The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Processes in Racial Discrimination: Differential Weighting of Conflicting Information
Open accessAbstract
The present research explored how White college students may exhibit response patterns associated with a subtle and rationalizable contemporary bias, aversive racism. In the study, higher and lower prejudice-scoring participants evaluated applicants for admission to their university, for whom information about high school achievement and college board scores (aptitude and achievement test scores) was independently varied as strong or weak. As predicted, discrimination against Black applicants relative to White applicants did not occur when the credentials were consistently strong or weak; however, discrimination by relatively high prejudice-scoring participants did emerge when the credentials were mixed and hence ambiguous. Moreover, relatively high prejudice-scoring participants weighed the different, conflicting criteria in ways that could justify or rationalize discrimination against Black applicants. The implications of these data for understanding contemporary racism and their relation to the shifting standards model of bias are considered.
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
A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance
Steele, C. M. (1997) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.52.6.613 · Cited by 6,770
Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components
Devine, P. G. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5 · Cited by 5,673
Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice.
Monin, B., & Miller, D. T. (2001) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.33 · Cited by 1,086 · cited 1×
“This bias is expressed primarily in indirect ways that serve to protect the aversive racist’s nonprejudiced selfimage (see also Monin & Miller, 2001).”
BackgroundStereotypes and standards of judgment.
Biernat, M., Manis, M., & Nelson, T. E. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.485 · Cited by 449
Cited by
Physicians and Implicit Bias: How Doctors May Unwittingly Perpetuate Health Care Disparities
Chapman, E. N., Kaatz, A., & Carnes, M. (2013) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-013-2441-1 · Cited by 1,300
Gender, Race, and Meritocracy in Organizational Careers
Castilla, E. J. (2008) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/588738 · Cited by 717
Why can't we just get along? Interpersonal biases and interracial distrust.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. E., Kawakami, K., & Hodson, G. (2002) · Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology · doi:10.1037/1099-9809.8.2.88 · Cited by 593
Self-citationDovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2004) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(04)36001-6 · Cited by 650
Self-citationHodson, G., & Costello, K. (2007) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01962.x · Cited by 497
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hodson, G., Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-04
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 460-471
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2049252767
- Cited by
- 303
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 28.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Processes in Racial Discrimination: Differential Weighting of Conflicting Information. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0146167202287004
- The paper
- Hodson, G., Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Processes in Racial Discrimination: Differential Weighting of Conflicting Information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202287004
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.