Implicit racism, colour blindness, and narrow deﬁnitions of discrimination: Why some White people prefer ‘All Lives Matter’ to ‘Black Lives Matter'

Tools

West, Keon; Greenland, Katy and van Laar, Colette. 2021. Implicit racism, colour blindness, and narrow deﬁnitions of discrimination: Why some White people prefer ‘All Lives Matter’ to ‘Black Lives Matter'. British Journal of Social Psychology, 60(4), pp. 1136-1153. ISSN 0144-6665 [Article]

Preview

Text
bjso.12458 (1).pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (269kB) | Preview

Official URL: https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10....

Abstract or Description

The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has been called the ‘civil rights issue of our time’(Holt & Sweitzer, 2020, Self and Identity, 19, p. 16) but the All Lives Matter (ALM) movement swiftly emerged as an oppositional response to BLM. Prior research has investigated some predictors of support for ALM over BLM, but these predictors have thus far not included levels of racial bias or potentially relevant constructions of racism.This pre-registered, cross-sectional study (N = 287) tested the degree to which White participants’ support for ALM could be predicted using measures of racism (implicit and explicit) and ideological stances around the construction of ‘racism’ (that discourage the recognition of contemporary inequalities and discrimination). Using multiple regression analyses, we found that implicit racism, colour-blind ideology, and narrow deﬁnitional boundaries of discrimination positively predicted support for ALM over BLM. Explicit racism, collective narcissism, and right-wing political orientation did not predict ALM support, nor did any (2-way) interaction of these predictors. Implications for our understanding of the All Lives Matter movement are discussed.

Item Type:

Article

Identification Number (DOI):

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12458

Additional Information:

We pre-registered this study experiments on the As Predicted website (https://aspredic ted.org/yg8fg.pdf). No data collection took place before the methods and hypotheses were pre-registered. Pre-registration, and all materials used in the study are available either in the manuscript or on the pre-registration website. Power analyses and sensitivity analyses are all available in the manuscript.