Cited by 256Social and Intergroup PsychologyRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchCritical Race Theory in Education

In Blind Pursuit of Racial Equality?

Apfelbaum, Evan P., Pauker, Kristin, Sommers, Samuel R., Ambady, Nalini·2010·Psychological Science

Abstract

Despite receiving little empirical assessment, the color-blind approach to managing diversity has become a leading institutional strategy for promoting racial equality, across domains and scales of practice. We gauged the utility of color blindness as a means to eliminating future racial inequity--its central objective--by assessing its impact on a sample of elementary-school students. Results demonstrated that students exposed to a color-blind mind-set, as opposed to a value-diversity mind-set, were actually less likely both to detect overt instances of racial discrimination and to describe such events in a manner that would prompt intervention by certified teachers. Institutional messages of color blindness may therefore artificially depress formal reporting of racial injustice. Color-blind messages may thus appear to function effectively on the surface even as they allow explicit forms of bias to persist.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797610384741

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Learning to negate race is itself highly relevant for youth development, both as a process and as an outcome, and with implications at the individual and societal levels.

    “However, learning to negate race is itself highly relevant for youth development, both as a process and as an outcome, and with implications at the individual and societal levels (Apfelbaum et al., 2010).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Apfelbaum, E. P., Pauker, K., Sommers, S. R., & Ambady, N.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Apfelbaum, Evan P.
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2010-09-28
Volume
21
Issue
11
Pages
1587-1592
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2133604348
Cited by
256
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
20.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Race Theory in Education
Keywords
colorblind racism, racial equality, racial discrimination, discrimination detection, teacher intervention, institutional diversity policy, racial bias, elementary school students
MeSH terms
Child, Female, Habituation, Psychophysiologic, Humans, Male, Prejudice, Social Identification, Social Justice, Social Values, Socialization, Socioeconomic Factors, Cultural Diversity

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