PRIVATE VS PUBLIC EXPRESSIONS OF RACIAL PREJUDICE

The present research examined the different processes that guide judgm ents of single group members in private vs anticipated public contexts . In each of three experiments, pro-Black or anti-Black participants w ere informed in advance either that their judgments of a Black individ ual were completely confidential (Private Context) or that they would be discussing their judgments with the other persons in the room (Anti cipated Public Context). Experiment 1 showed that judgments of the tar get were more consistent with racial attitudes in the anticipated publ ic than in the private condition. Experiment 2 replicated these findin gs and, moreover, showed nearly identical effects regardless of whethe r participants' attitudes were assessed by measures of modern vs ''old -fashioned'' racism. Experiment 3 again showed consistency between gro up attitudes and judgments of the target in anticipated public context s, even when participants were given information about the likely ''pr o'' or ''anti'' views of the audience and, hence, regardless of whethe r participants believed that the audience agreed with their own attitu des or not. Taken as a whole, results were consistent with a 'bolsteri ng' framework first articulated in the cognitive dissonance domain (e. g., McGuire, 1964), which has shown that people become psychologically invested in their own positions when they anticipate debate with othe rs, especially when their a priori commitment to their attitude is rel atively high. The implications of the present results for theories of modern racism and the construct validity of the modern racism scale ar e discussed. (C) 1996 Academic Press, Inc.