate), but not expressed cues (which “tell” observers about the organization’s diversity), affect these expectations. Using correlational methodologies, Study 1 found these effects were pertinent to African American and Latinx participants’ beliefs about their current workplaces, holding other diversity-related measures constant. Studies 2 to 4 used experimental methods to replicate these findings with African American participants, using a hypothetical workplace setting.

A substantial body of research on diversity philosophies has shown that multiculturalism (i.e., emphasizing and valuing cultural/ethnic differences) is a more effective way to promote equality and reduce bias than color blindness (i.e., deemphasizing cultural/ethnic differences in lieu of similarities). However, across two experiments, we present evidence for an unexpectedly negative outcome of multiculturalism: increased belief in race essentialism, or the notion that racial group differences are valid, biologically based, and immutable. Study 1 (N = 165) shows that participants exposed to multiculturalism expressed greater race essentialist beliefs compared to those exposed to color blindness. Study 2 (N = 150) replicates this effect and also finds that exposure to multiculturalism, compared to color blindness, decreased participants’ belief that racial equality is a problem. These findings raise the ironic possibility that well-intentioned efforts to portray the value of differences may reinforce the belief that fixed, biological characteristics underpin them.

How do voters' identities change after a candidate's defeat? A longitudinal, within-subjects study used Hillary Clinton's loss in the 2016 U.S. presidential election to explore social identity theory's (SIT) tenet that threats to self-relevant groups motivate further connection to and affirmation of the group. Two independent samples (university students and adults on Mechanical Turk) were assessed before and after the 2016 U.S. presidential election. After Hillary Clinton's defeat, those who reported voting for Clinton affirmed their political and gender identities in several ways, such as increasing their identification with Clinton. These ecologically valid results are consistent with SIT, and suggest supporters affirm their identities following a threat such as the defeat of their candidate during a high-stakes election. We discuss the implications of these findings within the context of the increasingly polarized U.S. electorate.

Much research on moral judgment is centered on moral dilemmas in which deontological perspectives (i.e., emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with utilitarian judgements (i.e., following the greater good defined through consequences). A central finding of this field Greene et al. showed that psychological and situational factors (e.g., the intent of the agent, or physical contact between the agent and the victim) play an important role in people’s use of deontological versus utilitarian considerations when making moral decisions. As their study was conducted with US samples, our knowledge is limited concerning the universality of this effect, in general, and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors of moral judgments, in particular. Here, we empirically test the universality of deontological and utilitarian judgments by replicating Greene et al.’s experiments on a large (N = X,XXX) and diverse (WEIRD and non-WEIRD) sample across the world to explore the influence of culture on moral judgment. The relevance of this exploration to a broad range of policy-making problems is discussed.

Essentialism-the belief that differences between groups of people are biologically based and unchangeable-is strongly associated with prejudice toward a variety of social groups. The present work examines how gender essentialism shapes support for the rights of two marginalized gender groups: women and transgender people. Study 1 provides correlational evidence that endorsement of gender essentialism is a robust predictor of people's opposition to both women's and transgender people's rights, over and above other individual difference measures. Studies 2 and 3 provide evidence that exposure to anti-essentialist messages about gender indirectly increases the support for women's and transgender people's rights. Study 4 examines the underlying psychological process, showing that gender essentialism reduction indirectly increases the support for women's and transgender people's rights through prejudice. Implications for research on lay theories and transgender people are discussed.

Many companies highlight their gender diversity, in part to signal positive attributes about the organization. We explored whether or not advertising gender diversity improves White men’s beliefs about an organization. In four studies, we found that White men expected a company to have a more broadminded and tolerant climate when the company noted it was gender diverse––and the gender diversity was described as including White women––as compared to when it did not address its gender diversity. In Studies 1 ( n = 105), 2 ( n = 101), and 3 ( n = 151), a White gender-diverse organization was also viewed as more prestigious than an organization that did not address its gender diversity. In Studies 3 and 4 ( n = 183), a gender-diverse company that highlighted a Black woman employee did not receive the same overall reputation boosts as the White gender-diverse company did. Our research indicates that companies that advertise their gender diversity may receive a boost to their reputation. We suggest that this research can inform organizational efforts to address gender diversity by encouraging companies to consider the intersection of gender and race in shaping both prejudicial attitudes and the experiences of minority groups. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0361684318800264