Biography

This sequential mixed-methods study examines how Americans ascribe meanings to the concepts racism, sexism, and classism. We first conduct interviews (N = 40) using a symbolic boundaries elicitation approach, gathering examples of scenarios that do and do not “count” as racism, sexism, and classism. We then use these examples as vignettes in a nationally representative survey-experiment (N = 2,000). Results reveal striking evidence for cultural heterogeneity in how Americans understand and define racism, sexism, and classism. We find that a person’s definition of these concepts depends on their emphasis on intentionality, unequal treatment/outcomes, and power (a)symmetry. We also find that political partisanship, gender, age, and income shape the importance of these three components in their definitions. Finally, we show that Americans’ definitions of racism, sexism, and classism strongly predict their discrimination-related public opinion and policy preferences, such as support for affirmative action and antidiscrimination laws, even after accounting for demographic controls, including political views.

Recent scholarship has advanced a concept of racism operating through omission. Omission captures both inaction and action, highlighting how systems of oppression rely on inertia in addition to discriminatory action to perpetuate inequality. Yet little is known about how laypersons understand the role of omission in propagating racism in the United States. Building on this premise, we employ a mixed-methods approach to document and test folk theories of the racism of omission. We interview diverse individuals (N=40) about their appraisals of racism; we use these findings to design a vignette study which we fielded to a national sample (N=1,174). Interview data reveal that some Americans do understand omission to be a form of racism, highlighting (1) bystander inaction, (2) silencing of experiences of racism, (3) overfocus on White issues, and (4) disparities in positions of power as instances where inaction, exclusion, or inertia constitute a form of racism. Data show that Americans are most likely to consider overfocus and silencing as forms of omission-based racism, and that racism appraisals depend on the victim’s race. We find that political ideology, gender, income, race, and education shape appraisals of racism as omission. These findings have implications for measures of perceived racism and discrimination.

Although higher education research has identified racial/ethnic disparities in college enrollment and degree completion, few studies investigate the educational outcomes of multiracial students relative to monoracial student groups. This paper begins to fill this gap and aims to open a conversation about the precarious state of data collection and empirical research on the growing multiracial population. Using several waves from the Educational Longitudinal Study (ELS) and the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), we center multiracial college students in our empirical analysis, which investigates the following questions: (1) how do enrollment rates and patterns of enrollment based on institutional type differ, if at all, for multiracial college students relative to monoracial college students? and (2) how does retention and overall degree attainment differ between multiracial and monoracial groups of college students? Our analyses identify several trends that suggest that multiracial people enroll in college at significantly lower rates, are more likely to enroll in private colleges and universities and four-year institutions, and are less likely to earn bachelor’s degrees relative to other racial groups.

Stigma is present throughout everyday interactions but has particular salience for people seeking abortion care. Using Goffman’s conceptualization of stigma as a marker and enforcer of social ostracization, we expand on existing understandings of abortion stigma and its management. We draw on interviews with 12 clients and 10 staff members of crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) in Ohio to demonstrate how stigmatization around abortion begins before an abortion occurs. We find evidence of enacted and anticipated stigmatization and document how women who are considering an abortion mitigate stigmatization through impression management and other responsive mechanisms. This project expands on existing literature by articulating the broad reality of abortion stigma and shows the concrete ways anticipated and experienced stigmatization can change an individual’s behavior in a health care setting.