The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Symbolic Racism: Problems of Motive Attribution in Political Analysis
Abstract
Research on symbolic racism attempts to identify the underlying psychological sources of public resistance to policies designed to promote racial equality. This research program has been built on the fundamental idea that, although old‐fashioned, overt forms of racism have lost much of their appeal in American politics, new, more subtle and symbolic forms of racism continue to exert a pervasive influence on policy debates, making themselves felt, for example, in opposition to busing, to affirmative action, or even to black candidates running for office. This paper identifies serious empirical, logical, and methodological shortcomings in the case that researchers have advanced to support the symbolic racism thesis. Most serious are (a) the lack of clarity in theoretical definitions of symbolic racism, (b) the major inconsistencies in the operationalization of the construct, (c) the confounding of “independent” and “dependent” variables in the construction of symbolic racism scales, (d) the politically controversial nature of the item content of certain symbolic racism scales, (e) the frequent failures to distinguish the impact of traditional racial prejudice from that of symbolic racism on policy preferences, and (f) the tendency to pose a very restrictive conception of self‐interest as the major explanatory alternative to symbolic racism interpretations of policy preferences.
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
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
Cited by
Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.67.4.741 · Cited by 4,954
Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339 · Cited by 4,904
Rethinking Racism: Toward a Structural Interpretation
Bonilla-Silva, E. (1997) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2657316 · Cited by 2,760
Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review
Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_4 · Cited by 1,588
Social Identity and Social Emotions: Toward New Conceptualizations of Prejudice
SMITH, E. R. (1993) · Affect, Cognition and Stereotyping · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-088579-7.50017-x · Cited by 803
Metadata
- Authors
- Sniderman, P. M., & Tetlock, P. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Social Issues
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1986-07
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 129-150
- ISSN
- 0022-4537 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-4560
- OpenAlex
- W2092323681
- Cited by
- 513
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 26.66
- 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: Symbolic Racism: Problems of Motive Attribution in Political Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1986.tb00229.x
- The paper
- Sniderman, P. M., & Tetlock, P. E. (1986). Symbolic Racism: Problems of Motive Attribution in Political Analysis. Journal of Social Issues. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1986.tb00229.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.