Theories of race relations have been shaped by the concept of a racial hierarchy along which Whites are the most advantaged and African Americans the most disadvantaged. However, the recent precipitated growth of Latinos and Asian Americans in the United States underscores the need for a framework that integrates more groups. The current work proposes that racial and ethnic minority groups are disadvantaged along 2 distinct dimensions of perceived and perceived, such that the 4 largest groups in the United States are located in 4 discrete quadrants: Whites are perceived and treated as superior and American; African Americans as inferior and relatively American compared with Latinos and Asian Americans; Latinos as inferior and foreign; and Asian Americans as foreign and relatively superior compared to African Americans and Latinos. Support for this Racial Position Model is first obtained from targets' perspectives. Different groups experience distinct patterns of racial prejudice that are predicted by their 2-dimensional group positions (Studies 1 and 2). From perceivers' perspectives, these group positions are reflected in the content of racial stereotypes (Study 3), and are well-known and consensually recognized (Study 4). Implications of this new model for studying contemporary race relations (e.g., prejudice, threat, and interminority dynamics) are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

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.

Whites' attempts to enact multicultural ideals in intergroup interactions can sometimes have negative interpersonal consequences. This paper reviews the instances when Whites' efforts to acknowledge, appreciate, and learn about racial and ethnic differences can make people of color's group identity uncomfortably salient (minority spotlight effect), make people of color feel that certain attributes are being imposed onto their group identity (positive stereotyping), or make people of color feel precluded from another group identity (identity denial). Each of these situations introduces a hurtful discrepancy between how people of color are seen by others and how they wish to be seen. Suggestions for how to "do" multiculturalism in ways that avoid creating this discrepancy are discussed.

What are people’s expectations of interracial political coalitions? This research reveals expectations of flexible interracial coalitions stemming from how policies and racial groups are viewed in terms of perceived status and foreignness. For policies seen as changing societal status (e.g., welfare), people expected Black-Hispanic political coalitions and viewed Asian Americans as more likely to align with Whites than with other minorities. For policies seen as relating to American identity (e.g., immigration), people expected Asian-Hispanic coalitions and that Black Americans would align with Whites more than other minorities. Manipulating a novel group’s alleged status and cultural assimilation influenced coalitional expectations, providing evidence of causality. These expectations appear to better reflect stereotypes than groups’ actual average policy attitudes and voting behavior. Yet these beliefs may have implications for a diversifying electorate, as Whites strategically enhanced the political voice of a racial group expected to agree with their personal preferences on stereotyped policies.

Four studies investigate whether gay Asian Americans are stereotyped as more American than Asian Americans who are presumed straight. Gay Asian American men (Study 1) and women (Study 2) were rated as more American than their counterparts whose sexual orientation was unspecified. However, sexual orientation did not influence judgments of Whites’ American identity. The relationship between Asian Americans’ sexual orientation and perceptions of their American identity was mediated by a belief that American culture is relatively more accepting of gay people than Asian culture (Studies 3 and 4). Manipulating how accepting of gay people a target’s country of origin is relative to the United States altered ratings of American identity for gay but not straight targets (Study 4). Using an intersectional approach, these studies demonstrate that sexual orientation information comes together with race to influence who is likely to be perceived as American.

What are people’s expectations of interracial political coalitions? This research reveals expectations of flexible interracial coalitions stemming from how policies and racial groups are viewed in terms of perceived status and foreignness. For policies seen as changing societal status (e.g., welfare), people expected Black–Hispanic political coalitions and viewed Asian Americans as more likely to align with Whites than with other minorities. For policies seen as impacting American identity (e.g., immigration), people expected Asian–Hispanic coalitions and that Black Americans would align with Whites more than other minorities. Manipulating a novel group’s alleged status and cultural assimilation influenced coalitional expectations, providing evidence of causality. These expectations appear to better reflect stereotypes than groups’ actual average policy attitudes and voting behavior. Yet these beliefs may have implications for a diversifying electorate as White Americans strategically amplified the political voice of a racial group expected to agree with their personal preferences on stereotyped policies.

A nationally representative survey (N = 2,213) and five experiments (four preregistered, total N = 1,920) revealed that Whites perceived a foreign cultural threat, or a threat to their American culture and way of life, from the projected growth of racial and ethnic minority populations in their majority-White neighborhoods (Studies 1-5) and schools (Study 6). Whites perceived the increasing presence of Arab Americans, Latinos, and Asian Americans to pose an especially strong degree of perceived foreign cultural threat relative to Black Americans, who were perceived as more threatening than no demographic change. Furthermore, perceptions of foreign cultural threat predicted Whites' desires to move out above and beyond other established intergroup threats (e.g., realistic and symbolic threats). These findings highlight how Whites' concerns about losing their American culture and way of life as racial and ethnic minority groups enter majority-White neighborhoods and schools may contribute to the maintenance of racial segregation.

No abstract