1
Uncensored:
Reducing Social Desirability in the Expression of Racial Attitudes
There is almost a consensus among scholars that the old days of expressing overt
racial beliefs have greatly diminished. This is not to say that racial prejudice has
disappeared. Rather, individuals are more likely to express their beliefs in race-neutral
terms
2
or censor themselves altogether. This is due to a shift in norms that now deems
the expression of racial prejudice politically incorrect. In other words, “new, post-civil-
rights-era, normative prescriptions now mute [racism’s] overt expression. That is, even
those with underlying prejudiced beliefs understand that the public expression of racism
is no longer acceptable in most circles and usually comply with that norm, at least
overtly” (Sears, Hetts et al. 2000).
Nevertheless, racist ideologies rest just below the surface. Whether overtly or
covertly expressed, attitudes towards race and perceptions of African Americans predict
support for candidates (Williams 1989; Terkildsen 1993; Reeves 1997; Berinsky 1999),
issues (Edsall and Edsall 1991; Gilens 1999; Valentino 1999; Mendelberg 2001), and
political parties (Carmines and Stimson 1989; Huckfeldt and Kohfeld 1989; Philpot
2004). Yet, the extent to which race matters in politics is systematically underestimated
because of the censoring of individuals racial beliefs. Rather than express racially
conservative attitudes, individuals will often mark “don’t know” when asked in surveys
about their racial attitudes (Berinsky 1999) or indicated that they are undecided when
asked about voting for a black candidate (Reeves 1997).
2
By race-neutral terms, we mean the expression of prejudice based on principled conservatism or racial
resentment rather than overt disenchantment for racial minorities.
Convention