Affirmative action is an international issue.

Comments on the article by Vasquez and Jones (see record 2006-01690-003), which focuses on diversity and begins with a discussion of affirmative action. The current author discusses his own three related points: first, it is virtually impossible, in our current culture, to agree on what constitutes affirmative action and certainly on what constitutes adequate or exemplary affirmative action; second, our broader culture must come to grips with what it means for the self-defined interests of European Americans as well as other cultural groups to at times be in apparent conflict with the overall interests of the culture; and third, affirmative action is not a challenge unique to the United States. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Diversity is a compelling interest, and affirmative action is an important strategy for achieving it.

Responds to comments made by Pipes (see record 2007-01685-011) and Kuncel and Sackett (see record 2007-01685-012) on the current authors' original article (see record 2006-01690-003). The current authors respond to the various points raised in the commenting articles, and suggest that diversity is a compelling interest and affirmative action is one means of achieving it. They stand by their original challenge, with the caveat that they do recognize that some tests may predict certain educational outcomes with similar reliability across diverse populations. They suggest that an increase in diversity in psychology would promote a robust exchange of ideas and would be of value to all. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Affirmative action: Psychological data and the policy debates.

The authors bring psychological research to bear on an examination of the policy of affirmative action. They argue that data from many studies reveal that affirmative action as a policy has more benefits than costs. Although the majority of pro-affirmative action arguments in the social sciences stress diversity, the authors' argument focuses on issues of merit. The merit-based argument, grounded in empirical studies, concludes that the policy of affirmative action conforms to the American ideal of fairness and is a necessary policy. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Beliefs about affirmative action: A test of the group self-interest and racism beliefs models.

Two models of affirmative action attitudes (i.e., group self-interest and racism beliefs) were examined among a sample of racially diverse college students. Open-ended questions were included to provide students an opportunity to elaborate on their beliefs about affirmative action and beliefs about the existence of racial discrimination. Findings from logistic regression analysis on a subsample (n = 376) provide support for both models; race (a proxy for group self-interest) and racism beliefs (as measured by the Color-Blind Racial Attitudes Scale [CoBRAS] and an the open-ended question) helped predict endorsement of affirmative action in theoretically expected ways. Asian, Latino, and Black students were more likely to view affirmative action as helpful compared to their White counterparts, and limited awareness of institutional racism (i.e., higher CoBRAS scores) was associated with antiaffirmative action arguments. Follow-up analysis, however, provided support for the superiority of the racism beliefs model as measured by the CoBRAS in predicting affirmative action beliefs over the group-interest model. Limitations and implications for future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

SEPA's affirmative action.

It may be concluded that women in psychology in the Southeast, except, in certain respects, women doctoral students, hold a "minority" status. In light of the evidence pointing to this conclusion, some affirmative action activities that are being conducted by the Southeastern Psychological Association and the Status of Women group are described here. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Not All Affirmative Action Rewards Merit: Comment.

Comments on the article by Crosby et al (see record 2003-03405-003), which argues that the main reason to endorse affirmative action in education and employment is to reward merit. In this article, the authors propose that, by eliminating prejudicial selection systems and encouraging strategies for identifying qualified women and minorities, affirmative action programs can help ensure that qualified women and minorities are selected. The current author believes that Crosby and colleagues went too far in trying to push their point, however, when they argued that the merit of individuals is not measured well. Discussion focuses on the suggestion by Crosby et al that standardized tests of cognitive ability are biased and lack validity. The author believes that their arguments display a fundamental misunderstanding. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Following Up on Cultural Lag (and How to Give it a Push).

In this column, the author discusses the 1925 American Journal of Psychology's published list of 30 statements. This list was arranged like a true-false test, of which the author wrote, "In general it seems likely that if the list were submitted to a group of psychologists there would be less than 1% of unqualified affirmative answers [Nixon, 1925]." However, when Nixon administered the test to 359 students of elementary psychology in New York, more than one-third of all answers were affirmative, and each statement received some "true" answers. Nixon's estimate of psychologists' unqualified affirmatives seems almost as applicable now as it did in 1925. But what of nonpsychologists? A challenge to contemporary psychologists is implicit in Nixon's outdated list; and there might be practical benefits to psychology as a whole if someone accepted the challenge. Should such a contemporary list be established, its value could extend far beyond that of a discussion starter for the introductory course. It could serve as a directive for educational efforts of psychologists to laymen; and it ought to be an effective springboard for work in public relations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Organizational Justice and Black Applicants' Reactions to Affirmative Action.

Using organizational justice as a guiding framework, the authors studied perceptions of affirmative action programs by presumed beneficiaries. Three conceptual issues were addressed: (a) the content of different affirmative action plans; (b) the 3-way interaction among distributive, procedural, and interactional justice; and (c) the distinction between outcome favorability and distributive justice. These ideas were tested with a sample of Black engineering students who responded to 1 of 6 plans. Participants distinguished among the various plans, with some policies being viewed as more fair than others. In addition, a 3-way interaction among the 3 types of organizational justice was observed. Specifically, the 2-way interaction between distributive and interactional fairness was only significant when procedural justice was low. Implications for organizational justice and for the design of affirmative action programs are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Examining the principles in principled conservatism: The role of responsibility stereotypes as cues for deservingness in racial policy decisions.

Why do educated conservatives oppose affirmative action? Those in the "principled conservatism" camp say opposition is based on principled judgments of fairness about the policies. Others, however, argue that opposition is based on racism. The present article offers an alternative perspective that may reconcile these contradictory points of view. In 2 studies, the authors show 2 major findings: (a) that conservatives oppose affirmative action more for Blacks than for other groups, in this case women, and (b) that the relationship between conservatism and affirmative action attitudes is mediated best by group-based stereotypes that offer deservingness information and not by other potential mediators like old-fashioned racism or the perceived threat that affirmative action poses to oneself. The authors conclude that educated conservatives are indeed principled in their opposition to affirmative action, but those principles are group based not policy based. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Is Affirmative Action Fair? Comment.

Comments on the article by Crosby et al (see record 2003-03405-003) which attempts to bring psychological research to bear on an examination of the policy of affirmative action. In their article, the authors support affirmative action on the grounds of fairness, merit, and equality. It is the current author's belief, however, that Crosby et al have failed to address the world of affirmative action as it is practiced today. Discussion focuses on 4 problem areas: discrepancies in affirmative action policies and practices, especially as they relate to "blind racial preference" practices; the premise that the underrepresentation of certain groups is mainly the result of societal prejudice when this underrepresentation is the complex result of countless factors-cultural, psychological, historical, biological-all of which are not fully understood; the push for affirmative action for all members of the group, even if many members have not experienced prejudice; and the fact that psychological science, empirical studies, and theory cannot decide among these values or between differing conceptions of justice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Predictors of African American and European American adolescents' endorsement of race-conscious social policies.

To examine the predictors of adolescents' evaluations of affirmative action and school desegregation policies, African American and European American students (ns = 94 and 116, respectively; aged 14 to 17 years) attending a racially diverse high school in the Midwestern United States completed measures of (a) implicit racial attitudes, (b) knowledge about historical racism, and (c) perceptions of and attributions for racial disparities. The following day, adolescents learned about either a proposed affirmative action policy (n = 101) or a school desegregation policy (n = 109) and completed measures of their attitudes toward the policy. Results indicated racial differences in policy support and in the factors predicting policy support. Theoretical implications of the findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Values and Science: Reply.

Responds to Kendler (2004), Johnson (2004), and Zuriff (2004) who directed a number of criticisms against the authors' original article (see record 2003-03405-003) examining the psychological data and policy debates surrounding affirmative action. Kendler and Zuriff both chided the authors for interjecting values into the realm of science. The authors, however, state that both seriously misread the argument, imagining that they talked about "morality" when they did not. The authors claim to hold the same view as Kendler and Zuriff about the dichotomy between data and values and revisit portions of their argument further questioned. To Johnson, they state that the issues are not as clear cut as he has suggested. The authors do, however, reevaluate their original article in light of his criticisms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Assuming preferential selection when the admissions policy is unknown: The effects of gender rarity.

One hundred thirty-five undergraduates indicated the degree to which they believed gender played a role in the selection of an applicant for a graduate degree program. Both the gender composition of the cohort and the selection policy (explicitly merit-based, explicitly affirmative action, or ambiguous) were varied. Results indicated that preferential selection on the basis of gender was assumed when women were solos and explicit information about the selection policy was not provided and that these assumptions were as strong as when an affirmative action policy was explicitly stated. This did not occur when the female selectee was not a solo or when a male selectee was a solo. Evaluations of qualifications and prediction of success paralleled the preferential selection assumptions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Meritocracy and opposition to affirmative action: Making concessions in the face of discrimination.

Typically, people who strongly endorse the merit principle and believe that outcomes should be given to those most deserving oppose affirmative action (AA) programs that violate this principle. However, how do they respond to AA when faced with a great deal of workplace discrimination? The authors hypothesized that people who care strongly about merit should be motivated to combat discrimination because it biases the assessment of merit. Consequently, these individuals should make concessions for AA. The authors found support for their hypothesis when investigating (a) participants' preexisting perceptions of workplace discrimination and (b) experimentally induced perceptions of discrimination. They discuss the implications of these results for the psychology of meritocracy and for resistance to AA. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Searching for the second generation of American women psychologists": Correction to Johnston and Johnson (2008).

Reports an error in "Searching for the second generation of American women psychologists" by Elizabeth Johnston and Ann Johnson (History of Psychology, 2008[Feb], Vol 11[1], 40-72). The authors would like to indicate that Inez Beverly Prosser's academic degree was incorrectly listed as EdD in the Appendix. Prosser's correct degree is PhD. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2008-04777-003.) As a consequence of the groundbreaking work of E. Scarborough and L. Furumoto (1987), the contributions of the pioneering first generation of American women psychologists are now well recognized within the history of psychology; however, the generation that followed the pioneers is less well known. The lack of recognition that most women psychologists of the interwar era experienced during the majority of their working lives resulted from sexism institutionalized through practices such as anti-nepotism rules that effectively excluded many married women from the academy, informal hiring practices operating in "old-boy network" fashion, and exclusion from certain key graduate training centers. Yet, many women were productive psychologists during this era and contributed to the growth and expansion of the discipline. Examination of published literature generated biographical information for 107 eminent women; C. A. Murchison's (1932b) Psychological Register provided a less detailed but more inclusive inventory to yield data on a total of 320 women. This article recounts our systematic search for this "lost generation" and emphasizes the extent and diversity of their contributions to psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Status of Women in the Psychological Community in the Southeast: A Case Study.

The Executive Committee of the Southeastern Psychological Association (SEPA) appointed a Commission on the Status of Women in the spring of 1972. The Commission was charged to describe the status of women in psychology in the Southeast, to develop an affirmative action plan, and to present a report at the annual meeting in 1973. The Commission conducted studies assessing women in the role of faculty, administrators, private practitioners, researchers, graduate students, and SEPA members, through surveys of female and male psychologists, members and nonmembers of SEPA, PhD students, department chairs, and, in one case, a controlled experiment on undergraduates of both sexes. This article reports some of the results of these studies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of persuasive arguments in changing affirmative action attitudes and expressed behavior in higher education.

The research reported in this article examined the conditions under which persuasive arguments are most effective in changing university students' attitudes and expressed behavior with respect to affirmative action (AA). The conceptual framework was a model that integrated the theory of reasoned action and the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Studies 1 and 2 established effective manipulations of positive-negative AA information, and peripheral-central routes of processing. Study 3 implemented these techniques, and a path analysis was carried out testing the differential effects of valence of information processed via different routes on AA evaluative beliefs, attitudes, intention, and expressed behavior. Results indicated that positive AA messages processed centrally (i.e., for meaning) resulted in significantly more positive evaluative beliefs. Modifications to the original model resulted in a final model with excellent fit to the data that supported the mediating role of intention in the AA attitude-behavior relationship, as predicted by the theory of reasoned action. The findings highlight potential benefits of interventions for improving support for AA policies, provided that positive information is processed at a central, evaluative level. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Problematic issues for Blacks in doctoral psychology programs.

Presents various aspects of the involvement of Black students and faculty in doctoral programs in psychology. Recruitment procedures, admissions criteria, financial aid, Black faculty rank, and retention strategies are examined. A focal concern of the article is the "marginal" Black students, that is, those who are admitted under some affirmative action mandate but who do not meet the traditional admissions criteria. This problem involves issues such as how to retain these students until program completion without simultaneously lowering academic standards. Although Black faculty could probably contribute greatly to addressing these matters, they are sorely underrepresented in doctoral programs throughout the country. There is great institutional variability in terms of admission and retention policies. Recommendations are made for actions that institutions can take to increase the involvement of Blacks in their doctoral psychology programs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Metaphysical Club at The Johns Hopkins University (1879-1885).

Of the earliest American universities, The Johns Hopkins in Baltimore holds a unique position for psychology. At Hopkins, many of America's first psychologists received their graduate training. Of special interest is the Hopkins Metaphysical Club, organized in 1879 by Charles Sanders Peirce. It provided a forum for research and scholarship by faculty and students. Papers related to topics of the "new" psychology began to appear in 1883, about the time G. Stanley Hall was given a 3-year appointment at Hopkins. When Peirce departed Hopkins in 1885, Hall was free to develop psychology in his image and disbanded the club. Nevertheless, the Metaphysical Club played an important role in the emergence of American scientific psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Diversity American style.

Comments on the article by R. E. Redding (see record 2001-00465-001) which argues that psychology lacks sociopolitical diversity and that conservatives are vastly underrepresented in the profession. The current author argues that by clinging to the favorite American political categories and defining diversity in terms of its favorite dualism (Republican vs Democrat), Redding hardly touched the issue of diversity of sociopolitical voices. It it maintained that diversity in the field of psychology will never be meaningfully accomplished by refusing to recognize the true diversity of voices that goes well beyond the dualistic system that animates US politics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)