Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T02:57:24.456Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in American Politics

The Acceptance and Expression of Prejudice during the Trump Era

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2020

Brian F. Schaffner
Brian F. Schaffner
Affiliation:
Tufts Univeristy

Summary

What are the consequences when politicians make prejudiced statements? Theories about the suppression of prejudice argue that people are likely to express more prejudice when they believe that norms are more permissive than they may have otherwise assumed. Using a series of experiments carried out during and since the 2016 campaign, Brian Schaffner shows that being exposed to Donald Trump's prejudiced rhetoric causes people to express more prejudice themselves. Notably, this is not merely a 'Trump Effect;' people's commitment to anti-prejudice norms is undermined even when exposed to prejudiced rhetoric attributed to unnamed politicians. These findings are consequential; if politicians increasingly feel at liberty to express explicit prejudice, then the mass public is likely to take cues from such behavior, leading them to express more prejudice themselves. This may lead to increasingly heightened inter-group tensions which could pose a threat to political and social stability in the United States.
Get access

Keywords

prejudicerhetoricpublic opinionmotivated reasoningpartisanship
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in American Politics
Online ISBN: 9781108924153
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 12 November 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Banks, A. J., & Hicks, H. M. (2019). The effectiveness of a racialized counterstrategy. American Journal of Political Science 63(2): 305–322.Google Scholar
Becker, J. C. (2010). Why do women endorse hostile and benevolent sexism? The role of salient female subtypes and internalization of sexist contents. Sex Roles 62(7–8): 453–467.Google Scholar
Blanchard, F. A., Crandall, C. S., Brigham, J. C., & Vaughn, L. A. (1994). Condemning and condoning racism: A social context approach to interracial settings. Journal of Applied Psychology 79(6): 993.Google Scholar
Blanchard, F. A., Lilly, T., & Vaughn, L. A. (1991). Reducing the expression of racial prejudice. Psychological Science 2(2): 101–105.Google Scholar
Bullock, J. G. (2009). Partisan bias and the Bayesian ideal in the study of public opinion. Journal of Politics 71(03): 1109–1124.Google Scholar
Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American Voter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carey, J. M., Helmke, G., Nyhan, B., Sanders, M., & Stokes, S. (2019). Searching for bright lines in the Trump presidency. Perspectives on Politics 17(3): 699–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science 10: 103–126.Google Scholar
Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In The Handbook of Social Psychology, edited by Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T. & Lindzey, G, pp. 151–192. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Coppock, A., & McClellan, O. A. (2019). Validating the demographic, political, psychological, and experimental results obtained from a new source of online survey respondents. Research & Politics 6(1): 1–14.Google Scholar
Costello, M. B. (2016). The Trump Effect: The Impact of the Presidential Campaign on Our Nation’s Schools. Montgomery, AL: Southern Poverty Law Center.Google Scholar
Crandall, C. S., & Eshleman, A. (2003). A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin 129(3): 414.Google Scholar
Crandall, C. S., Eshleman, A., & O’Brien, L. (2002). Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: The struggle for internalization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82(3): 359–378. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.82.3.359.Google Scholar
Crandall, C. S., Miller, J. M., & White, M. H. (2018). Changing norms following the 2016 US presidential election: The Trump effect on prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science 9(2): 186–192. doi:1948550617750735.Google Scholar
Crosby, F., Bromley, S., & Saxe, L. (1980). Recent unobtrusive studies of black and white discrimination and prejudice: A literature review. Psychological Bulletin 87(3): 546.Google Scholar
Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1986). Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Druckman, J., & Bolsen, T. (2011). Framing, motivated reasoning, and opinions about emergent technologies. Journal of Communication 61(4): 659–688. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01562.x.Google Scholar
Edwards, G. S., & Rushin, S. (2018). The effect of President Trump’s election on hate crimes. SSRN 3102652.Google Scholar
Engelhardt, A. M. (2018). Racial attitudes through a partisan lens. British Journal of Political Science: 1–18. doi:10.1017/S0007123419000437.Google Scholar
Ford, T. E., Boxer, C. F., Armstrong, J., & Edel, J. R. (2008). More than “just a joke”: The prejudice-releasing function of sexist humor. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34(2): 159–170.Google Scholar
Ford, T. E., Wentzel, E. R., & Lorion, J. (2001). Effects of exposure to sexist humor on perceptions of normative tolerance of sexism. European Journal of Social Psychology 31(6): 677–691.Google Scholar
Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., & Quirk, P. J. (2006). The logic of the survey experiment reexamined. Political Analysis 15(1): 1–20.Google Scholar
Gervais, B. T. (2014). Following the news? Reception of uncivil partisan media and the use of incivility in political expression. Political Communication 31(4): 564–583.Google Scholar
Gervais, B. T. (2015). Incivility online: Affective and behavioral reactions to uncivil political posts in a web-based experiment. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 12(2): 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70(3): 491.Google Scholar
Gross, J. H., & Johnson, K. T. (2016). Twitter taunts and tirades: Negative campaigning in the age of Trump. PS: Political Science & Politics 49(4): 748–754.Google Scholar
Hopkins, D. J., & Washington, S. (2020). The rise of Trump, the fall of prejudice? Tracking white americans’ racial attitudes 2008–2018 via a panel survey. Public Opinion Quarterly 84(1): 119–140.Google Scholar
Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aarøe, L. (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review 109(1): 1–17.Google Scholar
Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (1992). Traditional versus social values as antecedents of racial stereotyping and policy conservatism. Political Behavior 14(4): 395–421.Google Scholar
Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly 76(3): 405–431.Google Scholar
Julious, S. A. (2004). Using confidence intervals around individual means to assess statistical significance between two means. Pharmaceutical Statistics: The Journal of Applied Statistics in the Pharmaceutical Industry 3(3): 217–222.Google Scholar
Kalkan, K. O., Layman, G. C., & Uslaner, E. M. (2009). “Bands of others”? Attitudes toward Muslims in contemporary American society. Journal of Politics 71(3): 847–862.Google Scholar
Kuklinski, J. H., Cobb, M. D., & Gilens, M. (1997). Racial attitudes and the “New South.” Journal of Politics 59(2): 323–349.Google Scholar
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480–498.Google Scholar
Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How Democracies Die. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Mason, L. (2016). A cross-cutting calm: How social sorting drives affective polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly 80(S1): 351–377.Google Scholar
Mason, L. (2018). Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mason, L., & Wronski, J. (2018). One tribe to bind them all: How our social group attachments strengthen partisanship. Political Psychology 39(S1): 257–277.Google Scholar
Mendelberg, T. (2001). The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages, and the Norm of Equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Munger, K. (2017). Tweetment effects on the tweeted: Experimentally reducing racist harassment. Political Behavior 39(3): 629–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Newman, B., Merolla, J. L., Shah, S., Lemi, D. C., Collingwood, L., & Ramakrishnan, S. K. (2019). The Trump effect: An experimental investigation of the emboldening effect of racially inflammatory elite communication. British Journal of Political Science: 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0007123419000590.Google Scholar
Nithyanand, R., Schaffner, B., & Gill, P. (2017). Online political discourse in the Trump era. arXiv preprint. Available at: arXiv:1711.05303.Google Scholar
Paluck, E. L. (2009). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: A field experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96(3): 574.Google Scholar
Paluck, E. L., & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? a review and assessment of research and practice. Annual Review of Psychology 60: 339–367.Google Scholar
Petersen, M. B., Skov, M., Serritzlew, S. R., & Ramsøy, T. (2013). Motivated reasoning and political parties: Evidence for increased processing in the face of party cues. Political Behavior 35: 831–854. doi:10.1007/s11109-012-9213-1.Google Scholar
Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (1998). Internal and external motivation to respond without prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75(3): 811.Google Scholar
Roese, N. J., & Jamieson, D. W. (1993). Twenty years of bogus pipeline research: A critical review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 114(2): 363.Google Scholar
Rokeach, M., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1989). Stability and change in American value priorities, 1968–1981. American Psychologist 44(5): 775.Google Scholar
Schaffner, B. F. (2020). “White Republicans and Independents are starting to acknowledge their privilege, but will it last?” www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2020/6/15/white-republicans-and-independents-are-starting-to -acknowledge-their-privilege-but-will-it-last.Google Scholar
Schaffner, B. F. (in press). The heightened importance of racism and sexism in the 2018 US midterm elections. British Journal of Political Science.Google Scholar
Schaffner, B. F., MacWilliams, M., & Nteta, T. (2018). Understanding white polarization in the 2016 vote for president: The sobering role of racism and sexism. Political Science Quarterly 133(1): 9–34.Google Scholar
Schaffner, B. F., & Sellers, P. J. (2009). Winning with Words: The Origins and Impact of Political Framing. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sides, J., Tesler, M., & Vavreck, L. (2018). Identity Crisis: The 2016 Election and the Battle for the Meaning of America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigall, H., & Page, R. (1971). Current stereotypes: A little fading, a little faking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 18(2): 247.Google Scholar
Sniderman, P. M., & Theriault, S. M. (2004). “The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing.” In Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, edited by W. E. Saris and P. M. Sniderman, pp. 133–165. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Taber, C., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 755–769.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations 33(47): 74.Google Scholar
Tesler, M. (2016). Post-racial or Most-racial? Race and Politics in the Obama Era. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Valentino, N. A., Neuner, F. G., & Vandenbroek, L. M. (2018). The changing norms of racial political rhetoric and the end of racial priming. Journal of Politics 80(3): 757–771.Google Scholar
Valentino, N. A., Wayne, C., & Oceno, M. (2018). Mobilizing sexism: The interaction of emotion and gender attitudes in the 2016 US presidential election. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(suppl. 1): 213–235.Google Scholar
Weeks, B. E. (2015). Emotions, partisanship, and misperceptions: How anger and anxiety moderate the effect of partisan bias on susceptibility to political misinformation. Journal of Communication 65(4): 699–719.Google Scholar
Yglesias, M. (2019). The great awokening. Vox, March 22. www.vox.com/2019/3/22/18259865/great-awokening-white-liberals-race-polling-trump-2020.Google Scholar
Zaller, J. (1992). The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zitek, E. M., & Hebl, M. R. (2007). The role of social norm clarity in the influenced expression of prejudice over time. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43(6): 867–876.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Acceptance and Expression of Prejudice during the Trump Era
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Acceptance and Expression of Prejudice during the Trump Era
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Acceptance and Expression of Prejudice during the Trump Era
Available formats
×