The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Is Multiculturalism or Color Blindness Better for Minorities?
Abstract
Multiculturalism, a pluralistic ideology, stresses recognizing and celebrating group differences, whereas color blindness, an assimilationist ideology, stresses ignoring or minimizing group differences. Among dominant-group members, multiculturalism whether experimentally manipulated or measured as an individual difference predicts lower bias, whereas color blindness predicts greater bias. In a field study, we investigated the effects of Whites’ diversity beliefs on their minority co-workers’ psychological engagement, a meaningful target outcome. The 4,915 respondents (48% response rate; 80% female, 20% male; 79% White, 21% minority; modal age 42–60 years) mirrored organizational demographics (79% female, 21% male; 79% White, 21% minority; modal age 42– 60 years). The result indicates that diversity beliefs impact engagement despite dispersion. It is concluded that by making multiple advances across areas of psychology, we have shown that poor diversity climates cost and positive diversity climates benefit both minorities and organizations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85 · Cited by 4,774
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268 · Cited by 4,623
Cited by
Ambient belonging: how stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science
Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Davies, P. G., & Steele, C. M. (2009) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0016239 · Cited by 1,372
Self-citationNot So Subtle: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Correlates of Subtle and Overt Discrimination
Jones, K. P., Peddie, C. I., Gilrane, V. L., King, E. B., & Gray, A. L. (2016) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206313506466 · Cited by 445
Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures.
Kaiser, C. R., Major, B., Jurcevic, I., Dover, T. L., Brady, L. M., & Shapiro, J. R. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0030838 · Cited by 405
Rage against the Iron Cage: The Varied Effects of Bureaucratic Personnel Reforms on Diversity
Dobbin, F., Schrage, D., & Kalev, A. (2015) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122415596416 · Cited by 385
“What about me?” Perceptions of exclusion and Whites' reactions to multiculturalism.
Plaut, V. C., Garnett, F. G., Buffardi, L. E., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0022832 · Cited by 331
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Plaut, V. C., Thomas, K. M., & Goren, M. J.
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 444-446
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2160385787
- Cited by
- 462
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 65.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is Multiculturalism or Color Blindness Better for Minorities? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02318.x
- The paper
- Plaut, V. C., Thomas, K. M., & Goren, M. J. (2009). Is Multiculturalism or Color Blindness Better for Minorities? Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02318.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.