Errors in timed choice tasks typically produce an error-related negativity (ERN) in the event-related potential (ERP). The error specificity of the ERN has been challenged by studies showing a correct response negativity (CRN). Forty-five participants engaged in a flanker task in which both compatibility between flankers and target and the probability of compatible flankers were manipulated. Correct responses elicited a CRN, the amplitude of which increased with the degree of mismatch between the presence of conflict and conflict probability, even on low-conflict (compatible) trials. The fronto-central N2 component was larger on high-conflict (incompatible) correct response trials. However, in contrast to some recent accounts, this N2 was largest for highly probable stimuli. These findings suggest revision to models of the effects of conflict on response-related negativity to account for strategic adjustments made in preparation for the response.

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that alcohol increases race-biased responding via impairment of self-regulatory cognitive control. Participants consumed either a placebo or alcohol and then made speeded responses to stereotypic trait words presented after White and Black face primes while behavioral and event-related brain potential (ERP) data were recorded. Alcohol did not affect stereotype activation in either experiment. Experiment 2 showed that alcohol significantly impaired the ability to inhibit race-biased responses but did not reliably influence control of counterstereotypic responses. This disinhibition appears driven by impairment of regulative cognitive control, as indexed by amplitude of the negative slow wave ERP component. These findings suggest that controlling racial bias can be a function of effective implementation of basic self-regulatory processes in addition to the motivational processes identified in other research.

Recent electrophysiological research indicates that perceivers differentiate others on the basis of race extremely quickly. However, most categorization studies have been limited to White participants, neglecting potential differences in processing between racial groups. Moreover, the extent to which race interferes with categorization along other dimensions when race is made irrelevant to a perceiver's task is not known. A gender categorization task was used to test the extent to which race information would implicitly interfere with explicit gender categorization. As predicted, behavioral and electrocortical data indicated that participants attended to both the task-relevant gender dimension and the task-irrelevant race dimension. Additionally, processing of target race differed between Black and White participants. Ingroup attention biases in the N200 component of the event-related brain potential facilitated target categorization, suggesting a potential functional role for early differentiation of ingroup and outgroup targets.

The racial categorization literature, reliant on forced-choice tasks, suggests that mixed-race targets are often categorized using the parent faces that created the racially mixed stimuli (e.g., Black or White) or their combination (e.g., Black–White multiracial). In the current studies, we introduce a free-response task that allows for spontaneous categorizations of higher ecological validity. Our results suggest that, when allowed, observers often classify Black–White faces into alternative categories (i.e., responses that are neither the parent races nor their combination), such as Hispanic and Middle Eastern. Furthermore, we find that the stereotypes of the various categories that are mapped to racially mixed faces are distinct, underscoring the importance of understanding how mixed-race targets are spontaneously categorized. Our findings speak to the challenges associated with racial categorization in an increasingly racially diverse population, including discrepancies between target racial identities and their racial categorizations by observers as well as variable stereotype application to mixed-race targets.

No abstract

Research has established that targets who express disagreement with prejudicial comments directed toward their social group may be viewed negatively by those they confront or by members of social outgroups. Less research has examined how non-target individuals who confront prejudicial remarks are perceived. The current studies were designed to examine how non-targets who confronted racist (Study 1) and heterosexist (Study 2) comments would be perceived as a function of the level of offensiveness of the comment and the confrontation style used. The studies also examined whether confronting behavior would affect perceptions of the individual who made the prejudicial comment. Undergraduate participants read vignettes depicting a situation with a high or low offensive prejudicial comment in which a non-target individual confronted assertively, unassertively, or not at all. Participants provided judgments of both individuals. Results indicated that non-targets who confronted highly prejudicial comments either assertively or unassertively were liked and respected more than those who failed to confront. Additionally, commenters who were assertively confronted were respected less than commenters who were not. These findings suggest that non-targets may be especially effective in confronting prejudicial comments, as they do not suffer the same negative consequences as targets who confront.

Because of its emphasis on diminishing race and avoiding racial discourse, color-blind racial ideology has been suggested to have negative consequences for modern day race relations. The current research examined the influence of color blindness and the ambiguity of a prejudiced remark on perceptions of a racial minority group member who confronts the remark. One hundred thirteen White participants responded to a vignette depicting a White character making a prejudiced comment of variable ambiguity, after which a Black target character confronted the comment. Results demonstrated that the target confronter was perceived more negatively and as responding less appropriately by participants high in color blindness, and that this effect was particularly pronounced when participants responded to the ambiguous comment. Implications for the ways in which color blindness, as an accepted norm that is endorsed across legal and educational settings, can facilitate Whites' complicity in racial inequality are discussed.

The current studies explore situational and individual factors affecting non‐target perceivers' reactions and behavior following a racist comment, focusing on verbal confronting behavior. Two studies were conducted in which participants reported about recent situations in which they witnessed a racist comment that was not directed specifically at their own racial group. Results indicated that only one third of participants directly confronted the commenter. Strength of verbal confrontation was predicted by affective reactions and judgments of the offensiveness of the prejudicial comment. Analyses also revealed that strength of confrontation for females was predicted by the experience of negative emotions, but that males confronted more with stronger ratings of the offensiveness of the racist remarks. Implications for theory and policy are discussed.