| Summary: | Multiculturalism has been frequently cited as a potentially effective approach to managing diversity. However, previous research suggests that endorsement of multiculturalism by majority group members has been less optimistic. The aim of the current research is to identify previously unexamined factors that may relate to majority group members' resistance to endorsing multiculturalism as a diversity ideology and strategy. The goals of Studies 1-3 were to test if multiculturalism (vs. colorblindness) is more related to a sense of responsibility to address racial inequality (Study 1), to determine if priming multiculturalism (vs. assimilation) would lead to greater feelings of responsibility (Study 2), and to determine if directly manipulating the framing of the ideologies as a belief vs. strategy could highlight the relationship between multiculturalism, colorblindness and feelings of responsibility (Study 3). Results suggested that multiculturalism is more related to the construct of social responsibility than colorblindness. However, priming different ideologies did not affect feelings of personal responsibility. The goal of Studies 4-6 was to test if priming multiculturalism as a strategy would lead to more negative outcomes than priming multiculturalism as a belief. The first test of this examined if the framing of multiculturalism (interpersonal strategy vs. belief) predicted explicit racial bias (Study 4). In the final two studies (Study 5-6), multiculturalism was framed as an organizational strategy or belief to determine if the framing would negatively affect attitudes towards an organization. Results suggested that the strategy framing of multiculturalism (compared to the belief framing) led to negative evaluations of minorities and diverse organizations.
|
|---|
