Perspectives on Racial Phenotypicality Bias - Tufts University

19 Pages·2004·2.87 MB·English

Personality and Social Psychology Review Copyright ©2004by
2004, Vol.8, No.4,383–401 Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Perspectives on Racial Phenotypicality Bias
Keith B. Maddox
Department of Psychology
Tufts University
Thisarticlereviewsresearchexaminingracialphenotypicalitybias—within-category
stereotypes,prejudice,anddiscriminationbasedonrace-relatedphenotypiccharac-
teristicsoftheface.Aliteraturereviewofresearchexaminingskintonebias,drawing
largelyfromworkexaminingperceptionsofBlacksintheUnitedStates,revealsthat
individuals with features typical of members of their racial category are perceived
and treated more negatively by social perceivers. Furthermore, this treatment has
broadimplicationsforsocialstatusandhealth.Despitethisevidence,thetendencyto
attend to and use within-race variation in phenotypic appearance has been over-
lookedinsocialpsychologicalmodelsofimpressionformation.However,severalthe-
oretical frameworks have recently been proposed to explain the role of pheno-
type-based expectancies in social representation and judgment. Drawing on the
strengthsofeachperspective,arudimentarymodelofracialphenotypicalitybiasis
proposed. This analysis suggests that future examinations guided by the current
framework(orsimilarothers)cancomplementexistingeyvidencetowardagreaterun-
derstanding of the role of phenotypic variation in socpial perception.
o
Manyofusarefamiliarwithvividexamplesofra- CAs the criterion for racial group membership, per-
cialbias—negativetreatmentexhibitedtowardvarious ceivedphenotypicvariationacrossindividualsplaysan
t
individuals as a function of racial category member- o extremelyimportantinsocialperception.Butourun-
ship.Generally,thisbiasreflectsanegativedispositioNn derstandingofthisrolemaybeincomplete.Anumber
toward non-White individuals. At its core, racial bias of investigations have examined the possibility that

stemsfromtheideathatWhiteEurocentricphenootypic within-race variation in phenotypic appearance may
characteristics(e.g.,lighterskinandeyecolDor,longer have consequences for social perception beyond the
andstraighterhair,narrowernose,andthinnerlips)are “mere”determinationofracialcategorymembership.
preferabletofeaturestowardtheotherendofthecon- These investigations suggest that interpersonal out-
tinuum (e.g., darker skin color, kinkier hair, broader comesarealsobasedontheextenttowhichanindivid-
nose, fuller lips). As a consequence, White and non- ual’s physical facial characteristics resemble what is
Whitemembersofmanysocietiesareexposedtothis believedtobetypicalofaracialcategory.Racialgroup
idealandadheretoitintheirevaluationsofthemselves members whose appearance most closely resembles
andothersundermanycircumstances.Agreatdealof our representation of the “typical” category member
research in social psychology has explored the ante- aremorelikelytobeviewedthroughthelensofthecat-
cedentsandconsequencesofrace-basedstereotyping,
egory stereotypes and evaluations. This phenomenon
prejudice, and discrimination (Brigham, 1971; Fiske,
could be termedracial phenotypicality bias.
1998; Hamilton, 1981). This research has demon-
Usingtheliteratureasabarometer,mostsocialpsy-
stratedtheimportantroleofracialcategorizationinso-
chologists seem unfamiliar with incidents of pheno-
cial perception. The phenotypic facial characteristics
typicalitybiasdistinguishingmembersofthesamera-
wepossessdeterminetheracialcategorymemberships
cialcategory.Inthepast,theideathatwithin-category
thatareascribedtous.Thesemembershipshaveimpli-
variationinphysicalfeaturescouldhaveameaningful
cationsforinterpersonalthoughts,feelings,andbehav-
influence on race perception had been either ignored
ior (Fiske, 1998; Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Hamilton,
or rejected in the development of social psychologi-
1981).
cal theory governing person perception. However, a
glancebeyondthedisciplinaryboundaryrevealsanex-
I thank Irene Blair, Kendrick Brown, Buju Dasgupta, Eliot istingandexpandingbodyofhistorical,anthropologi-
Smith,LindaTropp,andtwoanonymousreviewersfortheirhelpful cal,sociological,andmedicalevidenceindicatingthat
comments on previous versions of this article.
within-race phenotypic variation makes a significant
RequestsforreprintsshouldbesenttoKeithB.Maddox,Depart-
contributiontosocialperception.Thelackofattention
mentofPsychology,TuftsUniversity,Medford,MA 02155.E-mail:
[email protected]. fromsocialpsychologicaltheoryissomewhatsurpris-
383
MADDOX
inggiventhatthisapproachhasprovidedanumberof 2002), and subgroup prejudice (Uhlmann, Dasgupta,
useful insights on racial stereotyping, prejudice, and Elgueta, Greenwald, & Swanson, 2002). All of these
discrimination.Similarideashavebeenexploredwith terms reflect differential attitudes, beliefs, and treat-
respect to gender, suggesting that men described as ment of individuals based on variation in phenotyp-
havingmore“masculine”appearanceandwomenwith ic characteristics of the face traditionally associated
more “feminine” appearance more closely resemble withparticularracialcategories.Someoftheseterms
theirrespectivecategorystereotypes(Deaux&Lewis, emphasize skin color or tone among those features,
1984). However, traditional social psychological per- reflecting an assumption by the researchers that skin
spectivesfailtoaccountfortheconsequencesthatvari- tone (as opposed to variation in other features of the
ationinracialphenotypicappearancehasfortheinter- face) is the most salient or important dimension on
personal and societal outcomes of others. which distinctions among group members may be
The following review of research exploring racial made. Accordingly, skin tone is often the only phe-
phenotypicalitybiassuggeststhatthewaysthatsocial notypicvariablemeasured.Othertermsdonotreflect
psychologistshavethoughtaboutracialstereotypingin assumptionsconcerningtheprimacyofskintone.Re-
thepastcanbeelaboratedbyconsideringracialpheno- searchers adopting these terms tend to use global
typicality. The review begins with a consideration of measures of phenotypic appearance. In the following
historical and empirical evidence providing perspec- review, terms reflect the specificity of the measures
tiveonthescopeofthephenomenon.Thisevidencede- that were used.
scribes a long history of discrimination and conflict,
the existence of damaging, negative stereotypes, and
Historical and Anecdotal Accounts
measurabledisparityinsocietalstatusamongindividu-
alsasafunctionofphenotypicappearance—withinra- Historicalandanecdotalaccountsofskintonebias
cial categories. The similarity to existing disparities among Black Americans abound (Drake & Cayton,
y
between racial groups is striking, suggesting the use- 1945; Frazier, 1957; Parrish, 1944; Russell et al.,
p
fulness of a social psychological perspective. This is 1992).1Ingeneral,theseepisodessuggestthatthein-
o
followedbydiscussionofseveraltheoreticalperspec- fluence of skin tone was widespread, extending to
C
tivesthathavebeenofferedtoexplainvariousaspects manyareasoflifeexperienceandachievement.Early
ofracialphenotypicalitybias.Theseapproachesoffer t historical evidence suggests that both Blacks and
o
suggestions for a rudimentary integrative framework Whites in the United States exhibited bias based on
N
thatcanaccountfortheexistingdataregardingtherole skin tone as early as the slavery era. White Eurocen-
ofracialphenotypicalityinsocialperception.Fin ally, tricfacialfeaturesinBlackswereseenasevidenceof
o
directionsforfutureresearchthatmaybeusefultoward Whiteancestry,leadingtoinferencesofracialsuperi-
D
exploring the nature and impact of racial pheno- ority(Russelletal.,1992).Aftertheabolitionofslav-
typicalitybiasarediscussed.Althoughmultipleracial ery, lighter skin provided better social, educational,
andethnicgroupsareconsidered,thereviewisskewed and economic opportunities (Neal & Wilson, 1989;
heavily toward research regarding Black Americans Russell et al., 1992). During this time, employment
becausethisgrouphasbeenamajorfocusofattention. and educational opportunities were finally becoming
Importantly, the evidence reviewed here covers only availableforallBlacks,buttheintragroupmanifesta-
thesocialperceiver’sviewpoint.Severalinvestigations tion of skin tone bias became more evident. All-
that have considered the target’s perspective are out- Blackschoolsandsocialorganizationsusedavariety
sidethescopeofthecurrentgoalsandthereforearenot of methods to weed out undesirable applicants as a
covered(forareview,seeBrown,Ward,Lightbourn,& function of skin tone. Typically, these methods
Jackson, 1999). sought to exclude darker Blacks from positions of
higher status, thus maintaining the social, educa-
tional, and economic distance between Blacks with
A Brief History of Racial light and dark skin (Hall, 1992; Maddox & Gray,
Phenotypicality Bias Research 2002; Russell et al., 1992).
Phenomena falling under the rubric of racial
1BecausemostoftheempiricalresearchhasfocusedonBlack
phenotypicality bias have been labeled Afrocentric
Americans,Ichosetoreflectthatsamefocusinthefollowingreview
bias (Blair, Judd, Sadler, & Jenkins, 2002), the
byfirstconsideringthehistoricalcontextinwhichskintonebiasesto-
bleaching syndrome (Hall, 1994, 1995), colorism wardBlacksdeveloped.Althoughafewstudiesthathaveexamined
(Okazawa-Rey, Robinson, & Ward, 1987; Russell, membersofotherracialcategoriesareconsidered,theirracialhisto-
Wilson, & Hall, 1992), perceptual prejudice (Liv- riesintheUnitedStatesarenotelaboratedhere.Isuggestthatthese
historiesshareasimilartheme—thatofracialdiscriminationinthe
ingston & Brewer, 2002), phenotyping (Codina &
UnitedStates.However,oneshouldkeepinmindthataconsideration
Montalvo, 1994), skin color bias (Hall, 1998), skin
oftheuniquehistoriesofthesegroupsmaybeimportanttowarddevel-
tone bias (Brown et al., 1999; Maddox & Gray, opingacomprehensiveunderstandingofthephenomenon.
384
RACIAL PHENOTYPICALITY BIAS
Empirical Accounts: Evaluations tributestoimplicitevaluations.HighlyprototypicBlack
and Beliefs faceswereassociatedwithmorenegativeimpliciteval-
uationsthanlessprototypicfaces(Livingston&Brew-
In general, people have exhibited a preference for
er,2002).Furthermore,highlyprototypicBlackfaces
lighter skin and Eurocentric facial features in their
primed implicitly led to more negative judgments of
mates, friends, acquaintances, and, at times, even
a race-ambiguous target than less prototypical Black
themselves. Lighter skin tone is preferred to darker
faces(Livingston,2001).Uhlmannetal.(2002)found
skin tone in general (Livingston, 2001; Livingston &
implicitpreferenceforlesstypicalHispanicfacesover
Brewer, 2002; Porter, 1991; Seeman, 1946) and in
moretypicalHispanicfacesamongbothlight-skinned
closerelationships(Averhart&Bigler,1997;Bond&
and dark-skinned Hispanic participants. Furthermore,
Cash,1992;Hill,1944;Robinson&Ward,1995;Ross,
these beliefs may be exaggerated as a function of the
1997). Ross investigated Black college students’atti-
culturalcontextinwhichtheyaremeasured.Uhlmann
tudes toward dating and mate selection. Men were
et al. found that implicit preferences for less pheno-
more likely to prefer lighter skinned mates in dating
typical faces was stronger among Chilean Hispanics
andmarriage.BondandCashfoundthat70%oftheir
comparedtoHispanicsintheUnitedStates.However,
Black college student participants indicated that they
individualsofdifferentracialcategoriesresidinginthe
thought that men preferred lighter skin tone in their
sameculturemaytendtoshowsimilarpatterns(Mad-
mates.
dox & Gray, 2002, in press).
Peoplealsotendtoassociatemorepositiveperson-
Stereotypingandprejudicebasedonphenotypicap-
alitytraitstothosewithlightskin,andnegativechar-
pearance are not always revealed empirically (Atkin-
acteristics to those with dark skin (Anderson &
sonetal.,1996;Secord,1959;Secord,Bevan,&Katz,
Cromwell, 1977; Bayton & Muldrow, 1968; Blair et
1956). Atkinson et al. found no differences in Black
al., 2002; Maddox & Gray, 2002, Study 2; Marks,
and White clinicians’diagnoses, trait ratings, or feel-
1943; Sciara, 1971, 1983). Anderson and Cromwell y
ings toward a hypothetical light- or dark-skinned cli-
surveyedBlackteenagersabouttheirbeliefsconcern- p
ent. These findings suggest the existence of factors
ing positive and negative traits that correspond to in- o
limiting the expression of phenotypicality biases.
dividuals having very light, light-brown, dark-brown, C
and black skin. Results showed that light-brown skin
was associated with positive characteristics (e.g., the otEmpirical Accounts: Life Experiences
prettiest skin, the smartest girl, the children fathNer
Sociologicalandanthropologicalresearchcorrobo-
likesbest).Blackskinwasassociatedwithmoreneg-
rateshistoricalaccounts,showingthatlighterskinned
ative characteristics (e.g., the person one wouold not
Blacks enjoy higher status in society than darker
like to marry, the color one would prefer Dnot to be,
skinned Blacks (Edwards, 1959; Frazier, 1957; Free-
the dumbest person).
man, Ross, Armor, & Pettigrew, 1966; Hill, 2000;
Averhart and Bigler (1997) examined Black chil-
Hughes&Hertel,1990;Hunter,1998;butseeKreiger,
dren’s memory for stereotype-related information
Sidney, & Coakley, 1998; Ransford, 1970; Seltzer &
about light- and dark-skinned Blacks. These partici-
Smith,1991).Thesefindingshaveledsomeauthorsto
pants were read stories that included light- and dark- suggest that the socioeconomic status gap between
skinned Black characters paired with stereotypic and light-anddark-skinnedBlacksintheUnitedStatesis
counterstereotypictraitsandoccupations.Theyfound aslargeasthegapbetweenWhitesandBlacks(Hughes
thatchildrenweremorelikelytorememberstoriesin &Hertel,1990;Hunter,1998;Keith&Herring,1991).
whichcharacterswereportrayedinstereotypeconsis- Inastudytypicalofthisapproach,KeithandHerring
tentways(e.g.,light-skinnedBlackswithpositivetraits examineddatafromthe1979–1980NationalSurveyof
andhigh-statusoccupations;dark-skinnedBlackswith Black Americans and found that Blacks with lighter
negativetraitsandlow-statusoccupations).Similarev- skin had higher educational attainment, occupational
idence was found in White participants’stereotyping status,andincomelevelsthanBlackswithdarkerskin.
offacesasafunctionofthedegreetowhichfaceswere Furthermore,theserelationshipsremainwhencontrol-
perceived to reflect Afrocentric physical features lingformanyotherfactorsthatwouldlikelycreateor
(Blair et al., 2002). Further evidence comes from the augment status differences such as parents’socioeco-
factthatwemaybeexplicitlyawareofculturalstereo- nomic status, gender, region of residence, urbanicity,
typesdistinguishingBlacksasafunctionofskintone. age,maritalstatus,andinheritanceofwealth.Similar
Maddox and Gray (2002, Study 2) found that both patterns of social and economic stratification are evi-
BlackandWhiteparticipantsmorecloselyassociated dent among Mexican Americans (Arce, Murguia, &
darker skinned Blacks with the negative cultural ste- Frisbie, 1987; Relethford, Stern, Gaskill, & Hazuda,
reotype associated with the representation of Blacks. 1983; Telles & Murguia, 1990).
Otherinvestigations,althoughnotfocuseddirectly Thesefindingssuggestacontinuinginfluenceofra-
onskintone,showthatphenotypicvariationalsocon- cial phenotypicality bias on interpersonal outcomes
385
MADDOX
that mirrors the impact of racial bias. Compared to The (Limited) Role
Whites, Black Americans experience greater racial of Phenotypic Variation
discriminationandaredisadvantagedonmanyindica- in Social Psychological Theory
torsofmorbidity,mortality,andaccesstohealthcare
(Dressler,1993).Similarly,darkerskinnedBlacksare Evidence suggests that racial phenotype-based
morelikelythanlighterskinnedBlackstoreporthav- perceptionsinfluencethesocial,physical,andpsycho-
ingexperienceddiscrimination(Edwards,1973;Keith logicaloutcomesofothers.Thissuggeststhataframe-
&Herring,1991;Klonoff&Landrine,2000).Klonoff work of social judgment involving racial categoriza-
(2000)foundthatdarkerskinnedBlacksreportedmore tion, stereotyping, and prejudice derived from social
racialdiscriminationinthepastyearandovertheirlife- psychological theory may be useful in understanding
times.DarkerskinnedBlackswerealsomorelikelyto racial phenotypicality bias. However, models of cate-
perceive the racism they experienced as stressful. gory representation and impression formation have
Studiessuggestthatdarkerskintoneisassociatedwith placed no particular emphasis on the role of with-
higher diastolic and systolic blood pressure, perhaps in-race variation in phenotypic appearance. Still, this
duetostressresultingfromahigherincidenceofdis- fact does not preclude these models from providing
crimination (Gleiberman, Harburg, Frone, Russell, & some perspective on the role of phenotype in social
Cooper,1995;Harburg,Gleibermann,Roeper,Schork, perception.
&Schull,1978).Thesefindingsareconsistentwitha
biopsychosocial model that conceptualizes perceived
Traditional Models of Social
racism as a significant environmental stressor for
Representation and Judgment
Black Americans resulting in a variety of negative
physical and psychological health outcomes (Clark, Therearemultiplesocialpsychologicalmodelsthat
Anderson,Clark,&Williams,1999).Similarly,dark- can describe the implications of a particular mental
y
skinnedChicanomenbornintheUnitedStatesshow representation for judgments about social targets.
p
higher levels of depression compared to their lighter Many of these (e.g., Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1998;
o
counterparts (Codina & Montalvo, 1994). Kunda & Thagard, 1996) have their bases in two ex-
C
tremely influential models of impression formation.
Summary ot Thedual-process(Brewer,1988)andcontinuummod-
els(Fiske&Neuberg,1990),ofimpressionformation
N
The evidence reviewed here suggests the broad have been compared, contrasted, and extensively
scopeandimpactofracialphenotypicalitybias.W ith- tested in the literature (Brewer & Feinstein, 1999;
o
in-race variation in skin tone and other aspects of Fiske,Lin,&Neuberg,1999).Althoughtheoretically
D
phenotypic appearance have a significant impact on distinct,bothprovideagreatdealofexplanatorypower
ourbeliefs,feelings,evaluations,andtreatmenttoward across the range of studies examining person percep-
otherswithconsequencesfortheirinterpersonal,eco- tion. The similarities among the two models, particu-
nomic, and physical health outcomes. As phenotyp- larly with respect to category-based processing, pro-
icality moves away from a White Eurocentric norm, videthefocusforthisdiscussion.Eachmodelbegins
negative evaluations and outcomes increase. When with a stage of initial identification of the social tar-
considering the scope of the phenomenon, several get’s attributes that act as cues to salient category di-
other tendencies are notable. First, the preference for mensionssuchasage,sex,andrace.Ifimportanceto
lighter skin exists when evaluating both African and selformotivationtoprocessislow,subsequentcatego-
Hispanic Americans. Second, this bias is revealed in rization (or recategorization) occurs. Through a com-
the perceptions of adults and children. Third, pheno- parison of the target attributes and a relevant mental
typicality biases are not limited to ingroup members’ representation, perceivers attempt to establish some
evaluations of each other—racial outgroup members degreeoffitbetweenthetargetandtherepresentation,
are also susceptible. Fourth, phenotypicality bias withabiastowarddeterminingsubcategorymember-
seemstobereflectedinbothimplicitandexpliciteval- ship.Oncesatisfactoryfitisestablished,thisrepresen-
uationsofothers.Fifth,perceivedtypicalityoffeatures tation will guide the processing of information about
isstronglyrelatedtothedegreetowhichcategoryste- and behavior toward the target. If fit is sufficiently
reotypes and prejudices are applied to a social target. poor,perceiverswillindividuatethetarget,essentially
Finally,thereareoccasionswhenracialcategorization developing a unique representation.
overrides more fine-grained distinctions based on Traditionally,discussionsoftheroleofskintonein
phenotypicality.Fromanexaminationoftheliterature, stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination have as-
these findings elude the grasp of traditional perspec- sumedthatskintoneissimplyoneofmanyphysicalat-
tivesinsocialpsychology.Thenextsectionconsiders tributesthatcontributestothedeterminationofracial
theroleofphenotypicalityintraditionalmodelsofso- category membership. Subsequently, racial category-
cial representation and judgment. based stereotyping potentially determines the infer-
386
RACIAL PHENOTYPICALITY BIAS
ences and judgments made about an individual. This the participants were assigned to make ratings of the
idea was explicit in the writings of some theorists. Blackphotographsalone.Theotherhalfwereassigned
Take,forexample,themodelofstereotypechangepro- tomakeratingsofthosephotographs,aswellasphoto-
posed by Rothbart and John (1985): graphs of Whites interspersed among the Blacks. In
comparingthesetwogroups,therewerenodifferences
Byextension,individualBlacksmaydifferastohow in stereotype use based on the skin tone of the Black
prototypical they are as examples of Black People. targets.TheabsenceoftheWhitetargetcontrastcate-
Whatwouldbethecriteriafordeterminingthegood- gorydidnotfacilitategreaterwithin-categorydifferen-
nessoffitofanindividualtoasocialcategorysuchas tiation of Black targets, supporting the previous evi-
Blacks? We suspect prototypicality for that group is dence that skin tone variation was not meaningful to
notstronglyrelatedtovariationsin“defining”attrib- White observers.
utes,suchasskincolor,butrathertostereotypicattrib-
The conclusions of these investigations reflect the
utesalreadyassociatedwiththecategory.(pp.89–90)
perceivedroleofphenotypicvariationininfluentialso-
cial psychological theories of category representation
For these theorists, typicality of Blacks is deter-
and impression formation. Although this may have
mined by personality traits and behavior rather than
been the dominant perspective, it was not necessarily
variationinphysicalattributessuchasskintone.Fiske
ubiquitous.Zebrowitz(1996)wasnotspecificallycon-
and Taylor (1991) expressed a similar belief in their
cerned with racial phenotypic variation in discussing
comprehensiveandinfluentialintegrationofthesocial
herecologicaltheoryofsocialperceptionanditsrela-
cognitive literature. “Once a person is categorized as
tion to stereotyping. Yet, she explicitly supported the
BlackorWhite,maleorfemale,youngorold,theste-
ideathat“physicalqualitiescanserveasabasisforso-
reotypic content of the schema is likely to apply re-
cialimpressionsintheabsenceofexplicitcategoriza-
gardless of how much or how little the person looks
tionprocesses,andthatvariationsinphysicalqualities
likethetypicalcategorymember”(p.121).Asimilar y
shouldleadtowithin-categoryvariationsinsocialim-
sentimentwasexpressedbySecord(1958),whostated p
pressions” (p. 109, Footnote 1).
that“aslongasanindividualiscategorizedasaNegro, o
his place on a continuum of Negro-White features C
makeslittledifferenceinimpressionsformed”(p.303). Racial Phenotypicality Revisited
t
Thus,skincolorvariationwasconsideredtobeofgreat o
TheSecordinvestigationsareuniqueandimportant
importance to racial categorization. But its contribuN-
intheirfocusonphenotypicvariationandstereotyping
tion to representation and judgment beyond categori-
ofBlacks.However,theirconclusionsstandincontrast
zation was not deemed meaningful. o
to the majority of published empirical research since
D
thattimedocumentingvariousconsequencesofracial
phenotypicality bias. The conclusions drawn from
Seminal Investigations
theseseminalinvestigationshavebeencritiquedelse-
Theneglectoftheroleofwithin-racevariationre- where and are not repeated here (Blair et al., 2002;
flected in social psychological research and theory is Maddox, 1998; Zebrowitz, 1996). One example may
basedonearlyexperimentalresearchthatfailedtofind illuminate a general concern. In the Secord (1959)
arelationbetweenphenotypicfeaturesandstereotyp- study, there was evidence that the Black targets with
ing. Secord et al. (1956) were interested in whether the most Eurocentric appearance were often catego-
White participants associated stereotype-related per- rizedasWhite,notBlack.Aftercompletingtherating
sonalitytraitstodark-andlight-skinnedBlackstodif- task, participants were asked to provide their opinion
ferent degrees. Participants were asked to rate photo- of racial group membership. The photographs of the
graphs of Black and White men on personality and three Black targets with the most extreme European
physiognomictraitscales.Secordetal.predictedthat featureswerecategorizedasWhiteby33of39partici-
categorizationbyrace,notvariationinfeatures,would pants.Follow-upanalysesshowedthattheparticipants
determinestereotyping.Aspredicted,theyfoundthat whothoughtthepersoninthephotographwasWhite
the presence of Eurocentric phenotypic features in stereotyped them less than the four participants who
photographsdidnotreduceracialstereotyping.Appar- thought the person was Black. The article did not
ently, White participants did not make distinctions clearlystatehowtheratingsoftheseincorrectlycate-
basedonphenotypicfeaturesandlightnessordarkness gorized photos of Blacks compared with ratings of
ofskintone:OnceatargetwascategorizedasBlack,he White photos, although their similarity is implied.
was stereotyped according to that categorization. However, it does state that the four participants who
Secord(1959)conductedafollow-upexperimentto categorized those photos as Blacks stereotyped them
addressthepossibilitythattheinfluenceofphenotypic tothesamedegreeasthemostunambiguouslyBlack
variationinBlacksmayhavebeenmaskedbythepres- photograph. Thus, the study as a whole does not ad-
enceofWhitesintheratingtask.Inthisstudy,halfof dress the situation where Blacks of varying skin
387
MADDOX
tonesarespontaneously(and“correctly”)categorized munities. Black Americans who display the tendency
as Black. to use phenotype to differentiate within a racial cate-
Consideranalternativeinterpretation:Whenpartic- goryaresometimesreferredtoas“colorstruck,”“color
ipants were allowed to work with their spontaneous conscious,” or said to have a “color complex” (Oka-
categorizations,many“incorrectly”perceivedthepho- zawa-Rey et al., 1987; Russell et al., 1992). These
tographs to be White and stereotyped them accord- terms suggest that variation in skin tone is primarily
ingly.2Ifso,thestudydoesnotaddresstheperception important. Blacks often use terms such as “light-
ofphotographsoflight-skinnedBlacksthataresponta- skinned” and “dark-skinned” to describe one another
neously categorized as Black. More important, these (Maddox & Gray, 2002; Russell et al., 1992). This is
criticisms call into question the empirical underpin- also true of Hispanics, who use the terms “blancos”
ningsofthetheoreticaldiscussionoutliningalimited and “morenos” to distinguish between lighter and
role of skin tone in social psychological judgment darker category members (Uhlmann et al., 2002).
processes. Thesetermsemphasizeskincolor,butalsocaptureper-
ceived correlations between skin color and other fea-
tures.Thegeneralcategory“race”andspecificgroup
Alternative Perspectives labelslike“Black”and“White”actasproxiesnotonly
on Racial Phenotypicality Bias forcolor,butalsofordimensionsofthenose,hair,and
lips. Similarly, labels such as “light-skinned,” “blan-
Theevidencereviewedheresuggeststhatracialcat- co,”“dark-skinned,”and“moreno”bringtomindindi-
egorizationdoesnotnecessarilyimplyaterminalstage viduals who differ not only in skin tone but also in
in processing race-related phenotypic features for so- other physical features.
cialperceptionandjudgment.Inlightofthisgrowing
body of cross-disciplinary evidence, several perspec- Consideringphenotypicality. The model begins
y
tiveshavebeenproposed,orcouldbeapplied,torec- with a stage of initial identification of the target’s at-
p
oncile the divergence of social psychological theory tributes(e.g.,phenotypicfeatures,clothing,behavior)
o
and social reality. These approaches, focusing on the thatactascuestosalientcategorydimensionssuchas
C
areas of category representation, impression forma- age,sex,andrace.Perceiverscomparetheseattributes
tion,andsocialjudgment,haveexploredhowvariation t toasalientmentalrepresentation(e.g.,race)withthe
o
inphenotypicappearancemaydetermineinterpersonal goalofdetermininggoodnessoffit,withabiastoward
N
treatment and outcomes. This section explores each determining subcategory membership. Once satisfac-
perspective, describes evidence concerning point s of tory fit is established, this representation will deter-
o
theoreticaldistinctiveness,anddiscussesstrengthsand minetheprocessingofinformationandbehavior.Tar-
D
weaknesses of each perspective in accounting for the getswhosephysicalcharacteristicsaremoretypicalof
available data. thecategorywillbemorelikelytobeviewedthrough
itsconceptuallens.Lesstypicaltargetsarealsoviewed
through that lens, but with less conceptual clarity. In
Skin Tone Bias
otherwords,thesamecategorystereotypesandpreju-
Theory dices will be applied, but to a lesser extent. If fit be-
tweentheracialcategoryandthetargetissufficiently
MaddoxandGray(2002)proposedthatdiscrimina-
poor,perceiverswillindividuatethetarget,essentially
tionbasedonskintoneandphenotypicfeaturescanbe
developing a unique representation. Cognitive psy-
explainedwithexistingmodelsofcategoryrepresenta-
chologistshavelongrecognizedtheimportantroleof
tion (e.g., Brewer & Feinstein, 1999; Fiske et al.,
physical typicality in object category representation
1999).Thisperspectivewasnotelaboratedinthatarti-
(e.g.,Medin,1989).Understandably,socialpsycholo-
cle, so it is described in some detail here.
gistshavefocusedontheroleofbehavioraltypicality
in past formulations (e.g., Rothbart & John, 1985).
The primacy of skin tone. Thisperspectiveem-
Thismodelsuggestsanintegrationofthetwoempha-
phasizestheassumptionthatskintoneisofprimarysa-
ses—racial phenotypicality is also an important con-
lience and importance among the many phenotypic
tributor to the process of social representation and
features used to determine racial category member-
judgment.Thedegreeofcategoryfitincreasesasaper-
ship. The important role of skin tone is supported by
son’sphenotypicappearancebecomesmoretypicalof
thelanguagechoicesintheBlackandHispaniccom-
theracialcategoryrepresentation.Assumingthatdark-
er skin tone is more typical of the representation of
Blacks,thedarkeraBlackperson’sskintone,themore
2Curiously,whenthesesamephotographswerelabeledasBlack,
likelyhewillbeviewedthroughthelensofthecultural
the labels did not facilitate use of the stereotype associated with
stereotype(i.e.,characteristicsassociatedwiththerep-
Blacks.Thisfindingcontradictssimilarresearchexaminingthein-
fluence of ethnic labels (e.g., Razran, 1950). resentationofBlacks).Becausetheculturalstereotype
388
RACIAL PHENOTYPICALITY BIAS
ofBlackAmericansispredominantlynegative,Blacks tion of a person’s genetic makeup and/or cultural
shouldalsobeperceivedmorenegativelyasskintone heritage.IntheUnitedStates,legaldefinitionstodeter-
darkens. mine Black racial category membership hinges on
knowledge of a person’s Black racial ancestry. His-
Phenotype-based subcategories. In addition to torically,thiswasknownintheSouthasthe“onedrop
suggestingalinearrelationbetweengoodnessofcate- rule,” meaning that a single drop of Black blood was
goryfitandstereotyping,theskintonebiasmodelalso sufficient to make someone Black (Davis, 1991). A
suggeststheexistenceofsalient,phenotype-basedsub- personwithdarkskintonemightbeassumedtohave
categories.Intraditionalmodels,perceiversusetarget twoBlackparents,whereaslightskintonemaysuggest
attributestoestablishfitwithmeaningful,salientsub- one Black and one White parent. These beliefs could
typesofthesuperordinatecategorybasedonsocialroles influencebothbiologicalandsocialnotionsofrace.A
and occupational status (Devine & Baker, 1991) or biologicalconstructionofracewouldleadaperceiver
stereotypicality of their behavior (Rothbart & John, toassumethatsomeonewithdarkerskintoneismore
1985). Subtyping, the clustering of individuals by “purely”Black.Asocialconstructionofracemaylead
whethertheyconfirmordisconfirmthestereotype,has another perceiver to infer that being raised by mixed
been linked to the perception of typicality of group raceparentsmightdilutea“purely”Blackculturalup-
members(Maurer,Park,&Rothbart,1995;Park,Wol- bringing. In other words, if one drop of Black blood
sko,&Judd,2001).Inthismodel,subtypingbasedon makesyouBlack,twodropsmakesyouBlacker,both
phenotype may similarly occur through recategoriza- genetically and culturally.
tionprocesses(cf.Fiske&Neuberg,1990).Lesspheno-
typicaltargetsaremorelikelytobesubcategorized.Asa
Evidence
result,thecategoryrepresentationofBlackscanbedif-
ferentiatedbyvarioussubcategoriesofgroupmembers Existence of phenotype-based subcategories.
y
basedontheirphenotypicappearance. Thecategory-basedmodelalsosuggeststhatdegreeof
p
physicaltypicalityisassociatedwiththeformationof
o
Essentialisttheoriesofracialcategorymember- subcategories. Maddox and Gray (2002, Study 1) ex-
C
ship. Beliefs about skin tone and physical features amined the antecedents of skin tone-based stereotyp-
are proposed to originate from our naïve biological t ing using the category confusion paradigm (Taylor,
o
theories about racial category membership. Our cur- Fiske, Etcoff, & Ruderman, 1978). The results of the
N
rent system of racial classification was developed memory task revealed that participants made more
largelybasedonperceivedvariationinskincolo rand within-skin tone than between-skin tone errors, sug-
o
otherphysicaldimensionsofthefaceandbody(Gould, gesting that they attended to, encoded, and used the
D
1994).However,geneticandanthropologicalresearch skintoneofthediscussantsinmakingtheirstatement
suggeststhatanyunderstandingofhumanracialcate- assignments.Furthermore,contextualfactorsmayop-
gories as a biological certainty is flawed. More accu- eratetomakeskintonemoreorlesssalient.Guidedby
rately, racial categories arise as a function of social the model of social category salience proposed by
construction processes (American Anthropological Blanz(1999),whichconsidersbothpersonandcontex-
Association,1998;AmericanAssociationofPhysical tualfactors,MaddoxandGray(inpress)usedthecate-
Anthropologists,1996).Inpartbecauseofourunchal- gory confusion paradigm to investigate contextual
lenged education concerning the biological bases of influencesonthesalienceofskintone-basedsubcate-
race,thissocialconstructionofracehasaverystrong gories.Twoexperimentsdemonstratedthatamanipu-
lay theoretical basis in biological thinking. Coupled lation of issue relevance during a group discussion
withanyknowledgeofdistinctculturalpractices,peo- among light- and dark-skinned Blacks enhanced the
ple are disposed to believe that external physical and categorysalienceofskintone,revealedinthepattern
behavioraldifferencesbetweengroupsarecorrelated, of within- and between-category errors. Discussion
each reflecting stable genetic differences (Eberhardt, topicsrelevanttotheracialpoliticsofskintone(race
Dasgupta,&Banaszynski,2003;Haslam,Rothschild, relationsintheUnitedStates)ledtoincreasesinthesa-
& Ernst, 2002; Hirschfeld, 1996; Rothbart & Tay- lienceofskintonecomparedtoneutraltopics(poten-
lor, 1992). This idea is consistent with theories and tial leisure activities or environmental issues). These
evidenceinthecognitiveliteraturesuggestingthatim- findingsshouldbeinterpretedwithcaution.Evidence
plicit causal theories are an important component of forwithin-andbetween-categoryconfusionsdoesnot
many of our category representations (Keil, 1989; provide direct evidence of categorization (or subcat-
Medin,1989;Medin&Ortony,1989).Implicitcausal egorization)becauseparticipantswereneveraskedto
theoriesrepresentperceiver’sbeliefsaboutcausalrela- categorizethephotographs.Nonetheless,therearerea-
tions among a target’s attributes. From an essentialist sonstobelievethatthesedatahaveimplicationsforthe
orimplicitcausaltheoryperspective,peoplearelikely roleofskintoneinthementalrepresentationofBlack
toassumethatincreasingdarknessofskinisareflec- Americans.Theconfusionmeasureusedherehasbeen
389
MADDOX
foundtobeareliableindirectmeasureofsubtyping.A thosewholinkphenotypicappearanceandracialcate-
similarpatternofconfusionerrorsoccurswhenpartici- gorymembershiptostablegeneticorculturalcauses.
pantsaregivenexplicitinstructionstosortindividuals Livingston and colleagues have found more extreme
using a subtyping process (Park et al., 2001). differencesinautomaticevaluation(Livingston&Brew-
er, 2002) and susceptibility to priming effects (Liv-
Casual role of skin tone. Simplyaskingpartici- ingston, 2001) for low- versus high-prototypic Black
pants to consider Blacks described as light-skinned faces among individuals who scored high on a scale
and dark-skinned is sufficient to elicit differences in measuring reliance on perceptual cues in impression
perceivedculturalstereotypes(Maddox&Gray,2002, formation.Eightofthenineitemsonthisscalereflect
Study2).Asforthecausalroleofskintoneinsocial phenotypic qualities (facial and vocal) and half of
perception,encodinganduseofskintone(Maddox& those items refer to race or ethnicity. Thus, this scale
Gray,2002,Study1;inpress)occurredinthecontext seemstoincludesomeconsiderationoftheracetheo-
of efforts to manipulate skin tone while holding con- ries of the respondents suggesting the importance of
stant other facial characteristics that may naturally laytheoriesofraceinsocialperception.However,other
covarywithskintone.Inthosestudies,theskintoneof research has failed to find a strong relation between
thediscussantswasmanipulateddigitallyacrossmulti- essentialistthinkingandracialprejudice(Haslametal.,
ple replications. However, no direct evidence for the 2002).Itmaybethecasethattheconsiderationofracial
causalroleofskintonehasbeenofferedinstudiesex- phenotypicality is important in linking essentialist be-
amining impression formation and judgment of indi- liefswithracialstereotypingandprejudice.
viduals belonging to the same racial category. At-
kinsonetal.(1996)usedadigitalmanipulationofskin
Afrocentric Bias
tone,yetfoundnodifferencesinBlackandWhitecli-
nicians’diagnoses, trait ratings, or feelings toward a Theory
y
hypothetical light- or dark-skinned client. Dixon and
Blair ept al. (2002) also proposed that traditional
Maddox(inpress)alsousedadigitalmanipulationof
modelosofsocialperceptionfailtorecognizetheinflu-
skintoneandraceamongavaried-racesampleofpar-
encCe of within-category phenotypic variation. This
ticipants. There were no differences in impression
model suggests that the presence of Afrocentric fea-
judgmentsasafunctionofskintone.Theydidfindthat t
o turescontributetosocialperceptionaboveandbeyond
a brief exposure to a photo of a dark-skinned Black
N thatofcategory-basedprocessing.Inthisview,apro-
perpetratorduringacrimestoryledtomoreemotional
cessofreversegeneralizationcharacterizesstereotyp-
discomfort about the story than exposure to a W hite
o ing and prejudice directed toward individuals as a
perpetrator associated with the same story. No differ-
D function of race-related phenotypic features. Racial
ences surfaced when comparing dark Black and light
phenotypicality bias represents a direct linkage be-
Blackperpetrators,orwhencomparinglightBlackand
tweenAfrocentricappearanceandculturalstereotypes
Whiteperpetrators.DixonandMaddoxsuggestedthat
aboutBlacks.Thisassociationiscreatedandfortified
compared to the light-skinned Black perpetrator, the
through the repeated pairing of dark skin tone, broad
dark-skinned perpetrator achieved a certain threshold
noses,fulllips,andshort,tightlycurledhairwiththe
toactivatecategorystereotypesassociatingBlacksand
stereotypes about the group members who possess
criminality. Bolstering this idea was the finding that
those features. As a result, those individuals who ex-
the aforementioned results distinguishing dark Black
hibit Afrocentric features, regardless of group mem-
and White targets occurred only among heavy televi-
bership, may come to be seen through the lens of the
sionnewsviewerswhoaremorelikelytobeexposedto
Black American stereotype.
Blacks as criminals (Dixon & Linz, 2000). So, al-
thoughthereisevidencethatsupportsthecausalroleof
Evidence
skintoneincategoryrepresentationstudiesandprim-
ingofemotionalconcern,thereisnoexistingsupport Unique contributions of category- and feature-
foritscausalroleinimpressionjudgments.Futureevi- based processes. Blair et al. (2002) examined the
denceofthisnatureiscrucialtodeterminingjusthow roleofAfrocentricfeaturesandperceivedracialtypi-
important skin tone is for racial phenotypicality bias. calityinstereotypingofBlacksandWhites.Inthefirst
study, White participants were asked to rate photo-
Implicit causal theories. Onlyonestudyhasat- graphs of Black and White men for the presence of
temptedtodelineatetheimportanceofvariouspheno- Afrocentricfacialfeatures(darkskin,broadnose,full
typic features for racial categorization. When asked, lips,andcoarsehair).Acrossthreeadditionalstudies,
participantsemphasizeskincoloramongotheraspects separate groups of participants rated subsets of these
ofphenotypicappearanceindeterminingracialgroup photographsfortheirdegreeoffitwithdescriptivesce-
membership(Brown,Dane,&Durham,1998).Others nariosthatvariedintheirvalenceandstereotypicality
haveattemptedtomeasureindividualdifferencesamong oftraitsdistinguishingBlacksandWhites.Inaddition,
390
RACIAL PHENOTYPICALITY BIAS
the presence of Afrocentric features contributed to Early emotional conditioning of negative affect with
stereotypingandprejudiceevenwhentheeffectofcat- Blacks will be less intense as cues to racial category
egory accessibility was controlled. This finding sug- membership become weaker (i.e., less typical). This
gests that both category-based process and feature- mechanismsuggeststhataffectiveinformationassoci-
based processes are useful in explaining judgments atedwiththelargerracialcategorybecomesassociated
based on racial phenotype. withlessprototypicalmembersoftheracialcategory.
LivingstonandBreweralsopositedafamiliarity-based
DirectlinkagebetweenAfrocentricfeaturesand mechanismfortheoriginsofperceptualprejudice.Un-
cultural stereotypes. The results of Blair et al. familiarstimulimayelicitstronganxietyanddiscom-
fortthatmightbeexpectedtodecreasewithadditional
(2002)consistentlyrevealedthatpositiveandnegative
exposure.TheysuggestthatWhitesmightbemorefa-
stereotypingofphotographsofbothBlacksandWhites
miliar with low-prototypic Blacks than high-proto-
was positively correlated with the presence of Afro-
typicBlacksforseveralreasons.Whiteslivinginrela-
centric features. Stereotyping of Whites on stereo-
tively racially segregated communities may get more
typicallyBlackpersonalitytraitsmustreflectadirect
frequentexposuretopositiveimagesoflow-prototypic
linkage between those features and the traits of the
thanhigh-prototypicBlacksthroughmediaandenter-
groupmostcloselyassociatedwiththem.However,the
tainment sources. Furthermore, given that skin tone
processlinkingfeaturestotraitsseemstobeasymmet-
hasbeendemonstratedasalimitingfactorinsocialand
rical.Thedescriptionsthatwereusedinthisinvestiga-
economicmobility,Whitesmightbemorelikelytoen-
tionwereconstructedfrompreviousinvestigationsthat
counter low-prototypic (i.e., light-skinned) Blacks
contrasted stereotypic conceptions of Blacks relative
thanhigh-prototypicalBlacksinoccupationalandedu-
to Whites. Thus, descriptions that were counterstere-
cationalsettings.Anyoftheseprocesseswouldperpet-
otypic of Blacks were stereotypic of Whites and vice
uateanexistingtendencytofavorlow-prototypicover
versa. Blair et al. reported that ratings of Eurocentric
y
high-prototypic Blacks.
featuresinWhitefacesdidnotpredictstereotypingof
p
WhitesinStudy3.Itisnotclearwhythepresenceof o
EurocentricfeaturesinBlackandWhitefacesdoesnot CEvidence
predict stereotyping, but the presence of Afrocentric
Automatic evaluation of low- and high-proto-
features does. t
o typic faces. In a series of experiments, Livingston
N and Brewer (2002) presented participants with a se-
Perceptual Prejudice quentialprimingparadigmthatmeasuredaffectivere-
o
actionstoBlackfacesthatwerehighandlowinracial
Theory D
prototypicality.Intwoexperiments,automaticevalua-
tiveresponsesindicatednegativeevaluationsofBlack
Livingston and Brewer (2002) proposed a theory
facesthatwerehighinracialprototypicalitycompared
that governs automatic responses to faces of Blacks.
tothosethatwerelowinracialprototypicality(Experi-
SimilartotheAfrocentricbiasperspective,thistheory
ments1&5).SimilarevidenceusingHispanicfacesin
suggests that the influence of phenotypic variation is
animplicitassociationtaskwasdiscussedearlier(Uhl-
not mediated through conceptual knowledge about
mann et al., 2002).
Blacks. Instead, the influence occurs through cue-
based, affective responses to the physical features of
theface.Thisperspectiveassertsthatfacesandthefea- Failure to activate semantic knowledge. Evi-
turestheypossessdonotnecessarilyactivatethesocial dencefromanotherexperiment(Livingston&Brewer,
categoriestowhichtheymaybelong.Accordingtothe 2002,Experiment3)suggeststhatskintoneandphe-
dual-process model, the identification stage reflects notypic facial characteristics elicit preconscious cue-
simple, automatic recognition of perceptual features. basedprocessingpriortoorinsteadofcategory-based
Therefore, tasks that measure automatic responses to processing.Undertaskgoalsdesignedtoencouragecat-
faces are necessarily cue-based (evaluative), but not egory activation, participants completed a conceptual
category-based (semantic). Automatic evaluations of judgmenttaskinvolvingstereotype-relevantwordsin-
facesthatarehighlytypicalofthecategoryshouldbe steadoftheevaluativetaskusedinotherexperiments.
more negative than evaluations of faces that are less Responsestothesewordswerenotaffectedbyamanip-
typical. ulationofracialprototypicality—afindingthatsuggests
Livingston and Brewer (2002) proposed two pro- semantic category knowledge was not recruited. Al-
cesses to explain the linkage between high thoughplausible,thispointmaybesubjecttosomede-
prototypicality and negative evaluations. In the first, bate. Livingston and Brewer present convincing evi-
theysuggestthatinitiallystrongprejudicesagainstthe dence that automatic categorization and stereotyping
racial category as a whole may become dissociated doesnotnecessarilyoccurautomatically.Butthisdoes
from category-based beliefs and attitudes over time. notmeanthatitcannotoccurundertherightconditions.
391
MADDOX
TheresultsofExperiment3alsofailedtoshowevidence perceptionsofphysicalattractiveness(Breland,1998;
ofautomaticstereotypingbasedonrace.Thisrepresents Wade,1996).Comparedtounattractivepeople,attrac-
afailuretoreplicateanumberofinvestigationsthathave tivepeoplearegenerallyassociatedwithpositiveper-
demonstratedthatautomaticresponsestofacialstimuli sonality characterizations (Dion, Berscheid, & Wal-
can in fact reflect category-based processing through ster, 1972) with some negative caveats (Dermer &
manipulations of processing goals (e.g., Macrae, Thiel,1975).Inotherwords,whatisbeautifulisgood,
Bodenhausen, Milne, Thorn, & Castelli, 1997; Wit- but self-centered. From this perspective, lighter skin
tenbrink,Judd,&Park,1997,2001).Thisraisesques- tone and Eurocentric features imply attractiveness,
tionsabouttheinterpretationoftheresults. leading to perceptions of higher status, financial suc-
cess,vanity,lackofsympathy,andarrogance.Thisex-
Directlinkagebetweenprototypicalfeaturesand
planation suggests that the inferences made about
group-based evaluations. There is no direct evi- light-skinned persons may reflect attractiveness ste-
dencethatsuggeststheexistenceofthislinkage.Inthe- reotyping rather than racial stereotyping.
ory, it is very similar to the feature-trait conditioning
process proposed by Blair et al. (2002) where both
Evidence
evaluativeandconceptualknowledgebecomedirectly
associated with physical features typical of Blacks Correlation between skin tone and physical at-
over time. However, the process described here sug- tractiveness. Anecdotally, techniques to make
gests that only evaluative knowledge becomes asso- physical features less Afrocentric and more Eurocen-
ciated with prototypical features. It is unclear how tricsuchashairstraightening,skinbleaching,colored
thisprocesswoulddissociateaffectivefromsemantic contactlenses,andplasticsurgeryareoftenemployed
knowledge as Livingston and Brewer (2002) suggest. by Blacks and others to augment physical attractive-
ness. Consistent with anecdotal accounts, recently
Increasedfamiliaritywithlow-prototypicBlacks. publisheddaytasuggestedthatthereisacorrelationbe-
Again,nodirectevidenceexists.Althoughthismecha- tween peprceived attractiveness and skin tone. Using
nism seems plausible, some elements seem counter- data froom the 1979–80 NSBA, Hill (2002) examined
intuitive.Forexample,althoughlow-prototypicBlacks ratiCngs of physical attractiveness and skin tone made
have been regarded more positively than high-proto- by the study’s Black interviewers. Results indicated
t
typic Blacks, it seems unlikely that these individuals o that lighter skin tone was related to higher ratings of
wouldbemorefamiliarasafunctionofmereexposure.N physicalattractivenessformenandwomen.Thisrela-
Whitesarereadilyexposedtobothnegativeimagesof tionwasstrongandmonotonicforwomen;ratingsof

high-prototypic Blacks and positive images ofolow- attractiveness steadily increased from “very dark” to
prototypic Blacks in the media. Whereas eduDcational “verylight.”Therelationformenwasweaker,butfol-
and occupational settings may also provide dispro- lowed the same general pattern. In addition, research
portionate (and greater) exposure to low-prototypic hasshownthatBlackandWhitemen,aswellasmen
Blacks, other settings provide disproportionate expo- acrossvariouscultures,findwomenwithamoreEuro-
suretohigh-prototypicBlacks.Inaddition,low-proto- centric appearance to be more attractive than women
typicBlackslikelymakeupasmallerproportionofthe with a more Afrocentric appearance (Cunningham,
Black population than those with darker skin tone. Roberts, Barbee, Druen, & Wu, 1995; Hamilton &
Usingdatacollectedinlargesamplestudies,onemight Trolier,1986;Martin,1964).However,empiricalevi-
infer that low-prototypic (specifically light-skinned) dence for the perceived relation between lighter skin
Blackscomprisebetween14–21%oftheBlackAmeri- toneandgreaterphysicalattractivenessisnotuniform.
canpopulation(Hill,2000;Hunter,1998;Keith&Her- Blairetal.(2002)foundthereverserelationinWhite
ring, 1991; Ransford, 1970). Thus, statistically, it is male and female participants’ratings of photographs
less likely that anyone will encounter a Black person of men, possibly indicating divergence in the conse-
with lighter skin tone. Furthermore, this mechanism quences of phenotypic variation for men and women
wouldnotbeabletoexplainBlackperceivers’prefer- (Hunter, 1998; Maddox, 1998).
ences for lighter skin tone. Even if Whites may have
greater familiarity with light-skinned Blacks, there is
Stereotypesandprejudiceasafunctionofphysi-
no reason to believe that dark-skinned Blacks would
cal attractiveness. Assuming that lighter skin tone
alsohavegreaterfamiliaritywithlight-skinnedBlacks.
isperceivedasmorephysicallyattractive,perceivedat-
tractiveness may explain the evidence favoring light-
Physical Attractiveness versus dark-skinned Blacks. In one study, ratings of
physicalattractivenesswereassociatedwithfamilyin-
Theory
comelevelsthatwerethreeormoretimesgreaterthan
Others have explored the hypothesis that differen- thepovertylevel(Hill,2002).Similartoattractivetar-
tial outcomes among Black Americans are based on gets,positivecharacteristicshavealsobeenattributed
392