PLACE ll RETURN BOX to romovothh mum your rocord. TO AVOID FINES Mum on or baton dd. duo. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE MSU Is An Mandi” Malt/EM Oppoflunlty Inltltulon Wanna-m AN EXPLORATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RACIAL IDENTITY ATTITUDES, LOCUS OF CONTROL ATTITUDES, AND THE ATTRIBUTION OF DISCRIMINATORY BIAS By Stephen D. Jefferson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTERS OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1 996 ABSTRACT AN EXPLORATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RACIAL IDENTITY ATTITUDES, LOCUS OF CONTROL ATTITUDES, AND THE ATTRIBUTION OF DISCRIMINATORY am By Stephen D. Jefferson This study explored the relationship between racial identity attitudes, locus of control attitudes, and the asymmetly hypothesis - which states that discriminatory acts perpetrated by the strong against the weak will be seen as more biased than similar acts perpetrated by the weak against the strong. Participants consisted of 92 African American undergraduate students. Preencounter attitudes positively correlated with “external” locus of control attitudes. Also, pro-Black attitudes were positively correlated with attributing more discriminatory bias to Whites as compared to African Americans characters. This study also investigated the relationship between the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS), and the African Self- Consciousness Scale (ASC). ASC scores positively correlated with Encounter ([ = .62, N = 88, p < .001) and Immersion/Emersion ([ = .74, N = 88, p < .001) subscales of the RIAS, and negatively correlate with the RIAS Preencounter ([ = -.33, N = 87, p < .01) subscale. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the members of my Masters thesis committee for their patience, insight, and excellent guidance. Your input turned a very stressful process into one of the most rewarding experiences I have ever had. Thank you Dr. Robert A. Caldwell, Dr. John R. Hurley, and Dr. Ralph Levine. I would also like to acknowledge the exceptional efforts of Susie Pavick, who has always been a fountain of information and support in the department; as well as acknowledging the efforts of Roger Halley, without whose assistance this project could not have been completed. I must also thank Janet Beesaw for her prompt assistance with any and all computer difficulties I encountered during this project. It is important to acknowledge the essential contributions of the following faculty and staff members from the Florida A&M University Psychology Department: Dr. Joseph Baldwin, Dr. Yvonne Bell, Dr. Raeford Brown, Dr. VVIlliam Chambers, Ms. Arzella Smith, Dr. Clarice Hall, and Dr. Seward Hamilton. Thank you all very much. iii Finally, I would like to thank my parents, Charles and Laura Jefferson, for always having faith in me, and ALWAYS suppOIting me. You are my inspiration, and I love you both dearly. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................ vii INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 African American Racial Identity Explored ......................................... 1 Nigrescence Theory ................................................................. 3 African Self-Consciousness Theory ......................................... 8 African American Personality Measures in Summary ........................ 11 Locus of Control Theories and African Americans ............................. 12 Salience, Attention, and Perceptions of Others ................................. 22 Summary ........................................................................................... 25 Hypotheses ........................................................................................ 27 METHOD ..................................................................................................... 28 Participants and Procedures .............................................................. 28 Measures ........................................................................................... 30 Psychometric Properties of the Racial ldentity Attitude Scale ........................................................... 30 Psychometric Properties of the African Self-Consciousness Scale .................................................... 33 Psychometric Properties of the lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance Scales .................................................. 36 Scoring and Interpretation Instructions for the Discriminatory Scenarios Questionnaire ............................... 39 RESULTS .................................................................................................... 42 Psychometric Findings for this study’s measures: Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS) ....................................... 42 African Self-Consciousness Scale ........................................... 42 lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance Scales ........................ 42 Discriminatory Scenarios Questionnaire .................................. 44 Hypotheses ........................................................................................ 47 Relationship Between Preencounter attitudes, Africentricity, and Levenson’s Chance and Powerful Others Scales ....................................................... 47 Relationship Between Attribution of Bias and African Self-Consciousness ................................................. 50 The Relationship Between Levenson’s lntemal Scale, African Self-Consciousness, and Racial Identity Attitude Scale ............................................... 50 The Relationship Between the RIAS Scales and the Attribution of Bias ................................................... 52 Post Hoc Analyses ............................................................................. 52 Significant Findings for Separate Male and Female Subgroups ....................................................... 59 Males ............................................................................ 59 Females ........................................................................ 60 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................. 62 Clinical Implications and Future Areas of Research .......................... 67 APPENDICES The Racial Identity Attitude Scale (Appendix A) ................................ 73 The African Self-Consciousness Scale (Appendix B) ........................ 76 Levenson’s lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance Scales (Appendix C) ....................................................................... 80 The Discriminatory Scenarios Questionnaire (Appendix D) ............... 82 Consent Forms A and B (Appendix E) ............................................... 88 Demographic Questionnaire (Appendix F) ......................................... 92 Psychometric Findings for the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (Appendix G) ................................................................................... 94 REFERENCE LIST ...................................................................................... 95 vi Table 10 11 LIST OF TABLES lntemal Consistency Coefficients for the Racial Identity Attitude Scale Across Six Studies ................................................ 32 Correlations Across Studies Between Different Subscales of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale ............................................. 35 Measures of Internal Reliability for Levenson’s lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance Scales ......................................... 38 Correlations Between Rotter’s l-E Scale and Levenson’s IPC Scales ............................................................... 40 Intercorrelations and Alpha Coefficients for the Four Subscales of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale ........................... 43 Results of the Factor Analyses Performed on Levenson’s Internal, Powerful Others, and Chance Scales ............................ 45 Intercorrelations, Alpha Coefficients, Means, and Standard deviations for Levenson’s lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance Scales ...................................................................... 46 Item Factor Loadings for the Discriminatory Scenarios Questionnaire Items ..................................................................... 48 Correlation Between the African Self-Consciousness Scale and the Four Stages of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale ............ 49 Correlation of the Preencounter Scale with Both Levenson’s IPC Scales and Participants’ Ratings of their Own Religiosity ..... 51 Correlation of the African Self-Consciousness Scale with Levenson’s IPC Scales ................................................................ 53 vii 12 Correlation of the Discriminatory Scenario Questionnaire (DSQ) with the Four Subscales of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS) .................................................................. 54 13 Correlation Between the Number of African American Organizations to Which Participants Belonged, and Both the African Self-Consciousness Scale (ASC), and the Racial Identity Attitude scale (RIAS) .......................................... 58 viii INTRODUCTION This study was conducted to elucidate the relationship between current theories of locus of control and African Americans’ racial identity attitudes. It also attempted to uncover the relationship between racial identity attitudes and how African Americans evaluate the discriminatory behaviors of fictitious Black vs. White actors engaged in discriminatory acts against each other. The following material shall summarize some of the major findings related to African American racial identity development, locus of control research involving African Americans, and research related to asymmetry in prejudice attribution. African American Racial Identfiy Explored As humans mature from infancy to adulthood, they are indoctrinated into a social system or culture. This process is as true in the United States as any other society; however, due to the multi-ethnic make-up of this country, this society consists of many variations on a common theme. The experiences of African Americans exemplifies this phenomenon quite aptly. Although integrated into the mainstream, African American culture is oftentimes slightly askew of the Eurocentric thrust of the majority culture. There is a growing body of literature that concerns itself with studying the unique personality variables of African Americans (Baldwin & Bell, 1985; Brookins, 1994; Cross, 1980; Nobles, 1972; Parham & Helms, 1981; Rose, 1982). In his discussion of traditional African philosophy, Mbiti, as cited by Nobles (1972), “recognizes that ‘only in terms of other people does the individual become conscious of his own being’” (p. 29). This description is consistent with the definition of personality that other social scientists have utilized. A general definition of personality as described by Sullivan (1953) is “the relatively enduring pattern of recurrent interpersonal situations which characterize a human life” (p. 110). Working from this paradigm, it becomes obvious that race, another largely social construct, and personality are inextricably linked. Because “the notion of the interrelatedness of personality and race has an extensive history in Western psychology” (Baldwin, 1981, p. 172), African American personality cannot be properly described without also considering issues of racial identity (Mbiti, 1969; Nobles, 1974). ldentity development involves specialized processes that are particular to the delimited group of interest. “...For African-Americans, racial identity refers to beliefs and attitudes about being African-American and to the extent to which individuals identify with African-American culture” (Martin & Hall, 1992). Theoretical exploration of such issues oftentimes leads to the construction of some stage model of development (Cross, 1978; Thomas 8 Thomas, 1971). Inspired by the theories of “Black self-hatred” that proliferated during the period from the 1930’s to the 1970’s, WIlliam E. Cross, Jr. developed a theory of Nigrescence to explain the development of racial identity in African Americans. Nigrescence Theory. “Nigrescence is a French term which means the process of becoming Black” (Cross, 1994, p. 120). This model is a stage model; therefore, individuals are expected to progress from one stage to the next in a hierarchical fashion. However, this progression across stages does not imply that these stages are mutually exclusive designations. As an individual moves from one stage to the next, he/she may still possess some attitudes from a previous stage (or stages), despite the fact that many more of his/her attitudes have become consistent with a later stage (and vice versa). This model describes a continuum upon which individuals can possess attitudes and beliefs, to lesser and greater degrees, on all levels. “If one reads Cross’s descriptions of the stages carefully, one comes to realize that in each of the stages, he is describing a complex interaction between feelings, cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors” (Helms, 1986, p. 62). Cross's theory consists of five stages. The first stage is the Preencounter stage. This stage is typified by an individual who exalts Eurocentric aesthetics and values over Africentric equivalents. All things associated with having an African ancestry are seen as somehow less prestigious and less desirable than the things associated with being of European descent. “The person may have an intact and functional identity, but one which, in the overall scheme of things, makes being Black somewhat insignificant" (Cross, 1994, p. 122). This denial of self results in self-hatred. Cross posits that this individual is ripe for change. The Encounter stage, the second stage of Cross’s theory, is the catalyst for this change. During this phase, the Preencounter individual experiences an event or learns some discordant bit of information that causes him/her to reevaluate the soundness of his/her Eurocentric orientation. “The person in this stage begins to search for a Black identity, initially feeling guilty about previously holding attitudes that degraded his or her Blackness, and eventually becoming increasingly angry for having been trained in this way” (Sabnani & Ponterotto, 1992, p. 176). The third stage of development entails a bit of grandiose idealization. Fueled by this anger, the individual moves into the Immersion-Emersion stage and begins to transform old cognitions of self-hatred into more self-affirming beliefs. During this stage, African heritage and people are exalted and idealized while White people and culture are heartily disparaged; however, at the end of this stage, these extreme evaluations are somewhat modulated by more realistic assessments of both groups. Finally, resolution occurs, and the dissonance that existed between the Preencounter and the lmmersion-Emersion person is dissolved during the Intemalization phase. “Tension, emotionality, and defensiveness are replaced by a calm, secure demeanor. Anti-White feelings decline to the point where friendships with White associates can be renegotiated...[and the] uncontrolled rage toward White people [is converted into] controlled anger toward oppressive and racist institutions” (Cross, 1978, p. 18). This leads into the fifth stage of Cross’s theory, Intemalization-Commitment. Although this stage is one step beyond the previous stage, it’s characteristics deviate only marginally from it’s predecessor. The major distinction of this stage from lntemalization is that in the lntemalization -Commitment stage, the individual not only intemalizes his new self, but he becomes politically active and tries to generalize his personal revelation to the general Black experience. This last stage “is the proposition that in order for Black identity change to have lasting political significance, the ‘sell’ (me or I) must become or continue to be involved in the resolution of problems shared by the ‘group’ (we)” (Cross, 1978). Parham and Helms (1981) developed the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS) to measure the stages of Cross’s theory (see Appendix A for a copy of this measure). The subscales of RIAS have been found to predict the behaviors and attitudes of African Americans in a theoretically consistent manner. In a study of the relationship of racial identity on black students’ preferences concerning counselors’ race, Parham and Helms (1981) found that “preencounter and encounter attitudes were significantly related to subjects’ preferences for the same-race counselor” (p. 253). As participants’ scores on the Preencounter stage increased, their preference for a White counselor also increased significantly while their preference for Black counselors decreased significantly. These researchers also found that “encounter and immersion-emersion attitudes were associated with pro- Black, anti-White counselor preferences” (p. 255). Further, this study found statistically significant evidence to support the premise that lmmersion- Emersion and lntemalization stage individuals would be less anti-black than the Preencounter individuals, and that the former two groups would also be less anti-White than Encounter stage individuals. Parham and Helms (1985) collaborated a second time to evaluate RIAS with regard to other personality characteristics; however, this time they related racial identity to self-actualization and emotional states of black students. Their results suggested that “encounter attitudes were related to a tendency to rely on one’s self for intrapersonal support whereas preencounter attitudes were related to a tendency to rely on others for such support” (p. 435). Preencounter attitudes were also found to be related to “feelings of inferiority, inadequacy, hypersensitivity, anxiety, and lack of self acceptance” (p. 436). These data are consistent with the findings of WIlliams, as cited by Cross (1978), who found that Preencounter participants “had a strong anti-Black bias, perceived other Blacks as not trustworthy, and they did not see being Black as an important part of their lives” (p. 25). Other researchers have also found that Preencounter scores were associated with negative psychological and affective states. Munford (1994) found that “high Preencounter Scale scores were associated with lower self-esteem scores” (p. 166). This study also found a significant positive correlation between Preencounter attitudes and depression. Carter (1991), using the Bell Global Psychopathology Scale, found that “Pre-Encounter...attitudes were significantly positively related to feelings of anxiety. Thus denial of one’s Blackness seems to be associated with feelings of anxiety" (Carter, 1991, pp. 109-110). Finally, Mitchell and Dell (1992) found that “the higher a person’s pro-White, anti-Black (Pre- Encounter) attitudes, the less likely a person is to participate in cultural (i.e., Black-oriented) campus activities” (p. 42). All of the preceding research on RIAS, although far from conclusive, validates the underlying model that Cross has devised. Multiple studies have shown that Preencounter attitudes are related to lower self-esteem, higher pro-White/anti-Black attitudes, and negative affective states such as anxiety and depression (Carter, 1991; Munford, 1994; Parham 8 Helms, 1981; Parham & Helms, 1985). Encounter attitudes have been found to be associated with higher pro-Black/anti-White attitudes, depression, less anxiety, and paranoid thought (Carter, 1991; Parham & Helms, 1985). lntemalization attitudes have been found to correlate positively with self- esteem and negatively with anxiety (Munford, 1994; Parham & Helms, 1985). All these findings are consistent with Cross’s theory; and with this in mind, it seems reasonable to use Cross’s model to examine other issues related to African American personality. African Self-Consciousness Theory. Other researchers have described racial identity in ways that do not utilize a stage model. In an attempt to develop a culturally relevant personality measure for African Americans, Baldwin and Bell (1985) have created the African Self-Consciousness Scale (ASC) - see Appendix B for a copy of this measure. It was designed to measure "African self- consciousness," which is best exemplified by the following attributes: a. The person possesses an awareness of his/her Black identity (a sense of collective consciousness) and African cultural heritage, and sees value in the pursuit of knowledge of self (i.e., African history and culture throughout the world-encompassing African American expenence) b. The person recognizes Black survival priorities and the necessity for institutions (practices, customs, values, etc.) which affim'I Black life. c. The person actively participates in the survival, liberation and proactive development of Black people and defends their dignity, worth and integrity. d. The person recognizes the opposition of racial oppression (via people, concepts, institutions, etc.) to the development and survival of Black people, and actively resists it by any appropriate means. (Baldwin & Bell, 1985, p. 63). The underlying construct of this scale seems to tap heavily into a socio- political dimension that should positively correlate with an individual's political activism in the African American community. ASC attitudes have been measured not only in terms of subjective feelings about being Black (i.e., I feel good about being black, or I feel bad about being Black), they have been measured by more objective statements of action such as: “Black children should have their own independent schools which consider their African heritage and values an important part of the curriculum”; “it is not within the best interest of Blacks to depend on whites for anything no matter how religious and decent they (the whites) purport to be”; and “it is intelligent for Blacks in America to organize[,] to educate[,] and liberate themselves from white-American domination” (ASC scale items #2, #6, and #20, respectively). Items such as these move beyond merely measuring how one feels about being African American; rather, these items seem to directly assess one’s actual commitment to Black political activism. It seems that racial identity is at least in part defined in terms of involvement in pro-Black activities. Further support for this melding of attitude and activity factors in operationalizing African American personality can been seen in the work of Caplan (1970). He integrated research findings related to “black consciousness” and “political activism” to come up with a composite “profile of the Black militant.” These Black militants were “reported...[to] prefer Negro newspapers and magazines,... [they were] better able to identify Negro writers and civil rights leaders, and [they had] 10 a more positive appreciation of Negro culture than nonmilitants” (p. 67). Caplan also cited research that showed that “the Negro who is militant in the pursuit of civil rights objectives is more likely to be the person best integrated into the black community” (p. 64), and they were found to “not only have rejected the traditional stereotype of the Negro[,] but also [to] have created a positive stereotype" (p. 66). This description is theoretically consistent with what one would expect from an African American who is high in African self-consciousness. From this illustration, it is reasonable to hypothesize that African Americans with higher ASC scores should be more prone to engaging in social activities that are related to the Black community than individuals who are not strongly identified with the Black community. This hypothesis is partially supported by the research of Baldwin, Duncan, and Bell (1987). These researchers found that individuals who attended predominantly Black educational settings (i.e., elementary, secondary, and post-secondary schools) achieved higher ASC scores than individuals who did not experience such environments. This study also found that African Americans who had taken "Black Studies" courses had higher ASC scores than individuals who were not exposed to such classes. Additionally, Baldwin, Brown, and Rackley (1990) found "parental membership in predominantly Black organizations, exposure to Black studies courses, and prior experiences with racism/racial prejudice significantly predicted ASC scores" (p. 1). Individuals who experience the aforementioned conditions achieved higher scores than individuals who did 11 not. This study also found that attending a Black cultural event, or reading a book about an African American within the past year significantly predicted higher ASC scores (individuals who had not participated in either of these activities scored lower than individuals who had). Stokes, Murray, Peacock, and Kaiser (1994) found that “African Americans who engaged in activities that encouraged affiliation and involvement with other African Americans had higher Racial and Cultural Awareness [ASC subscale] scores than did African Americans who did not engage in such activities” (p.72). These findings indicate a significant relationshipibetween racial identity, and involvement in the African American community. African American Personalfiy Measures in Summary. The validity of both of these African American racial identity measures seems reasonably supported, and it is expected that these different scales, when used in conjunction, shall provide a more complete picture of the racial identity status of this study’s participants. However, due to factors that shall be explained more fully in the methods section (see RIAS in the Methods section), only the Preencounter subscale of the RIAS shall be used in this study. Preencounter attitudes have been significantly correlated with anti-Black feelings, and high ASC scores have been significantly correlated with pro-Black attitudes. Because of this, it is reasonable to assume that RIAS Preencounter scores and ASC scores shall be negatively correlated (i.e., higher Preencounter scores will be related to lower ASC scores, and vice versa). It also seems reasonable to 12 assert that possessing favorable attitudes about being black is positively correlated with involving oneself in pro-Black activities, and for the purpose of this study, these variables represent overlapping constructs. These propositions describe a continuum of racial identity attitudes and behaviors that should allow one to make valid predictions about other related attitudes of African Americans. Locus of Contrgl Theories and African Americans The theory of “internal versus external control of reinforcement, often referred to as locus of control” (Rotter, 1990, p. 489), has been extensively researched and operationalized by Rotter (1966). Individuals who explain occurrences in their life by attributing causation to forces such as luck, chance, powerful others, or predestination are described as having a belief in “external control” (p. 1). Individuals who believe that personal qualities or behaviors dictate the outcome Of events in their lives are described as possessing a belief in “internal control” (p. 1). Rotter points out that this is not an absolutistic theory. His l-E Scale was not designed to classify individuals into fixed categories or identify immutable personality traits. It was created to “measure...relatively stable, cross-situational, individual differences...” (Rotter, 1990, p. 490) that relate to expectancy of outcome for a variety of situations. “Behavior in different situations will be different, although there may be a gradient of generalization from one situation to another" (p. 491). 13 Rotter was greatly influenced by the role of expectancy in social learning theory. In social learning theory, a reinforcement acts to strengthen an expectancy that a particular behavior or event will be followed by that reinforcement in the future. Once an expectancy for such a behavior-reinforcement sequence is built up the failure of the reinforcement to occur will reduce or extinguish the expectancy.” (Rotter, 1966, p. 2) The initial studies of locus of control repeatedly manipulated the role of expectation in research participants. Participants were usually divided into two groups (and sometime there was a third group of control subjects). One group would be told in some convincing fashion that their success at an upcoming task would be based on skill, while another group would be lead to believe that their performance would be based on chance factors. Control of the reinforcement in both conditions was actually entirely under the control of the researcher, though the subjects were not told this. The types of behaviors exhibited by each group was markedly different as a function of each group’s perception of control. It was found that: ...in a number of replicated studies, we [researchers] discovered that the well-known finding that 50% reinforcement is more resistant to extinction than 100% reinforcement was true only in chance or experimenter-controlled tasks. In skill tasks in which the subject believes that reinforcement is contingent on his or her own skill, the l4 opposite is true (Blackman, 1962; Holden & Rotter, 1962; James & Rotter, 1958; Rotter, Liverant, & Crowne, 1961). One hundred percent reinforcement is more resistant to extinction than 50% reinforcement. (Rotter, 1990, p. 490) When compared to externally oriented individuals, those with an lntemal locus of control have been found to “commit themselves to more personal and decisive social action” (Gore & Rotter, 1963, p. 62); possess a greater ability to change the attitudes of others (Davis & Phares, 1967); seem more resistant to overt manipulation (Rotter, 1966); and enjoy greater academic success (Webb, Waugh, & Herbert, 1993). Because many of the above attributes are greatly valued in this culture, much of the early literature on this topic seemed to suggest that having an lntemal locus of control was more desirable than having an external style. Believing in an external locus of control was associated with possessing reduced seIf-efficacy, helplessness, and taking less responsibility for one’s actions. African Americans have been found to be consistently more external in their expectations of control than White participants (Gaa, Vlfilliams, & Johnson, 1981; Garcia & Levenson, 1975; Gruen, Korte, & Baum, 1974; Hillman, Wood, & Sawilowsky, 1992; Jacobson, 1975; Tashakkori & Thompson, 1991). Gurin, Gurin, Lao, and Beattie (1969) re-evaluated Rotter’s I-E Scale and added greater clarity to the construct of extemality. Their research began to explore the mum-dimensionality of extemality. especially as it relates to African Americans. 15 Although the literature to date indicates that people who believe in external control are less effectively motivated and perform less well in achievement situations, these same effects may not follow for low- income persons, particularly Negroes, who believe that economic or discriminatory factors are more important than individual skill and personal qualities in explaining why they succeed or fail. Instead of depressing motivation, focusing on external forces may be motivationally healthy if it results from assessing one’s chances for success against systematic and real external obstacles... (p. 33). Gurin et al. criticized Rotter's l-E scale because it does not distinguish between attributions made for good versus bad outcomes; it does not discriminate between external attributions made about chance factors, and those made that blame an external system; and finally, as it relates to internal control, Rotter’s scale was criticized for not distinguishing between an individual’s perception of personal efficacy, and the efficacy of people in general or racial groups in general. Gurin et al. (1969) constructed their own lntemal-Extemal Control Scale using 23 items from Rotter’s Scale, three questions to measure “Personal Efficacy” (a person’s sense of personal control over his/her life), and an additional array of questions that were designed to assess participants’ feelings about how race affects them individually, and African Americans as a group. They tested this scale on a relatively equal number of African American men and women (N = 1695). The results of this study helped to 16 clarify some of the contradictory findings in related literature. Although African Americans were found to possess the same values (i.e., the “Protestant Ethic” that assumes that hard work is an important requirement for success) as White participants in previous studies, this concordance of attitudes disintegrated when more specific questions were asked that directly related to feelings of personal efficacy. In the latter situation, White respondents reported feeling more personal control than was reported by African Americans in this study. Gurin et al. also found that “students’ beliefs about what generally determines success and failure have nothing to do with their self-confidence, personal expectancies or aspirations” (p. 43); however, participants’ sense of personal control was found to predict higher “expectancies of success and self—confidence about their abilities for academic and job performance; they also aspire to jobs that are more prestigeful, demanding, and realistic in terms of their own abilities and interests” (p. 43). Participants who scored higher on this personal control measure were found to have higher college grades and achievement test scores than participants who believed that internal forces are the primary effectors of the success for groups in general society. So it seems that a belief in personal efficacy has a different effect on behavior than having a belief in group efficacy, and/or group impotence. It seems reasonable to speculate that some African Americans feel personally efficacious while simultaneously acknowledging the influence of powerful external forces in their lives. 17 “Students on the external end of the continuum - i.e., those who tended to blame the system [as opposed to the innate character of African Americans] - were much more in favor of group rather than individual action to deal with discrimination...” (Gurin et al., 1969, p. 46); and these students were found to participate in more civil rights activities than individuals who blamed African Americans for their lower status in society. This finding is interesting when one considers the findings of WIlliams, as cited by Cross (1978). WIlliams found that of those African Americans who scored high on the Preencounter stage in his sample (N = 57): ...not one person from this stage was a member of a ‘Black’ organization, and their worldview incorporated the belief that Black people, and not the system, were to blame for the “Black situation’ [(i.e., the problems that African Americans experience in this society)]. Not surprisingly, these subjects had the lowest anti-White score and turned away from ‘militant’ and/or ‘all Black’ strategies for racial change [in this society]" (p. 25). Vlfilliam’s findings suggest an inverse relationship between Preencounter attitudes and the Individual-System Blame dimension of Gurin et al.’s (1969) scale. Gurin et al.’s findings are theoretically consistent with attitudes that would be expected of an individual who has progressed beyond the Preencounter stage of Cross’s theory. Preencounter individuals would not be expected to engage in a great number of political organizations that combat racial discrimination. 18 Some of these issues were addressed by Caplan’s (1970) review article. As mentioned previously, Caplan looked at “the new ghetto man: A black militant who is committed to the removal of traditional racial restraints by open confrontation and, if necessary, by violence" (p. 59). These "militants" were described as endorsing social change through the use Of any efficacious means, and they were described as being the best and brightest of Black youth. Caplan found that a high percentage of Black's who endorsed rioting as a means of bringing about social change were college educated (though this finding was not consistently linear), and that "...while the average rioter was likely to be a high school dropout, data show that the average non-rioter was more likely to be an elementary school dropout" (p. 63). This finding may have relevance to Gurin et al.’s finding that “students who were more sensitive to discrimination, who tended to blame the social system rather than individual qualities of Negroes for the problems that Negroes face, more often aspired for jobs that are less traditional for Negroes” (p. 46). “Less traditional” jobs were defined as those jobs that had the lowest proportion of African Americans in the 1960 census data. Positions requiring a college education would certainly be in this “less traditional” track. Additionally, Caplan (1970) also found that the average non-rioter was "the poorest of the poor" (p. 62). Blacks at the lowest end of the economic scale were found to have low levels of racial pride, and a high acceptance of "those who control scarce resources [in society]" (p. 62). The latter two personality attributes are certainly l9 consistent with Preencounter attitudes. In contrast to this, Caplan cites research that suggests that "militants were more strongly identified with Negro cultural values and civil rights objectives than those in the black community who neither support nor participate in militant activities" (p. 65). Individuals who have higher ASC scores could reasonably be expected to participate in more militant activities, while less militant persons seem to exhibit more passive behaviors (i.e., they do not try to overcome the societal obstacles placed before them). It seems that African Americans who possess high, positive racial identity are more prone to acknowledging the influence of some controllable, external factor(s) in their lives; and this contrasts with the attitudes of African American individuals with a more negative racial identity. The latter group seems to attribute their status in life to uncontrollable or chance factors, or they blame the innate character of Blacks. Such attributions have been found to lead to learned helplessness states which are not healthy (Peterson, Maier, & Seligman, 1 993). Levenson (1972) has further explored the tertiary characteristics found concerning the theory of lntemal/extemal control. The rationale behind this tripartite differentiation stemmed from the reasoning that people who believe the world is unordered (chance) would behave and think differently from people who believe the world is ordered but that powerful others are in control. In the latter case a potential for control exists. Furthermore, it was expected that a 20 person who believes that chance is in control...is cognitively and behaviorally different from one who feels that he himself is not in control.... (p. 261) Levenson, using a modified version of Rotter’s l-E Control Scale, attempted to distinguish three aspects of locus of control with her scales: 1) an lntemal scale; 2) a Powerful Others scale; and 3) a Chance scale (see Appendix C for a copy of this measure). Although others have hypothesized that early measures of expectations of control should be multidimensional (Gurin, Gurin, Lao, & Beattie, 1969), Levenson’s approach is unique in that it states all items in the first person, it uses a 6-point Likert scale rather than a forced-choice format, and it dichotomizes extemality (Garcia & Levenson, 1975). Garcia and Levenson (1975) found that “students from low-income families had stronger perceptions of control by chance than wealthier students” (p. 564). Endorsing a belief that chance controls one’s life has been shown to negatively correlate with political activism (Kumea, 1976; Levenson, 1972; Martin & Hall, 1992). This is consistent with the findings of Caplan (1970), who found that low income African Americans were less likely to act aggressively to bring about social change than their wealthier peers; and with the findings of Kumea (1976), who found that African American students who were highly involved in political activity scored higher on the personal control scale (lntemal scale) than students who were less active (N = 81). Kumea also found that “activists felt strongly that 21 outside people and systems control the lives of Blacks [in general], but that chance or fate had little influence over their own [personal] lives” (p. 67). African American non-activists were found to believe “that they did not have a lot of control over their own lives and that Blacks as a group were controlled by chance or fate” (p. 67). Finally, Kumea found that “more active students felt that...Blacks as a group are not controlled by chance or fate” (p. 65). These findings in conjunction with Caplan’s (1970) and Gurin et al.’s (1969) conclusions seem to indicate that a belief that chance factors control either one’s personal life, or the lives of Black people in general is negatively correlated with political activism, self-efficacy, and positive racial identity in African Americans. Conversely, it seems that activists feel personally efficacious in their own lives, but they simultaneously acknowledge the influence of powerful others or systems in the lives of Blacks in general. It is interesting to note, however, that Levenson’s Powerful Others scale does not seem to significantly predict political activism or racial identity attitudes (Kumea, 1976; Levenson, 1972; Levenson, 1974; Martin & Hall, 1992). This is probably due to the fact that Levenson’s items are all in the first person, and really do not address a respondent’s perception of group control, or lack thereof. The literature seems to support the hypothesis that “powerful others” locus of control attitudes for African Americans are predictive of pro-Black political activism only when this locus of control paradigm relates to Blacks in general. Powerful others attitudes related to first person evaluations (i.e., having the 22 belief that powerful others influence one’s personal life) are not the same construct, and cannot be assumed to have the same predictive validity. This hypothesis explains the moderate, positive correlation found between Levenson’s Chance and Powerful Others scales; and from this conclusion, this research assumes that Levenson’s Powerful Others scale will negatively correlate with pro-Black racial identity attitudes. Salience, Attention, and Perceptions of Others lf personality is largely a byproduct of social interactions, then it seems reasonable to posit that perceptions substantially influence the structure of personality. Heider (1958) has hypothesized that: ...man is usually not content simply to register the observables that surround him; he needs to refer them as far as possible to the invariances of his environment....[T]he underlying causes of events, especially the motives of other persons, are the invariances of the environment that are relevant to him; they give meaning to what he experiences and it is these meanings that are recorded in his life space, and are precipitated as the reality of the environment to which he then reacts. (p. 80) The cognitive salience of perceptual sets has been shown to have a significant effect on how people process interpersonal stimuli. Taylor, Fiske, Close, Anderson, and Rudennan (1977), as cited by Taylor and Fiske (1978), showed that particular characteristics of individuals (i.e., race and gender) attracted a disproportionate amount of observers attention if 23 these individuals were in otherwise homogenous or equally integrated groups (i.e., if they were the only African American in an otherwise all White group). These researchers found that “a solo Black was perceived as talking more, being more influential, and giving a clearer impression than was the same person when he was not a solo or when he was part of the majority” (p. 258). They also found similar effects for solo women in all male groups. These findings seem to indicate that an awareness of salient differences between individuals can influence how one perceives said individuals. The research of Rodin and Harari (1986) found that when persons were asked to rate the amount of prejudice they attributed to fictitious individuals who endorsed variously biased stances toward an outgroup (i.e., “a particular hypothetical group is better, same, or worse” [p. 437] than another group), they consistently attributed more prejudice to situations wherein these fictitious individuals endorsed negative stereotypes about another group, regardless of the factual basis of the prejudice. This was also found when real world situations were discussed. Additionally, the researchers found that “...the belief that groups differed...whether positive or negative, justified or unjustified, was seen as more prejudiced [by participants] than a belief that the groups were equal” (p. 444). Further research by Rodin, Price, Sanchez, and McElligot (1989), using similar hypothetical situations, found that “more prejudice was attributed to those who behaved in a discriminatory way toward persons whose flaws were 24 beyond their control [i.e., they were physically disfigured, or they stutteredl” as opposed to individuals who discriminated against someone because of something that this victimized person could control [i.e., having a neat appearance, or using foul language]” (p. 439). This latter finding relates to what might be called the “asymmetry hypothesis: that discriminatory behaviors directed toward the weak by the strong are seen as more indicative of prejudice than the same behaviors directed toward the strong by the weak” (Rodin, Price, Bryson, & Sanchez, 1990, p. 481). Rodin et al. (1990) found support for this hypothesis in their study of people’s perceptions of prejudiced situations and differentially empowered groups: It was suggested that what underlies the asymmetry effect are the perceptions that discriminatory behaviors betoken a greater intent to harm when engaged in by those with more social power, and result in greater harm to those with less social power. (p. 481) Because “race” is predominantly a social construct, and because many ethnic minority groups in this country have experienced derogation as a function of not being considered a part of the majority culture; issues of racial identity and racism may have greater salience in the minds of highly identified, ethnic minority group members than it does in the minds of less identified, ethnic minority group members. African American individuals who are less identified with their ethnic group can reasonably be expected to minimize the importance of racial differences because race has less salience for them. Or if racial identity does have salience for these 25 individuals, its importance will be experienced as a rejection of African American aesthetics in favor of more Eurocentric mandates. To take this a step farther, issues of racial oppression may also have less salience for these individuals because they probably do not strongly identify with a racially oppressed group; and this race-blindlanti-Black orientation may inhibit these individuals from discriminating between powerful and less powerful groups in society. This is very unlike the predictions one might make about a minority group member who is highly identified with her/his racial group. The latter individual would probably be more sensitive to the subtle and gross aspects of racial oppression and prejudice because her/his identity is, in many ways, based on just such a distinction. m This review has described what this study shall posit as the multidimensional aspects of African American personality, which includes all of the major variables of this study (i.e., racial identity, locus of control, and perceptions of prejudice). Endorsing a Chance locus of control, or possessing negative attitudes about being Black have both been shown to positively correlate with negative affective states (i.e., depression, feelings of inferiority, anxiety, etc.), and they both have been shown to predict less involvement in pro-Black social activities. These findings suggest that for African Americans there may be a positive correlation between possessing negative attitudes about being Black and endorsing a Chance locus of control. In contrast to this, having a more positive view of being Black has 26 been shown to be positively correlated with self-esteem, negatively correlated with anxiety, and positively correlated with being actively involved in the Black community. These observations seem to indicate that there is a negative correlation between positive racial identity and Chance locus of control attitudes. Finally, it is assumed that individuals who hold more positive attitudes about being Black will attribute significantly greater prejudice to White actors engaged in discriminatory behaviors against Blacks than to Black actors who discriminate against Whites. However, African Americans who possess negative attitudes about being Black are not expected to behave in the aforementioned manner. Because African Americans with these types of negative attitudes have been found to blame Blacks as a group for their status in society, it is reasonable to speculate that such people might attribute more, or relatively equal amounts of prejudice to Black actors compared to White actors in these hypothetical situations. This would be inconsistent with what would be expected due to the asymmetry hypothesis which assumes that Whites actors would be found to be significantly more prejudiced than Blacks actors. The interrelationship of the main variables of this study should allow us to make accurate predictions about the attitudes of African Americans on a variety of issues related to these theories. Confirmation of this study’s hypotheses should help to further validate present theories of racial identity, and should also increase our 27 understanding of African American personality in general. This study’s specific hypotheses were as follows: 1) African Self-Consciousness attitudes were expected to negatively correlate with Preencounter attitudes. 2) Both Chance and Powerful Others locus of control attitudes were expected to positively correlate with Preencounter attitudes, and negatively correlate with African Self-Consciousness attitudes. 3) lntemal locus of control attitudes were expected to be positively correlated with African Self-Consciousness attitudes, and negatively correlated with Preencounter attitudes. 4) This study expected to find a positive correlation between pro-Black attitudes (i.e., higher Africentricity or lower Preencounter attitudes) and the attribution of more prejudice to White vs. African American actors. 5) This study expected to find that participants who endorsed negative attitudes about being African American would attribute more or relatively equal amounts of prejudice to hypothetical Black vs. White characters who were described engaging in discriminatory behaviors against each other. Basically, it was hypothesized that there would be a negative correlation between attribution of prejudice scores and Preencounter attitudes. Method Participants and Procedure Two hundred and seventy-five African American students were asked to voluntarily complete written, self-report measures to assess their attitudes concerning issues of racial identity, locus of control, and asymmetry in prejudice attribution. Participants were also asked to complete a brief demographic questionnaire, and a consent form. Ninety-nine questionnaires were returned, and 92 of these (22 men, 67 women, and 3 who did not report their sex) were completed sufficiently to allow for valid scoring. The average age of participants was 21 (fl = 3.28), and the range of ages was 17 to 44. Participants for this study were drawn from students attending Michigan State University during the spring and summer terms of 1996. These participants were recruited from both the Human Subjects Pool of the Psychology Department (N = 13), and from a variety of other general settings across the campus (i.e., residence halls, the main library, campus greens, etc.). Participants who were approached in these remote sites (N = 262) were recruited through the use of a one on one personal appeal which consisted of the following dialogue: Hello. My name is Stephen Jefferson, and I am a graduate student in the Clinical Psychology program at MSU. I am currently involved in research that is 28 29 attempting to look at the attitudes of African American students concerning a variety of topics including race, personal efficacy, and prejudice. l have a packet of questionnaires that I would like to give you to complete, and this should require less than an hour of your time. I would really appreciate your help, and your participation in this study will allow you the opportunity to be entered into a random drawing for a $50.00 (or $25) award. Participants were allowed to either return their questionnaires directly to the experimenter, or they were provided with pre-addressed, stamped envelopes with which they could returned their responses. Participants were solicited as I observed them in any of the aforementioned settings over the course of the summer. The researcher attempted to approach as many African American candidates as he could during different times of the day (usually between the hours of 8:00 am. to 6:00 p. m.). Participants who were drawn directly from the Human Subjects Pool were given extra course credit for their participation. All participants who returned their packets were offered the opportunity to participate in a random drawing for a cash award (between $50 and $25). 30 Measures This study used four measures: The Racial Identity Attitude Scale (Appendix A); the African Self-Consciousness Scale (Appendix B); Hanna Levenson’s lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance scales (Appendix C); a measure to assess the amount of prejudice attributed to individuals of different races in hypothetical situations (Appendix D); and a brief demographic questionnaire (Appendix E.). Psychometric Properties of the Racial ldentig Attitude Scalp. Initial inquiry into validating Cross’s model empirically was attempted by Hall, Cross, and Freedle (1972). Twenty-eight single sentence items suggested by Cross as representing the different beliefs and activities of the Pre-encounter (7-items), Encounter (4-items), lmmersion-Emersion (14-items), and lntemalization (3-items) stages were typed on 3 x 5 inch index cards and presented to subjects for sorting. Ninety Black and 90 White college students were used as subjects....The results indicated that (a) under less constrained conditions, three or four clusters were used, with no two cluster sorts reported; (b) whether the subjects used unmarked or marked categories, they sorted the deck in the same fashion; (c) under all conditions, subjects sorted the items in a sequence that replicated the stages in the Cross Model; (d) there was a pronounced tendency for White subjects to perceive the 31 stages in much the same manner as the Black students did...” (Cross, 1978). Other researchers have attempted to create scales to assess an individual’s attitudes concerning racial identity and many findings support the structure of Cross’s Model (Milliones, 1980; Vlfilliams, 1975). Janet E. Helms and Thomas A. Parham (1981) have operationalized Cross’s theory, and their scale is currently the most widely used for research of this kind. “The scale was adapted from Hall, Cross, and Freedle’s (1972) Q-sort items, which were designed to assess attitudes and behaviors characteristic of the various stages of racial identity” (Parham & Helms, 1985b, p. 144). This scale is called the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS). In a review of eight “racial/ethnic minority-specific instrumentation,” Sabnani and Ponterotto cited five studies that evaluated the coefficient alphas for the four subscales of the RIAS - “the fifth stage [of Cross’s model] has been eliminated from the RIAS because of the difficulties involved in measuring its representative characteristics” (Sabnani & Ponterotto, 1992). These studies and their coefficient alphas are described in Table 1 (a modified version of Sabnani and Ponterotto’s table). “The RIAS exists in three forms: Short forms A and B, and the Long Form (RIAS-L)....The two short Forms are markedly similar. The 50 item RIAS-L was constructed by Helms and Parham...in an effort to increase the reliabilities of the four subscales” (Sabnani & Ponterotto, 1992). A later study by Yanico, Swanson, and Tokar (1994), indicated that although there were strong correlations 32 Table 1 lntemal Reliability Coefficients for the Racial ldent'm] Attitude Scale Across Six Studies Subscales PRE ENC lM-EM INT Parham & Helms (1881)” .67 .72 .66 .71 Pomela’s et al. (1986)8 .45 .35 Ponterotto & WIse (1987)8 .63 .37 .72 .37 Helms & Parham (1985)“b .69 .50 .67 .79 Helms & Parham (1985)”6 .76 .51 .69 .80 Yanico, Swanson, and Tokar(1994)c .59 .45 .63 .59 " as cited by Sabnani & Ponterotto (1992, p. 177) " Short Form A ° Short Form B 33 between the Preencounter and lmmersion/Emersion subscales across scoring versions “A” and “B” (.97 and .89, respectively; with correlations greater than .12 being significant at the .01 level; N = 540); correlations between the Encounter and the lntemalization subscales (.30 and .24, respectively) were not as robust (Table 2 includes data on the correlations found between different stages of the RIAS). Psychometric Properties of the African Self-Consciousness Scale. This 42-item scale was constructed to measure distinct African American personality variables (previously described). “...The Africentric paradigm [that undergirds this theory] conceives of [healthy] Black behavior as being in the service of the authentic needs and social priorities of the African community...” (Baldwin & Bell, 1985, p. 62). The psychometric properties of this scale have been adequately explored. A six week test-retest stability coefficient of .90 (p < .001) was reported by the authors (1985). Psychology instructors were required to rate specifically chosen individuals (25 high scoring, and 25 low scoring ASC Scale testees) on the qualities that were described on an ASC checklist. “The Pearson product-moment coefficient computed between these subjects’ mean ASC Scale scores and their mean check-list ratings by their instructors” (p. 64), was found to be .70 (p < .001). ASC has been found to correlate positively ([ = .68, p < .001) with the Black Personality Questionnaire, another racially specific personality measure; and this supports the ASC’s convergent validity (Sabnani & Ponterotto, 1992). Stokes, Murray, Peacock and Kaiser (1994), 34 assessing 147 African Americans from three Southern California cities, conducted a factor analysis on the ASC scale, and they found a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .78, as well as identifying four subscales that are consistent with Baldwin's theoretical conception of ASC (though it should be noted that these subscales are revisions of the authors” actual designation of items for their original four subscales). Based on Baldwin and Bell‘s conceptualization and the present factor loadings, the following four labels were given for the purpose of the present investigation: Personal Identification Wrth the Group (e.g., “Regardless of their interest, educational background, and social achievements, I would prefer to associate with Black people than non-Blacks”), Self Reinforcement Against Racism (e.g., “It is not within the best interest of Blacks to depend on Whites for anything, no matter how religious and decent they [the Whites] purport to be”); Racial and Cultural Awareness (e.g., “It is good for Black husbands and wives to help each other develop racial consciousness and cultural awareness in themselves and in their children”), and Value for African Culture (e.g., “l have difficulty identifying with the culture of African people”), which was reversed scored. (Stokes, Murray, Peacock, & Kaiser, 1994, p. 69). 35 Table 2 Correlations across studies between different subscales of the RIAS Preencounter Encounter lmmersion- lntemalization Emersion Preencounter _ .12 .12 -.23 Encounter -.01 _ .38 .21 lmmersion- .12 .41* _ .05 Emersion lntemalization -. 32* .1 3 .04 Note. Data above the diagonal is from a sample of N = 177 African American women (Martin & Hall, 1992, p. 512). Data below the diagonal is from a sample of N = 146 African American university students (96 females, 50 males) and 83 adults from the general population (60 females, 23 males) (Munford, 1994, p. 167). *p_< .05. 36 Psychometric Properties of the lntemal, Power Others, and Chance 5.023;. Because contradictions were found in the literature that related to the role of expectancy for control and political activism as it related to African Americans, Levenson (1972) set out to explain some of these inconsistent findings. Previously it was found that intemality in African American youth was related to higher levels of social activism (Gore & Rotter, 1963). Later findings contradicted these data by demonstrating that intemality was negatively correlated with social action (Gurin, Gurin, Lao, & Beattie, 1969). Levenson’s lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance scales were designed to attempt to explain this discrepancy. Although the Powerful Others and Chance scales negatively correlate with the lntemal scale (I = -.14, —.17, respectively, ns), they positively correlate with each other (1 = .59; p < .01) (Levenson, 1972); and these findings are consistent with the underlying theory behind Levenson’s scale. The “external” dimensions (i.e., the Chance and Powerful Others scales) are both related to a belief that external factors control reinforcement, and therefore these variables would be expected to positively correlate. Additionally, both of these external scales measure a construct that is directly counter to the construct measured by the lntemal scale. The lntemal Scale consists of items such as, “Whether or not I get to be a leader depends mostly on my ability”; the Powerful Others Scale consists 37 of items such as, “I feel like what happens in my life is mostly determined by powerful people”; and the Chance Scale consists of items such as, “To a great extent my life is controlled by accidental happenings” (Levenson, 1981, p. 57). Respondents are asked to agree or disagree on a continuum from -3 (strongly disagree) to +3 (strongly agree). No zero or neutral responses are allowed. Scores for each scale are calculated by summing the points of each item for that scale, and adding 24 to this sum. Points on each scale can range from 0 to 48. The psychometric properties of the IPC Scales have been well explored. Cronbach’s alpha has been found to be “.77 for the lntemal scale, .71 for the Powerful Others scale, and .73 for the Chance scale” (Levenson & Miller, 1976, p. 202) - also see Table 3. Levenson (1981) found Kuder— Richardson reliabilities of .64 (lntemal), .77 (Powerful Others scale), and .78 (Chance scale). “Split-half reliabilities (Spearrnan-Brown) are .62, .66, and .64 for the I, P, and C Scales. Test retest stabilities for a one-week period are in the .60-.79 range, and Lee found comparable correlations with a 7- week test-retest interval (.66, .62, and .73)” (Levenson, 1981, pp. 22-23). Unlike Rotter’s scale, the IPC scales have not been found to correlate strongly with measures of social desirability (Levenson, 1972). The validity of the l, P, and C Scales has been demonstrated chiefly through convergent and discriminant methods (Campbell & Fiske, 1959) that are designed to show significant low-order correlations with other measures of the general construct as well as a pattern of 38 Table 3 Measures of intemalreliabilitv for Levenson’p I. P. and C Scales lntemal Powerful Chance Others Levenson (1974) .64 .77 .78 Levenson & Miller (1976) .77 .71 .73 Walkey (1979) .71 .65 .72 Blau (1984) .67 .73 .80 Goodman & Waters (1987) .73 .75 .67 39 theoretically expected positive and negative relationships with other variables. (Levenson, 1981. p. 23) Further support for the validity of this scale can be gleaned from its relationship with Rotter's l-E Scale. “The Rotter l-E Scale was moderately related to the Levenson scales, and seems to measure belief in control by chance and in internal control” (Hall, Joesting, & Woods, 1977, p. 61). Correlations between the two measures have been found to be rather low; however, most researchers who have explored this topic have concluded that the two scales may simply address different aspects of the same locus of control construct (Hall et al., 1977; Blau, 1984; Goodman & Waters, 1987) - see Table 4. It is not surprising that these two measures are not highly correlated because they were not designed to measure precisely identical factors. Scoring and lntemretation Instructions for the Discriminatpm Scenarios Questionnaire (DSQ). This ten item questionnaire was specially designed for this study. It consists of several new items modeled after Rodin et al.’s (1990) hypothetical scenarios; and it also contains questions that are only slight modifications of Rodin et al.’s original vignettes. Participants were asked to rate on a scale of 1 (not at all biased against) to 7 (very highly biased against) how they perceived the actions of hypothetical African American and White characters who behaved in a blatantly discriminatory manner towards individuals of another racial group. Each item consisted of two 40 Table 4 Correlation between Rotter's l-E Scale and Levenson’s IPC Scales lntemal Powerful Chance Others Hall, Joesting, & Woods (1977)‘I .32 —.22 —.43 Walkey (1979) l-E —.52 .17 .65 Good man & Waters (1987) -.34 .26 .45 Mtg Higher scores on any IPC scale indicates a greater belief in that construct, and lower scores indicate less endorsement of that construct. This is different than Rotter’s unidiminsional, l-E scale. Higher scores on the l-E scale indicate a greater belief that external forces control one’s fate, while lower scores indicate a belief in a more internal locus of control. aRotter’s l-E scale was “[s]cored so that a high score indicates an internal orientation” (p. 61). 41 vignettes (i.e., one in which the discriminatory main character was White, and another that had an African American discriminatory character). The score for the overall item was derived by taking the difference between these item pairs. These differences were summed across all ten items to produce a total DSQ score. Positive scores indicated more bias being attributed to White characters, negative scores indicated more bias being attributed to African American characters, and a zero score indicated equal bias for both characters. By emulating Rodin et al.’s work, it was expected that this questionnaire measured the asymmetry hypothesis in a fashion that was both theoretically and empirically consistent with the research upon which it was based. Results Psychometric Findings for this Study’s Measures Racial ldentgy' Attitude Scale (RIAS). Because this scale has already been widely psychometrically evaluated by other researchers, this study used this measure with as few alterations as possible. Some of these alterations were undertaken to increase the RIAS’s internal reliability. Simply stated, items that detracted from each subscale’s lntemal reliability were deleted, and scores for all of these subscales were calculated without these items. Before and after item deletions, alpha coefficients, means, standard deviations, and sample sizes are described in Appendix G. Subscale intercorrelations are described in Table 5. African Self-Consciousness Scale. All items were retained in this measure because the overall alpha coefficient was consistent with previous findings cited in the literature (Stokes, Murray, Peacock & Kaiser, 1994). In the current study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the ASC was .88 (M = 209.48, SD = 33.05, N = 90). lntempl. Powerful Other§,_and Chgnce Scales. For each of Levenson’s scales (i.e., the lntemal, Powerful Others, and Chance scales), items that did not significantly contribute to each scales’ internal reliability were deleted. A principal components factor analysis (varimax 42 43 Table 5 Intercorrelations and Alpha Coefficients for the Four Subscales of the Racial ldentmj' Attitude Scale PREEN ENCOU lMM/EM INTERNAL Preencounter .78 -.04 -. 17 -.37" (PREEN) Encounter -.03 .70 .86*** .23 (ENCOU) lmmlEmersion -.13 .64*** .79 .34“ (lMM/EM) lntemalization -.27* .16 .25” .70 (INTERNAL) Note. Alpha coefficients are in the bold diagonal. Upper correlations have been corrected for random error of measurement, while lower correlations have not. Also, a 2-tailed test of significance was used. Finally, due to incomplete data, sample sizes for these correlations ranged from 83 to 90. *9 < .05. "*2 < .001. 44 rotation; eigenvalue > 1) was conducted on the remaining items, and a three factor solution consistent with Levenson’s original scale designations was found. Before and after item deletions, eigenvalues, and percentage of variance accounted for by this solution is included in Table 6. Intercorrelations among scales, scale reliabilities, means, and standard deviations are included in Table 7. Because of these alterations in scale items, raw scale scores were used in calculations rather than the non- negative scores that Levenson suggested (Levenson, 1981). This modification is expected to alter the generalizability of mean scores; however, it is not expected to influence any of the correlation coefficients derived from the revised scales. Finally, a secondary confirmatory factor analysis which treated the Powerful Others and Chance scales as one factor revealed that these two scales seem to both tap into a single construct that is orthogonal to the lntemal scale (5 = -.07). _D_i§<1i_mingtorv Scenarios Questionnaire. A principal components factor analysis was conducted on 9 of the .10 items of the Discriminatory Scenario Questionnaire (item five was excluded in this analysis because a typographical error in the printing of this question made it useless). Two factors were identified with an eigenvalue greater than one. Due to the consistency of findings concerning the asymmetry hypothesis (Rodin 8. Harari, 1986; Rodin et al., 1989), it was assumed that this study would identify a unidimensional measure of this construct. Because seven of the nine items of this measure loaded most highly on a single factor, 45 Table 6 Results of the Factor Analyses Performed on Levenson’s lntemal, Powerful Others and Chance Scales POWERFUL INTERNAL OTHERS CHANCE SCALE SCALE SCALE FACTOR FACTOR FACTOR ITEM# LOADINGS ITEM# LOADINGS ITEM LOADINGS IPC01 .57 IPC03 .56 IPCOZ .59 IPC05 .42 IPC08 .52 IPC06 .69 IPC19 .68 IPC11 .76 IPCO7 .71 IPC21 .74 IPC13 .56 IPC12 .48 IPC23 .70 IPC15 .64 IPC14 .70 IPC04 DELETED IPC1 7 .54 IPC24 .58 IPC09 DELETED IPCZZ .59 IPC10 DELETED IPC18 DELETED IPCZO DELETED IPC16 DELETED Pct of Var' 43.8 ”Pct of Var = Percentage of variance accounted for by this solution. 46 Table 7 Intercorrelations, Alpha Coefficients, Means, and Standard Deviatipns for Levenson’s Internal, Powerful Others, and Chance scales INTERNAL CHANCE POWERFUL OTHERS INTERNAL .67 -.O1 -.10 CHANCE -.00 .72 .46“ POWERFUL -.07 .33” .73 OTHERS MEAN'I 10. 69 -7. 79 -8.21 §Q 3. 77 7.1 1 7.68 Note. Alpha coefficients are in the bold diagonal. Corrected correlations are above the diagonal, and uncorrected are below the diagonal. Also, a 2- tailed test of significance was used. Finally, due to incomplete data, sample sizes for these correlations ranged from 89 to 92. ”Because of alterations in scale items, raw scale scores were used in calculations rather than the non-negative scores that Levenson suggested (Levenson,1981) "p < .01. 47 and the two remaining items loaded most highly on a second factor, the latter two items were deleted. Additional analyses of the seven remaining items revealed a one factor solution which accounted for 48.4% of the variance (see Table 8 for item numbers and their factor loadings). The items of this final factor seem to tap into an underlying construct that is related to excluding and/or affirming one racial group over another (i.e., White vs. African American). These items also seem to measure participants’ attitudes related to the asymmetry hypothesis (i.e., that White actors will be seen as more biased than Black actors when both groups engage in the same discriminatory behaviors). The Alpha coefficient for this scale was .81 (M = 7.6, _S_D_ = 7.83, N = 91). Hypotheses Relationship between Preencounter attitudes, Africentriciy, and Levenson’s Chgpce and Powerful Others scales. The correlations derived from this study's hypotheses testing have been corrected for random error using the computer program Correct (Hunter, 1993). Additionally, because these hypotheses were directional, one-tailed tests at the .05 level of significance or higher were used, unless othenNise stated. As predicted, Preencounter scores were negatively correlated with Africentricity scores (see Table 9). This suggests that endorsing anti-Black/pro- White attitudes is inconsistent with possessing a more African centered orientation to life. Additionally, Preencounter attitudes were found to positively 48 Table 8 Item Factor Loadings for the Discriminatory Scenarios Items Item # Factor Loading DSQ3 .80 DSQ1 .74 DSQ7 .71 DSQ9 .69 DSQ10 .65 DSQB .64 DSQ4 .62 Note. These items are arranged from highest to lowest loading. 49 Table 9 Correlation Between the African Self-Consciousness Scale and the Four Stages of the Racial ldentgg' Attitude Scale Preencounter Encounter Immersion! lntemalization Emersion ASC -.40*** .79*** .89*** .27“ (corrected r) ASC -. 33*" .62*** .74*** .21 * (uncorrected r) Npt_e_. Upper correlations have been corrected for random error of measurement, while lower correlations have not. Also, a 1-tailed test of significance was utilized. Finally, due to incomplete data, sample sizes for these correlations ranged from 84 to 88. *p < .05. ***p<.001. 50 correlate with both Levenson’s Chance, and Powerful Others scales (see Table 10). Endorsing anti-Black/pro-White beliefs seems to relate to possessing a more external locus of control. Other findings included a negative correlation between Preencounter scores, and the lntemalization scale of the RIAS (see Table 5). This finding is consistent with Cross’s theory and helps to further validate Parham and Helm’s scale. Finally, as would be expected, a positive correlation was found between RIAS lntemalization attitudes and ASC scores (see Table 9). Relationship between attribution of bias and African Self-Consciousness. As hypothesized, a significant positive correlation was found between ASC scores and the attribution of bias to White vs. African American actors (I_' = .40, corrected 1 = .47, N = 89, p < .001). Participants who were higher on Africentricity perceived White characters who discriminated against African Americans as more biased than African American characters who discriminated against Whites. The relationship between Levenson’s lntemal Scale, African Self Consciousness, and Racial ldentiy Attitude Scale. Though this study hypothesized that Internal locus of control attitudes would positively correlate with Africentricity, and negatively correlate with Preencounter attitudes; Levenson’s lntemal scale was not significantly correlated with ASC 51 Table 10 Correlation of the Preencounter Scale with Both Levenson’s IPC Scales and Participants’ Ratings of their Own Religiosmg' IPC IPC IPC Religiosity Chance Powerful lntemal Others Preencounter Attitudes .56*** .50*** —.29* -.28** (corrected 0 Preencounter Attitudes .42*** .38*** -.20* —.25** (uncorrected [) N_ot_g, Upper correlations have been corrected for random error of measurement, while lower correlations have not. Also, a 1-tailed test of significance was utilized. Finally, due to incomplete data, sample sizes for these correlations ranged from 85 to 89. *p<.05. **p< .01. ***p<.001, 52 scores (see Table 11), or Preencounter scores (see Table 10). Additionally, ASC scores were found to negatively correlate with Levenson’s Powerful Others and Chance scales, but these findings were not significant (see Table 11). Interestingly, a significant correlation was found between the lntemalization scale of the RIAS, and the lntemal scale of the IPC ([ = .27, corrected 1 = .39, N = 86, p <.01). This suggests that individuals who have adopted an integrated pro-Black stance towards life are more likely to also believe that they are the masters of their own fate. The Relationship Between the RIAS Scales and the Attribution of Bias. Although this study hypothesized that Preencounter attitudes would be negatively correlated with the attribution of bias to White vs. African American characters, no significant correlation was found between these variables (see Table 12). However, both Encounter and Immersion/Emersion attitudes were highly correlated with the attribution of bias as measured by the DSQ (see Table 12). Post Hoc Analyses Unless othenrvise stated, the following analyses utilized a two-tailed test of significance at the .05 level or higher. For this study’s overall sample, a t-test for paired samples was performed on the DSQ which looked at cumulative scores for African American actor vs. White actor scenarios. These ratings revealed a significant difference between how much bias was attributed to White actors (M = 35.24, SD = 6.45) as compared to African American actors (M = 27.66, SD = 7.81): 1(90) = 9.24, p < .001. White characters were viewed as more 53 Table 11 Correlation of the African Self-Consciousness Scale with Levenson’s IPC Scales IPC IPC IPC lntemal Chance Powerful Others African Self- Consciousness .07 -.14 -.17 (Corrected 9 African Self- Consciousness .05 -.1 1 -.14 (Uncorrected [) N9_t_e_; Upper correlations have been corrected for random error of measurement, while lower correlations have not. Also, none of these correlations was significant at the .05 level using a 1-tailed test. Finally, due to incomplete data, sample sizes for these correlations ranged from 87 to 90. 54 Table 12 Correlation of the Discriminatogy Scenario Questionnaire (DSQ) with the Four Subscales of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS), RIAS RIAS RIAS RIAS Preencounter Encounter Emerslonl lntemalization Immersion DSQ —.01 .61*** .58*** .04 Scores (corrected 0 DSQ —.01 .47*** .46*** .03 Scores (uncorrected [) Not_e, Upper correlations have been corrected for random error of measurement, while lower correlations have not. Also, a 1-tailed test of significance was utilized. Finally, due to incomplete data, sample sizes for these correlations ranged from 85 to 89. ***p < .001. 55 biased than African American characters when both engaged in comparable discriminatory behaviors. Male participants (N = 35.60, S_Q = 2.93) were found to score significantly higher on the RIAS lntemalization scale than female participants (M = 32.73, S_D = 4.57): 1(81) = 2.63, p < .01. On average, male participants would appear to endorse more attitudes that are consistent with an integrated, pro-Black orientation compared to female participants; however, this finding must be evaluated with extreme caution. There were only 20 males used in this analysis, and a test for the homogeneity of standard deviations revealed a significant difference between the standard deviation for men and women on this variable (y = .64, SE = .13, p < .05). Additionally, participants who answered “yes” to the question “Are you planning to attend graduate school?” were found to have significantly higher mean Immersion/Emersion (M = 31.97, SQ = 7.01) and Encounter (M = 11.28, g = 3.34) scores than participants who answered “no” to this question (M = 27.20, SD = 5.43 and M = 9.10, SD = 2.56, respectively): t (83) = - 2.04, p < .05 and 1(83) = - 1.99, p < .05, respectively. No significant differences were found between the standard deviations of these “yes/no” groups (Immersion/Emersion y = .76, S_E_ = .20, ns‘; and Encounter y = .77, _S_§ = .20, ns). 56 Consistent with past research, being involved in the African American community was found to be negatively related to having a Powerful Others locus of control. Answering “yes” to the question, “Are you a member of any African American organizations?”, resulted in a significantly lower mean score on Levenson’s Powerful Others scale (M = - 10.14, SD = 6.61) than the mean score obtained from participants who answered “no” to this questions (M = —6.79, SD = 8.26): t (84) = 2.02, p < .05). Lower scores on these measures indicated less endorsement of each construct. This finding indicates that individuals who are more involved in the African American community endorse an external locus of control less strongly than individuals who are less involved in this community. Again, this finding must be interpreted with caution because a significant difference was found between the standard deviations for the “yes” and “no” groups (_ = .80, S_E_ = .11, p < .05). Further support for the validity of the present measures of African American personality can be gleaned from the relationship found between these measure and the number of African American organizations in which participants reported having membership. While a negative correlation was found between Preencounter attitudes and the number of African American organizations participants claimed membership; Encounter, Immersion/Emersion, lntemalization, and ASC attitudes all showed a positive correlation with the number of African American organizations in 57 which participants claimed membership (see Table 13). This seems to indicate that possessing pro-Black attitudes predicts more involvement in the African American community, and possessing anti-Black attitudes predict an opposite effect. This finding is consistent with past research on this topic, which is why a one-tailed test of significance was used for these analyses. This study also found that Encounter and Immersion/Emersion attitudes were both highly correlated with African Self-Consciousness attitudes (see Table 9). This suggests that Encounter and Immersion/Emersion individuals should be very invested in their African heritage, and they should be actively involved in uplifting the African American community. Again, a one tailed test of significance was utilized for this analysis because both of these theories would predict a positive correlation between these variables. Finally, because Encounter and Immersion/Emersion attitudes seemed to both consistently correlate in the same direction and with the same level of significance with other variable in this study, a secondary confirmatory factor analysis which treated these two subscales as one factor was performed to assess the relationship of this new composite factor to the Preencounter and lntemalization subscales. A negative correlation ([ = —.1 1) was found between the Preencounter subscale and this composite factor, and a positive correlation was found between the latter factor and the lntemalization subscale (g = .31). This suggests that Encounter and 58 Table 13 Correlation Between the Number of African American Organizations to Which Participants Belonged, and both the African Self Consciousness Scale (ASC), and the Racial ldent'gy Attitude Scale (RIAS) RIAS RIAS RIAS RIAS ASC Preencounter Encounter Emllmm lntemal Scores Number of Afr. Amer. Organizations -.24* .30“ .44*** .36“ .45*** to Which You Belong (corrected [) Number of Afr. Amer. Organizations —.21* .25" .39*** .30" .42*** to Which You Belong (uncorrected [) Npt_e__. Upper correlations have been corrected for random error of measurement, while lower correlations have not. Also, a 1-tailed test of significance was utilized. Finally, due to incomplete data, sample sizes for these correlations ranged from 81 to 85. *9 < .05. “*p < .01. "*9 < .001. 59 Immersion/Emersion attitudes may both tap into a common factor that is negatively associated with endorsing anti-Black attitudes, and positively associated with possessing pro-Black attitudes. Significant findings for separate male and female subgroups. Findings concerning African American gender differences in attitudes about race have been inconclusive. Some studies report significant differences on some attitudinal variables (Parham & Helms, 1985; Munford, 1994), while others do not (Evans & Herr, 1994; Mitchell & Dell, 1992). Because of this inconsistency, I thought that all relevant analyses should be calculated using male only and female only subsets of this study’s sample. Only findings that were significant for one sex but not the other are highlighted in this section. Findings that were significant for the overall sample, which included both male and female participants, are discussed in the preceding sections which addressed the main findings for this study. Two tailed tests of significance (alpha = .05) were used for these analyses because the direction of any gender differences could not be assumed. M319; For males, two significant findings were uncovered that were completely unique to this subgroup. A positive correlation was found between Preencounter scores and age (1 = .48, corrected 5 = .54, N = 21, p < .05). As the age of male participants increased, the strength of their endorsement of Preencounter attitudes also increased. This finding was not true for women in this sample (_ = -.06, corrected 1 = -.07, N = 65, ns). 60 Additionally, a negative relationship was found between male participants’ grade point averages and their age (1 = -.44, corrected r = -.44, N = 22, p < .05). Older male students seemed to have lower grade point averages than younger male students. Again, similar results were not found for women (I = .13, corrected [ = .13, N = 62, ns). E§m_a|_6§_. For females, there were also two significant findings that were unique to this subgroup (i.e., these findings were not significant for the overall sample, or the all male subgroup). These findings included a negative correlation between Immersion/Emersion attitudes and Preencounter attitudes (I = —.26, corrected 5 = —.33, N = 63, p < .05). This seems to suggest that as women in this study struggle to incorporate more pro-Black attitudes into their thinking, their anti-Black attitudes diminish. This finding was not consistent for men (1 = .21, corrected 1 = .27, N = 21, ns). Additionally, a positive correlation was found between how religious female participants rated themselves, and the lntemalization stage of the RIAS (I = .26, corrected 1 = .31, N = 62, p < .05). It seems that women who endorsed a positive, pro-active stance towards being African American, also tend to endorse that they are religious. Although this relationship was only significant for women in this study, the findings for the overall sample (r = .20, corrected r = .24, N = 82, ns), and the all male subgroup (g = .17, corrected I = .22, N = 21, ns), suggest that this seems to be a general trend 61 for both African American men and women. If this study had made an a priori hypothesis that lntemalization scores should be positively related to self-reported religiosity, a 1-tailed test of significance would have revealed significant findings for the overall sample at the .05 level. This relationship is interesting when one considers that for the overall sample, a negative correlation was found between Preencounter attitudes and participants’ ratings of their own religiosity (see Table 10). Discussion As hypothesized, individuals who strongly endorse an Africentric perspective were not found to strongly advocate anti-Black beliefs. Further, this study found that Africentricity was strongly related to Immersion! Emersion and Encounter attitudes. Content analysis of relevant items revealed that the latter two subscales, as well as the African Self- Consciousness Scale, all seem to tap heavily into both a Black political activism construct, and an idealization of things African construct. Individuals in the Immersion/Emersion stage, accOrding to Cross’s theory, would naturally endorse a great number of Africentric ideas because they are redefining themselves in devoutly African centered terms; and Africentricity, as explained by Baldwin and Bell (1985), would be a highly salient factor in such a process: This core component of Black personality represents the conscious level expression of the ‘oneness of being’ communal phenomenology which characterizes the fundamental self-extension orientation of African people....[lt is simply explained] in terms of a congruent pattern of basic traits (beliefs, attitudes and behaviors) which affirm African American life and the authenticity of its African cultural heritage (p. 62). A weak but positive relationship was found between lntemalization attitudes and Africentricity. Also, both variables were negatively and 62 63 significantly related to Preencounter attitudes; and this supports the central tenet behind each construct, and indicates that neither is strongly representative of anti-Black attitudes. Additionally, both Africentricity and lntemalization attitudes correlated positively with membership in African American social/political groups. All of these findings support for the continued utilization of both Nigrescence theory, and the Africentric theory of African American personality. Another hypothesis was only partially supported. Although endorsing anti-Black (Preencounter) beliefs was found to positively relate to both Powerful Others and Chance locus of control measures, no locus of control scale was significantly associated with Africentricity. Preencounter attitudes may be associated with an external locus of control because, by very definition, Preencounter attitudes emphasize a cultural imperative that is external and oftentimes antithetical to the positive acknowledgment of an African heritage. Thomas and Thomas (1971) have hypothesized that individuals in the early stages of “becoming Black” may seek approval from Whites at all costs: Inherent in this concept of approval is the need to be accepted as something other than what one is. Gratification is based upon denial of self and rejection of group goals and activities. The driving force behind this need requires Afro-Americans to seek approval from 64 whites in all activities, to use white expectations as the yardstick for determining what is good, desirable or necessary. Any indication of rejection by or hostility from whites results in these Afro-Americans changing their pattern of actions, even when the individual hurts himself and others of his people....They prefer to have goal directed actions that fit into adoptive patterns, which will not be criticized by whites. (p. 104) Although Thomas and Thomas’s theory is separate from Cross’s, this aspect of their theory seems to apply to Cross’s Preencounter stage. Preencounter attitudes were found to be negatively related to lntemal locus of control attitudes. Interestingly, RIAS lntemalization attitudes were significantly positively related to lntemal locus of control attitudes, and this is probably due to the fact that lntemalization individuals are expected to have adopted a more positive and active African American identity. Individuals in the lntemalization stage of racial identity should have spent a great deal of thought and energy trying to undo their past feelings of hostility towards things African. In experiencing success at working through some of these anti-Black attitudes, such individuals would be more prone to feeling able to control their internal worlds, which might also influence their appreciation of how much control they have over their external worlds. Stages following the Preencounter stage, but preceding the lntemalization stage, seem to require a great deal of introspection. 65 As predicted, a positive relationship was found between Africentric attitudes and the attribution of more prejudice to discriminatory White as compared to discriminatory African American characters. No significant relationship was found between RIAS lntemalization scores and the attribution of prejudice; nor was there a significant relationship between Preencounter scores and the attribution of prejudice. The latter finding may be due to the fact that Preencounter scores relate significantly to a variety of anti-Black attitudes and behaviors (i.e., not participating in African American organizations, choosing White service providers over African American, etc.); and because of this, one might expected that individuals who endorse a great number of such attitudes would actively disaffiliate from an African American perspective. WIthout such a perspective, instances of racial discrimination could be viewed in isolation, without placing such events in the context of this country’s history of racism. So although discrimination might be perceived as generally bad for both African American and White victims; there would be no consideration of an historical intent to harm, and not an immediate perception that discriminatory acts by those in power have a greater potential to harm minorities than the reverse situation. Without an appreciation of a greater potential for harm, the asymmetry hypothesis would not be expected to hold sway with such individuals. This contrasts with what would be expected of a highly Africentric individual. For individuals who endorse a more Africentric stance, there is a strong identification with African Americans as 66 a group, and a more comprehensive appreciation of the context of individual instances of racial bias. Nobles (1972) describes a more Africentric stance on individuality: “Whatever happen[s] to the [African] individual happen[s] to the corporate body, the tribe, and whatever happen[s] to the tribe, happen[s] to the individual.” An Africentric individual would be more prone to conceptualizing the hypothetical scenarios in this study as a metaphor for the oppression of all African Americans rather than as disconnected instances of one African American being discriminated against. Individuals who endorse an Africentric perspective are expected to possess a sense of “collective consciousness” (Baldwin & Bell, 1985, p. 63). From an Africentric perspective, it is easier for participants to appreciate the power differential between African Americans and Whites in this society, and as a result of this, Africentric individuals should respond to this study’s hypothetical scenarios in ways consistent with the asymmetry hypothesis, as found. Finally, lntemalization has been described as a stage typified by the integration of pro-Black attitudes, a more neutral attitude towards Whites, and a commitment to combating White supremacy as opposed to White people. Individuals in this stage are expected to acknowledge the existence of racism, but in their attempt to combat this phenomenon, they may take a more liberal position and attempt to eliminate discrimination of any kind, against African Americans or others. Adopting this position might explain the lack of a significant correlation between lntemalization attitudes and the present measure of the attribution of prejudice. 67 In summary, although the overall sample was found to attribute more bias to White characters than African American characters, future research on this topic will want to consider an African American individual’s identification with his/her ethnic group before this finding is accepted without qualification. Additionally, some of the findings related to all male and all female subgroups suggests that there may be sex differences in the meaning the Preencounter stage and the lntemalization stage, and that this area needs to be more fully explored. Clinical Implications and Future Areas of Research Oler suggests that individuals in the Preencounter stage may: ...present with complaints of low self-esteem, dissatisfaction with personal appearance, and rather vague anxieties and frustrations in relationships with white Americans. They may even voice a sense of disconnectedness from black people and the black culture in general...(p. 236)[;] and he suggests that clinicians need to be cognizant of what these indicators may suggest about the individual’s racial identity attitudes. Preencounter attitudes represent anti-Black beliefs, and African Americans in this stage probably also have anti-self beliefs. Because these negative attitudes are centered about immutable or characterological attributes, this anti-self orientation is probably most salient for such individuals when they are confronted with failures. Blaming failures on one’s “Blackness” would be a schema consistent cognition for Preencounter individuals, and would have a greater likelihood of occurrence than 68 attributing successes to “Blackness.” Having negative beliefs about being African American while simultaneously being unable to change your membership in this group is a contradiction that could understandably contribute to a great deal of cognitive dissonance, frustration, depression, and feelings of helplessness. Characterologically caused bad events are more uncontrollable, and their causes are more stable and more global....Taken together, these results confirm Beck’s (1967, 1976) descriptions that depressive cognition is absolutist and paradoxical and dwells on themes of helplessness and guilt. (Peterson, Schwartz, & Seligman, 1981,p.258) Because one cannot change from being African American to White, this powerlessness may partially account for the positive correlation between Preencounter attitudes and external locus of control attitudes. In providing therapy for African Americans in the Preencounter stage, therapists may be able to diminish depressive or anxious symptoms by helping such clients confront their anti-Blacklanti—self attitudes. Preencounter individuals try to resolve these anti-Blacklanti-self attitudes by moving away from African American culture and idealizing EuropeanNVhite culture. It is the therapist’s job to help such clients examine the origin and meaning of their unrealistic beliefs concerning both European American and African American cultures, and through this process, the client should learn that it is his/her attitudes about race that make such factors important, not race in and of itself. 69 Additionally, because Preencounter individuals have been found to feel that they do not personally control the reinforcers in their lives, such individuals may initially be more responsive to a more directive approach to therapy. This may change as these individuals move into the later stages of racial identity development. If Preencounter attitudes and lntemalization attitudes are the polar extremes of African American racial identity development, the present research suggests that African Americans who are moving from the first stage to the latter may also be moving from an external locus of control to a more internal orientation. This process may be facilitated through the Encounter and Immersion/Emersion stages, though empirical support for this was not robust in the present study. This study found large correlations between Encounter, Immersion/Emersion, and Africentricity scores. Because of these strong associations, this section will discuss all three under the rubric of Immersion/Emersion. Therapists working with Immersion/Emersion Clients may want to give these individuals ample room for introspection and self-definition. Simultaneously, the therapist wants to encourage Immersion/Emersion clients to critically look at their attitudes concerning race. The Immersion/Emersion stage is typified by a very reactionary stance towards European American culture. European American culture is denigrated, and African American culture is idealized. Allowing such individuals to define for themselves the reality of the therapy room may help them to arrive at a less reactionary definition of self. Simply 70 put, such individuals will move beyond enhancing their self-esteem through the denigration of Whites, and they will develop an internalized value for being African American that is independent of comparisons to Whites. Therapists might also have to be especially sensitive to how such clients feel about who is controlling the therapy, and what outcomes are expected. A therapist who is perceived as being too controlling may alienate the Immersion/Emersion client because such clients may see acquiescence as a regression back to their Preencounter identity. In rebelling against this, they may act in an exactly contradictory fashion to what the therapist proposes, and the reactionary stance that they have adopted against White culture will be replayed directly against the therapist. Effective interpretation of this transference may call for the therapist to help the client contexturalize this behavior in terms of their burgeoning racial identity development. African Americans in the lntemalization stage are less likely to seek therapy because they are expected to be generally more psychologically healthy than individuals in the other stages. It is, of course, important to remember that Cross does not posit that the stages of racial identity development are mutually exclusive or non-recursive. Not everyone moves “forward.” People regress, they become “stuck” in transition - consumed by hatred - they become disillusioned, or may spin off into still another cause and another identity “conversion.” Or, they become entrapped in the everyday 71 dysfunctionalities and private demons that haunt us all....Many a clinician has notes on clients who came to them with problems concerning their “Blackness,” only for it later to be revealed that sexual problems, problems of repressed anger...all unrelated to race, lie at the core of their interpersonal misery. (Cross, 1994, p. 119) lntemalization individuals should be capable of sophisticated introspection; however, Butler (as cited by Oler, 1989) warns that “intellectualization [may be used] as a defense against experiencing emotions” (p. 238). Oler also believes that “the person in this stage is likely to present with some mild, transient symptomatology from the earlier stages...” (p. 238) and that therapy should emphasize to such individuals that they become involved in the Black community. Oler believes that such activity should help to crystallize lntemalization attitudes. Although these conceptualizations of Black personality can be helpful in understanding African American clients, they are general theories that have relevance to lesser and greater degrees depending upon the character of each individual client. Therapists should be familiar with these theories, but they should not assume that these theories will always have direct applicability to African American consumers seeking psychological services. Future research in this sector might profitably examine how attribution style relates to different stages of racial identity, and more work needs to be done to improve the measurement of the middle stages of the RIAS scale. 72 Finally, the relationship between Africentricity and Immersion/Emersion attitudes needs elucidation. APPENDIX A APPENDIX A Black Racial Identig Attitude Scale Instructions: This questionnaire is designed to measure people's attitudes about social and political issues. There are no right or wrong answers. Different people have different viewpoints. So, try to be as honest as you can. Beside each statement, circle the number that best describes how you feel. Use the scale below to respond to each statement. l 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly disagree agree (circle here) 1 2 3 4 5 1. I believe that being Black is a positive experience. 1 2 3 4 5 2. I know through my personal experiences what being Black in America means. 1 2 3 4 5 3. I am increasing my involvement in Black activities because I don't feel comfortable in White environments. 12 3 4 5 4. I believe that large numbers of Blacks are untrustworthy. 12 3 4 5 5. I feel an overwhelming attachment to Black people. 1 2 3 4 5 6. I involve myself in causes that will help all oppressed people. 1 2 3 4 5 7. A person's race does not influence how comfortable I feel when I am with her or him. 1 2 3 4 5 8. I believe that White people look and express themselves better than Blacks. 12 3 4 5 9. I feel uncomfortable when I am around Black people. 1 2 3 4 5 10. I feel good about being Black, but do not limit myself to Black activities. 1 2 3 4 5 11. When I am with people I trust, I often find myself referring to Whites as "Honkies", "Devils", "pigs", "White boys", and so forth. 12 3 4 5 12. I believe that being Black is a negative experience. 1 2 3 4 5 13. I believe that certain aspects of "the Black experience" apply to me, and others do not. 1 2 3 4 5 14. I fiequently confront the system and the (White) man 1 2 3 4 5 15. I constantly involve myself in Black political and social activities (such as art shows, political meetings, Black theater, and so forth). 1 2 3 4 5 16. I involve myself in social action and political groups even if there are no other Blacks involved. 1 2 3 4 5 17. I believe that Black people should learn to think and experience life in ways that are similar to White people's ways. 73 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 74 I believe that the world should be interpreted from a Black or Afrocentric perspective. I am changing my style of life to fit my new beliefs about Black people. I feel excitement and joy in Black surroundings. I believe that Black people came from a strange, dark, and uncivilized continent. People, regardless of their race, have strengths and limitations. I find myself reading a lot of Black literature and thinking about being Black. I feel guilty or anxious about some of the things I believe about Black people. I believe that a Black person’s most effective weapon for solving problems is to become part of the White person's world. I speak my mind about injustices to Black people regardless of the consequences (such as being kicked out of school, disappointing my parents, being exposed to danger). I limit myself to Black activities as much as I can. I am determined to find my Black identity. I believe that White people are more intelligent than Blacks. I believe that I have many strengths because I am Black. I feel that Black people do not have as much to be proud of as White people do. Most Blacks I know are failures. I believe that White people should feel guilty about the way they have treated Blacks in the past. White people can't be trusted. In today’s society if Black people don’t achieve, they have only themselves to blame. The most important thing about me is that I am Black. Being Black just feels natural to me. Other Black people have trouble accepting me because my life experiences have been so different fiom their experiences. Black people who have any White people's blood should feel ashamed of it. Sometimes, I wish I belonged to the White race. The people I respect most are White. A person's race usually is not important to me. I feel anxious when White people compare me to other members Of my race. I can't feel comfortable with either Black people or White people. A person's race has little to do with whether or not he or she is a good person. 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 75 46. When I am with Black people, I pretend to enjoy the things they enjoy. 47. When a stranger who is Black does something embarrassing in public, I get embarrassed. 48. I believe that a Black person can be close fiiends with a White person. 49. I am satisfied with myself. 50. I have a positive attitude about myself because I am Black. APPENDIX B APPENDIX B The African Self-Consciousness Scale (Baldwin & Bell, 1985, pp. 65—67) Instructions: The following statements reflect some beliefs, opinions, and attitudes of Black people. Read each statement carefully and give your honest feelings about the beliefs and attitudes expressed. Indicate the extent to which you agree carefully and give your honest feelings about the beliefs and attitudes expressed. Indicate the extent to which you agree by using the following scale: 1—2 3-4 5-6 7-8 Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly disagree agree Circle the number closest to your own feelings. Note that the higher the number you choose for the statement, the more you agree with that statement; and conversely, the lower the number you choose, the more you disagree with that statement. Also, there is no right or wrong answer, only the answer that best expresses your present feelings about the statement. Please respond to all of the statements (do not omit any). Items: *1. I don’t [necessarily] necessarily feel like I am also being mistreated in a situation where I see another Black person being mistreated. 2. Black people should have their own independent schools which consider their African heritage and values an important part of the curriculum. 3. Blacks who trust whites in general are basically very intelligent people. 4. Blacks who are committed and prepared to uplift the (Black) race by any means necessary (including violence) are more intelligent than Blacks who are not this committed and prepared. 5. Blacks in America should try harder to be American rather than practicing activities that link them up with their African cultural heritage. 6. Regardless of their interests, educational background and social achievements, I would prefer to associate with Black people than with nonBlacks. 7. It is not such a good idea for Black students to be required to learn an African language. 76 77 8. It is not within the best interest of Blacks to depend on whites for anything no matter how religious and decent they (the whites) purport to be. 9. Blacks who place the highest value on Black life (over that of other people) are reverse racists and generally evil people. 10. Black children should be taught that they are African people at an early age. 11. White people, generally speaking, are not opposed to self- detennination for Black people. 12. As a good index of self-respect, Blacks in America should consider adopting traditional African names for themselves. 13. A white/European or Caucasian image of God and the “holy family" among others considered close to God) are not such bad things for Blacks to worship. 14. Blacks born in the United States are Black or African first, rather than American or just plain people. 15. Black people who talk in relatively loud manner, show a lot of emotions and feelings, and express themselves with a lot of movement and body motion are less intelligent than Blacks who do not behave this way. 16. Racial consciousness and cultural awareness based on traditional African values are necessary to the development of Black marriages and families that can contribute to the liberation and enhancement of Black people in America. 17. In dealing with other Blacks, I consider myself quite different and unique from most of them. 18. Blacks should form loving relationships with and marry only other Blacks. 19. I have difficulty identifying with the culture of African people. *20. It is intelligent for Blacks in America to organize[,] to educate[,] and liberate themselves from white-American domination. 21. There is no such thing as African culture among Blacks in America. 78 22. It is good for Black husbands and wives to help each other develop racial consciousness and cultural awareness in themselves and their children. 23. Africa is not the ancestral homeland of all Black people throughout the world. 24. It is good for Blacks in America to wear traditional African-type clothing and hair styles if they desire to do so. 25. I feel little sense of commitment to Black people who are not close friends or relatives. 26. All Black students in Africa and America should be expected to study African culture and history as it occurs throughout the world. 27. Black children should be taught to love all races of people, even those races who do harm to them. 28. Blacks in America who view Africa as their homeland are more intelligent than those who view America as their homeland. 29. If I saw Black children fighting, I would leave them to settle it alone. 30. White people, generally speaking, do not respect Black life. 31. Blacks in America should view Blacks from other countries (i.e., Ghana, Nigeria, and other countries in Africa) as foreigners rather than as their brothers and sisters. 32. When a Black person uses the term “Self, Me, and l,” his/her reference should encompass all Black people rather than simply him/herself. 33. Religion is dangerous for Black people when it directs and inspires them to become self-determining and independent of the white community. 34. Black parents should encourage their children to respect all Black people, good and bad, and punish them when they don’t show respect. 35. Blacks who celebrate Kwanzaa the “Nguzo Saba” (the Black Value System), both symbolizing African traditions, don’t necessarily have better sense than Blacks who celebrate Easter, Christmas, and the Fourth of July. 36. African culture is better for humanity than European culture. 79 37. Black people’s concerns for self-knowledge of one’s history, philosophy, culture, etc.) and self (collective) - determination makes them treat white people badly. 38. The success of an individual Black person is not as important as the survival of all Black people. 39. If a good/worthwhile education could be obtained at all schools (both Black and white), I would prefer for my child to attend a racially integrated school 40. It is good for Black people to refer to each other as brother and sister because such a practice is consistent with our African heritage. 41. It is not necessary to require Black/African Studies course in predominantly Black schools. 42. Being involved in wholesome group activities with other Blacks lifts my spirits more than being involved in individual oriented activities. “These two items (items #1 and #20) were slightly modified for this study to remove what seem to be typographical errors. APPENDIX C APPENDIX C Levenson’s lntemal, Powerfgl Others. 111d Chance Scales (and each scale’s respective items) (Levenson, 1981, pp. 56-59) Directions: On the next page is a series of attitude statements. Each represents a commonly held opinion. There are no right or wrong answers. You will probably agree with some items and disagree with others. We are interested in the extent to which you agree or disagree with such matters of Opinion. Read each statement carefully. Then indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree by circling the number following each statement. The numbers and their meanings are indicated below. If you agree strongly: Circle +3 If you agree somewhat: circle +2 If you agree slightly: circle +1 If you disagree slightly: circle -1 If you disagree somewhat: Circle —2 If you disagree strongly: circle -3 First impressions are usually best. Read each statement, decide if you agree or disagree and the strength of your opinion, and then circle the appropriate number. GIVE YOUR OPINION ON EVERY STATEMENT If you find that the numbers to be used in answering do not adequately reflect your own Opinion, use the one that is closest to the way you fell. Thank you. Items: 1. Whether or not I get to be a leader depends mostly on my ability. 2. To a great extent my life is controlled by accidental happenings. 3. I feel like what happens in my life is mostly determined by powerful people. 4. Whether or not I get into a car accident depends mostly on how good a driver I am. 5. When I make plans, I am almost certain to make them work. 6. Often there is no chance of protecting my personal interests from bad luck happenings. 7. When I get what I want, it’s usually because I’m lucky. 8. Although I might have good ability, I will not be given leadership responsibility without appealing to those in positions Of power. 9. How many fi'iends I have depends on how nice a person I am. 10. I have often found that what is going to happen will happen. 11. My life is chiefly controlled by powerful others. 12. Whether or not I get into a car accident is mostly a matter of luck. 80 81 13. People like myself have very little chance of protecting our personal interests when they conflict with those Of strong pressure groups. 14. It’s not always wise for me to plan too far ahead because many things turn out to be a matter Of good or bad fortune. 15. Getting what I want requires pleasing those people above me. 16. Whether or not I get to be a leader depends on whether I’m lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time. 17. If important people were to decide they didn’t like me , I probably wouldn’t make many friends. 18. I can pretty much determine what will happen in my life. 19. I am usually able to protect my personal interests. 20. Whether or not I get into a car accident depends mostly on the other driver. 21. When I get what I want, it’s usually because I worked hard for it. 22. In order to have my plans work, I make sure that they fit in with the desires of people who have power over me. 23. My life is determined by my own actions. 24. It’s chiefly a matter of fate whether or not I have a few friends or many friends. Scale Items: Internal Scale: 1,4,5, 9, 18, 19,21,23 Powerful Others Scale: 3,8, 11,13, 15,1 7, 20, 22 Chance Scale: 2, 6, 7, 1 0, 12, 14, 1 6,24 APPENDIX D APPENDIX D The Discriminato Scenarios uestionnaire INSTRUCTIONS: The following questions attempt to assess your attitudes about the amount Of prejudice you perceive in the following hypothetical scenarios. Many people have different opinions about such topics, and there are no right or wrong answers. Please answer in a manner that accurately reflects your true thoughts and feelings about these situations. Your answers will be kept completely anonymous. UESTION 1 la) Martin is an African American student at Tuskaloosa University. He wants to form a student group to discuss the needs of minority students on campus (specifically, African American students). In advertising for this group, Martin makes it clear that White students will not be welcomed. Please rate how biased against Whites you think Martin rs: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 1b) George, a White student, is also a student a Tuskaloosa University. He sees the flier for Martin’s group and decides that he wants to start a similar group for the White students on campus. In advertising for his group, George makes it clear that non-White students will not be welcomed. Please rate how biased against African Americans you believe George is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased UESTION 2 2a)Fred is White. He and some friends are sitting around talking. During the course of the conversation, the topic of African Americans comes up. Fred says, “There are a lot of areas in which African Americans are not as capable as Whites.” Please rate how biased against African Americans you think Fred is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 82 83 2b) Michael is African American. He disagrees with Fred and says the following: “No. You have it wrong. It is just the Opposite. There are a lot of areas in which Whites are not as capable as African Americans.” Please rate how biased against Whites you think Michael is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased QUESTION 3 3a) Hundson’s College has a predominantly White student body. One of the two candidates for Student Body President was an African American woman. The other candidate was a White women. Many students on the campus felt that an African American could not understand the needs of the White majority, and so they did not vote for her. Please rate how biased against African Americans you think this decision was: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 3b) Blume College is a historically Black institution with a predominantly African American student body. Two female students, one White and one Black, were running for the position of Student Body President. Many of the African American students on campus did not think that this White student could understand the needs of the African American students on campus, and so they did not vote for her. Please rate how biased against Whites you think this decision was: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased QUESTION 4 4a) Jasmine has decided to start a magazine. She has decided that this magazine will focus almost exclusively on the experiences of her people, Afi'ican Americans. Please rate how biased against White people you think Jasmine is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 84 4b) Kelly, a White woman, has decided that she also wishes to start a magazine. She has decided that the focus of her magazine will center almost exclusively on the issues of White people. Please rate how biased against African Americans you think Kelly is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased UESTION 5 5a) Marcus is a heterosexual, African American man; and he refiises to become romantically involved with any White women because he believes that all Whites are devils. Please rate how biased against Whites you believe Marcus is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 5b) Michael is a heterosexual White man, and he agrees with Marcus. He does not believe in interracial dating, and he refuses to become romantically involved with any African American women because he feels that Blacks are all evil. Please rate how biased against Blacks you believe Michael is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased QUESTION 6 6a) Herbert Thompkin, a White man, will not shop at African American businesses because he would rather support the White business community. Please rate how biased against Afi'ican Americans you think Mr. Thompkin is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 6b) Gary Toulousse, an African American, will not shop at White owned businesses because he would rather support the African American business community. Please rate how biased against Whites you think Mr. Toulousse is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 85 QUESTION 7 7a) Percy Hudson is an African American businessman who needs to fill a management position in his company. He has interviewed several applicants and has narrowed his search to two candidates. Both applicants have an equal amount of strengths and weaknesses, and both would be expected to perform equally well at the job. Mr. Hudson makes his decision based on race and chooses the African American applicant. Please rate how biased against Whites you think Mr. Hudson is: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 7b) Steven Collier is a White casting director. He has auditioned a large number of actors for the lead role in his new play, and he has narrowed his selection to two actors of relatively equivalent merit. Either actor would be equally well suited for the part; however, one is White, and the other is African American. Mr. Collier bases his decision on race and chooses the White actor. Please rate how biased against African Americans you think Mr. Collier is: l 2 3 4 S 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased QUESTION 8 8a) Helen Reedy and her husband are White, and they feel that public schools in this country should place an increased emphasis on Western (European) culture and historical accomplishments because Whites are not as well represented in a more multi-cultural curriculum. Please rate how biased against Blacks you believe this stance is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 8b) Clara Miller and her husband are African American, and they feel that public schools in this country should place an increased emphasis on African cultural values and historical accomplishments because Blacks are not as well represented in a more Western (European) curriculum. Please rate how biased against Whites you believe this stance is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 86 QUESTION 9 9a) Harold Cumming, a White MSU student living in a residence hall, always requests that he NOT have to share a room with any African American students. Please rate how biased against Afi'ican Americans Harold’s request is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 9b) Ted Macon, an African American MSU student who also lives in a residence hall, always requests that he NOT have to room with any White students. Please rate how biased against Whites you think Ted’s request is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased QUESTION 10 10a) Two men arrive at a hotel restaurant at the same time. One man is from the Black Business Alliance meeting in the hotel; the other man, who is White, has a badge showing he is from the Dental Association, also meeting in the hotel. Neither one has a reservation. The host speaks separately to each man, asking him to wait in the adjoining bar until a table is free. Shortly thereafter, a table becomes available. The host can tell from looking around the room that the wait for the next available table will be 30-45 minutes. Peter Jones, the host, is White. He gives the available table to the man from the Dental Association. Please rate how biased against Blacks you believe the host’s decision is: l 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 10b) Yesterday, two businessan arrived at a hotel at the same time. Neither of them had a reservation. Both men had their credit cards out, ready to pay for the room. Unfortunately, only one room was available. Neither man had stayed at the hotel before. One of the men was Black and one was White. Curtis Miller, the hotel manager, is Black. He decided to let the Black man have the room. Please rate how biased against Whites you believe the host’s decision was: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not at All Moderately Very Highly Biased Biased Biased 87 NOTE: Items 2a (Rodin et al., 1990, p. 487), 10a (p. 491), and 10b (p. 493) are all slightly modified versions of Rodin et al.’s items. All other items were created specially for this study; however, they too were modeled afier Rodin et al.’s original items. APPENDIX E APPENDIX E Consent Form (Form A) This is a study to explore your attitudes about a variety of topics related to race and prejudice. You will be given a series of questionnaires to fill out, and we ask that you complete these forms as thoroughly and honestly as possible - there are no right or wrong answers. Additionally, all information obtained fi'om this consent forms will be treated with strict confidentiality, and all other responses will be kept anonymous. It is estimated that you should be able to complete all of the enclosed questionnaires in approximately one hour. Upon the return of this consent form to the researcher, your name will be entered into a random drawing for a $50.00 award (NOTE: Only one entry per student name will be allowed). If you refuse to answer any or all parts of the questionnaires Of this study, you are still eligible for participation in this drawing. The award recipient will be notified by e-mail (or other means specified below) on May 1, 1996 of his/her status. All others can e-mail or telephone the experimenter if they have questions about their status related to the drawing’s outcome. To protect participants’ confidentiality, the name of the award recipient will not be disclosed without written permission from said award recipient. Also, participation in research is not a requirement at MSU, and your instructor should provide you with alternative opportunities to earn equal research credit (i.e., helshe should let you complete journal summaries, complete extra reading, etc. for credit) if you do not wish to participate. By signing this statement, you are stating that you understand all that has been explained to you, and that you freely agree to participate in this study. At anytime during your participation, you have the right to discontinue your participation without penalty. At the conclusion of this study’s data collection phase, a brief letter explaining some of the main hypotheses of this study shall be disbursed to participants who request such material. I, , am freely volunteering to participate in the (please print your name here) current study. I do this without coercion and with the understanding that I have the right to terminate my participation during any phase of this research without penalty. (please sign your name here) 88 89 Please check the appropriate option if you wish to receive additional information about this study after the data collection phase of this investigation is completed (Please provide your Pilot e-mail address). NO, I would not like any additional information on this study. Yes, I would like additional information on this study. My Pilot e- mail address is: . Please provide your postal address, e-mail address (if not provided above), or telephone number so that we can notify you if your are randomly selected to receive the $50.00 award. Now, before you begin any other questionnaire, please separate this sheet from the others included in your packet, fold it, and give it to the researcher. This will ensure the anonymity of your other responses. Thank you VERY much for your cooperation. 90 Consent Form (Form B) (NOTE: This packet of information should be postmarked no later than April 25, 1996 to ensure that you are entered into the drawing for $50.00) This is a study to explore your attitudes about a variety of topics related to race and prejudice. You will be given a series of questionnaires to fill out, and we ask that you complete these forms as thoroughly and honestly as possible -- there are no right or wrong answers. Additionally, all information obtained from this consent forms will be treated with strict confidentiality, and all other responses will be kept anonymous. It is estimated that you should be able to complete all of the enclosed questionnaires in approximately one hour. Upon the return of this consent form to the researcher, your name will be entered into a random drawing for a $50.00 award (NOTE: Only one entry per student name will be allowed). If you refuse to answer any or all parts of the questionnaires of this study, you are still eligible for participation in this random drawing. The award recipient will be notified by e-mail (or other means specified below) on May 1, 1996 of his/her status. All others can e-mail or telephone the experimenter if they have questions about their status related to the drawing’s outcome. To protect participants’ confidentiality, the name of the award recipient will not be disclosed without written permission from said award recipient. By signing this statement, you are stating that you understand all that has been explained to you, and that you freely agree to participate in this study. At anytime during this experiment, you have the right to discontinue your participation without penalty. At the conclusion of this study’s data collection phase, a brief letter explaining some of the main hypotheses of this study shall be disbursed to participants who request such material. I, , am freely volunteering to participate in the (please print your name here) current study. I do this without coercion and with the understanding that I have the right to terminate my participation during any phase of this research without penalty. (please sign your name here) Please check the appropriate Option if you wish to receive additional information about this study after the data collection phase of this investigation is completed (Please provide your Pilot e-mail address). 91 No, I would not like any additional information on this study. Yes, I would like additional information on this study. My Pilot e- mail address is: . Please provide your postal address, e-mail address, or telephone number so that we can notify you if your are randomly selected to receive the $50.00 award. Now, before you begin any other questionnaire, please separate this sheet fi'om the others included in your packet, place it in the enclosed envelope marked “Informed Consent,” sea] this envelope, and place this sealed envelope in the brown, 8 1/2 X 11 inch envelope marked “Survey Data” (NOTE: Do not seal the “Survey Data” envelope yet). This “Informed Consent” form will NQI be used to link your responses to your name; rather, this sealed envelope ensures the anonymity of your responses, and enters you in the random drawing for the $50.00 award. After you have completed all of the questionnaires in your packet, place all of your materials in the envelope marked “Research Responses” and mail this packet to the address indicated (postage and labeling have already been provided for you on the envelope, and this material should be postmarked no later than April 25, 1996 to ensure that you are entered into the drawing). Thank you VERY much for your cooperation. APPENDIX F APPENDIX F DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE (Please do not put your name on this form) Please use the space provided to answer the following Questions. 1) Which of these racial designations do you feel most comfortable with (please check one)? African American Black Other (specify) 2) Sex: Male Female (Please check one) 3) What is your major field of study at MSU? 4) What MSU classification are you (Freshperson, Sophomore, Junior, Senior)? 5) How old are you? 6) Please rate how religious and/or spiritual you would consider yourself to be on the following scale: 1 2 3 4 5 Not at all Moderately Very highly religiousl religiousl religiousl spiritual spiritual spiritual 7) Are you a member of any African American campus groups (i.e., As One, Black Student Association, etc.)? Yes No . If so, in how many organizations are you involved? . What are their names? 8) What is your overall MSU Grade Point Average? 92 93 9) Are you planning to attend graduate school? Yes NO (please circle your response) 10) If you answered “yes” to item #9, please state whether or not you are planning to pursue a Ph.D. degree, a Masters degree, or both APPENDIX 6 APPENDIX G This study’s psychometric findings for the Racial Identity Attitude Scale, including scale item modifications. RIAS Preecounter Scale Original items: 4,8,9,12,17,21,24,25,29,31,32,35,38,40,41,42,46,47 Alpha = .72 N = 35.54, _SQ = 7.71, N = 86 Modified items: 4,8,12,17,24,25,29,31,32,38,40,46 (deleted items: 9,21 ,35,41,42,47) Alpha = .78 M = 21.32, §p= 6.54, N= 89 RIAS Encounter Scale Original items: 3,19,23,28,43,44 Alpha = .57 N = 15.84, S_D= 3.81, N= 90 Modified items: 3,19,23,28 (deleted items: 43,44) Alpha = .70 M= 11.03, Q12: 3.34, N= 90 _RI_AS lm_mer§ion/Emersi_op Original items: 11,14,15,18,26,27,33,34,36,39,20,5 Alpha = .79 M = 32.67, SQ = 7.16, N = 90 Modified items: 11,14,15,18,26,27,33,34,36,20,5 (deleted item: 39) Alpha = .79 N = 31.42, _SQ = 7.06, N = 90 lntemalization Original items: 1,2,6,7,10,13,16,22,30,37,45,48,49,50 Alpha = .60 M = 57.86, SQ = 5.48, N = 84 Modified items: 1,2,6,7,10,37,49,50 (deleted items: 13,16,22,30,45,48) Alpha = .70 N] = 33.47, S_D = 4.33, N = 86 94 ‘ LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Baldwin, J. A. (1981). Notes on an Africentric theory of Black personality. The Western Joum_a_l of Black Studies, _5_, 172-178. Baldwin, J. A. (1987). Assessment of African self-consciousness among Black students from two college environments. Journal of Black Psycholpgy, 1;, 27-41. Baldwin, J. A. & Bell, Y. R. (1985). The African self-consciousness scale: An Africentric personality questionnaire. The Western Journal of Black Studies, _9, 61-68. Baldwin, J .A., Brown, R .A., & Rackley (1990). Some socio- behavioral correlates of African self-consciousness in African-American college students. The Journal of Blgck Psycholpgy, 11, 1-17. Baldwin, J. A., Duncan, J. A., 8 Bell, Y. R. (1987). Assessment of African self-consciousness among Black students from two college environments. The Journal of Black Psycholpgy, fl, 27-41. Blau, G. J. (1984). Brief note comparing the Rotter and Levenson measures of locus of control. Perceptual and Motor Skill, 58, 173-174. Brookins, C. C. (1994). The relationship between Africentric values and racial identity attitudes: Validation of the belief systems analysis scale on African American college students. Journal of Black Psycholpgy, Q, 128-142. Caplan, N. (1970). The new ghetto man: A review of recent empirical studies. Journal of Social Issues, E, 59-73. Carter, R. T. (1991). Racial identity attitudes and psychological functioning. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 3, 105- 1 14. Carter, R. T., & Helms, J. E. (1988). The relationship between racial identity attitudes and social class. J umal of Negro Education, Q, 22-30. 95 96 Cross, W. E. (1978). The Thomas and Cross models of psychological Nigrescence: A review. The Journal of Black Psycholpgy, 5, 1 3-31 . Cross, W. E. (1980). Models of psychological Nigrescence: A literature review. In R. L. Jones (Ed.), Black Psycholpgy (2nd ed., pp. 81- 98). New York: Harper & Row. Cross, W. E. (1994). Nigrescence theory: Historical and explanatory notes. Joumgl of Vocational Behavior, _4_4;, 199-123. Davis, W. L., 8 E. J. Phares (1967). lntemal-extemal control as a determinant of information seeking in a social influence situation. Journal of PersonaliN, _3_5_, 547-561. Evans, K. M., & Herr, E. L. (1994). The influence of racial identity and the perception of discrimination on the career aspirations of African American men and women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 173-184. Forward, J. R., & WIlliams, J. R. (1970). Intemal—extemal control and Black militancy. Journal of Social Issues, E, 75-92. Gaa, R. P., \Mlliams, R. E., & Johnson, S. W. (1981). Domain- specific locus of control orientations of Anglo, Black, and Chicano adolescents. The Journal of Psycholpgy, _1Q_7_, 185-190. Garcia, 0., & Levenson, H. (1975). Differences between Blacks’ and Whites’ expectations of control by chance and powerful others. Psycholpgical Reports, 31, 563-566. Goodman, S. H., Waters, L. K. (1987). Convergent validity of five locus of control scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 743-747. Gore, P. M., & Rotter, J. B. (1963). A personality correlate of social action. Journal of Personal'fl, 3_1, 58-63. Gruen, G. E., Korte, J. R., & Baum, J. F. (1974). Group measure of locus of control. Developmental Psycholpgy, 10, 683-686. Gurin, P. Gurin, G., Lao, R. C., & Beattie (1969). lntemal-extemal control in the motivational dynamics of Negro youth. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 29-53. 97 Hall, E. R., Joesting, J., 8 Woods, M. J. (1977). Relationships among measures of locus of control for Black and White students. Psycholmical Reports, 4Q, 59—62. Hall, W. 8., Cross, W. E., 8 Freedle, R. (1972). Stages in the development of Black awareness: An empirical investigation. In R. L Jones (Ed.), _B__lgck Psychology (pp. 156-165). New York: Harper 8 Row. Heider, F. (1958). Psycholpgy of interpersonal relations. The United States of America: John WIIey 8 Sons, Inc. Helms, J. E. (1986) Expanding racial identity theory to cover counseling process. Journal of Counseling Psycholpgy, 33, 62—64. Hillman, S. 8., Wood, P. C., 8 Sawilowsky, S. S. (1992). Extemalization as a self-protective mechanism in a stigmatized group. Psycholpgical Reports, 7Q, 641-642. Hunter, J. E. (1993). Program Correct (Update 9-15-93) [Computer software]. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. Jacobson, C. K. (1975). The saliency of personal control and racial separatism for Black and White southern students. The Psycholpgical Record, _2_5_, 243-253. Kumea (Shorter, D. L.) (1976). Towards developing Black activists: The relationship of beliefs in individual and collective intemal-extemal control. The Journal of Black Psychology, 3, 59-70. Levenson, H. (1974). Activism and powerful others: Distinctions within the concept of internal-extemal control. Journal of Personally Assessment, fl, 377-383. Levenson, H. (1981). Differentiating among intemality, powerful others, and chance. In H. M. Lefcourt’s (ed.), Research with the Locus of Control Construct (vol. 1, pp. 15—63). New York: Academic Press. Levenson, H. (1972). Distinctions within the concept of intemal- extemal control: Development of a new scale. Proceedings of the 80th Annual Convention of the American Psycholpgical Association, _7_, 259-260. Levenson, H., 8 Mahler, l. (1975). Attitudes toward others and components of intemal-extemal locus of control. Psycholmical Repprts, 3_6_, 209-210. 98 Levenson, H., 8 Miller, J. (1976). Multidimensional locus of control in sociopolitical activists of conservative and liberal ideologies. Journal pf Personality and Social Psycholpgy, 3_3, 199-208. Martin, J. K., 8 Hall, G. C. N. (1992). Thinking Black, thinking internal, thinking feminist. Journal of Counseling Psycholpgy, 39, 509-514. Mbiti, J. S. (1969). African religions 8 philosophy. New York: Praeger Publishing. Milliones, J. (1980). Construction of a Black consciousness measure: Psychotherapeutic implications. Psychotherapy: Theogy, Research 8 Practice, 1_7_, 175-182. Mitchell, S. L., 8 Dell, D. M. (1992). The relationship between Black students’ racial identity attitude and participation in campus organizations. Journal of Collgge Student Development, 3_3, 39 - 43. Munford, M. B. (1994). Relationship of gender, self-esteem, social class, and racial identity to depression in Blacks. Journal of Black Psycholpgy, _2__0_, 157-174. Nobles, W. W. (1972). African philosophy: Foundations for Black psychology. In Reginald Jones (Ed.) Black Psycholpgy, New York: Harper 8 Row, 23-35. Nobles, W. W. (1974). Africanity: Its role in Black families. Ins Black Scholar, 5, 10-17. Oler, C. H. (1989). Psychotherapy with Black clients’ racial identity and locus of control. Psychotherapy, 26, 233-241. Parham, T. A., 8 Helms, J. E. (1981). The influence of Black students’ racial identity attitudes on preferences for counselor‘s race. Journal of Counseling Psycholpgy, 28, 250-257. Parham, T. A., 8 Helms, J. E. (1985). Relation of racial identity attitudes to self actualization and affective states of Black students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, Q, 431-440. Parham, T. A., 8 WIlliams, P. T. (1993). The relationship of demographic and background factors to racial identity attitudes. Journal of Black Psycholpgy, 1_9, 7-24. 99 Peterson, C., Maier, S. F ., 8 Seligman, M. E. P (1993). Lgamed helplessness: A theorv for the age of personal control. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Peterson, 0., Schwartz, S. M., 8 Seligman, M. E. P. (1981). Self- blame and depressive symptoms. Journal of Personalfly and Social Psycholpgy, 41, 253-259. Rodin, M., 8 Harari, H. (1986). Fact, belief, and the attribution of prejudice. Social Cpgnition, 4_, 437-445. Rodin, M., Price, J., Sanchez, 8 McElligot, S. (1989). Derogation, exclusion, and unfair treatment of persons with social flaws: Controllability of stigma and the attribution of prejudice. Personality and Social Ps chol Bulletin, 1_5_, 439-451. Rodin, M. J., Price, J. M., Bryson, J. B., 8 Sanchez, F. J. (1990). Asymmetry in prejudice attribution. Journal of Experimental Social Psycholpgy, _2_§, 481-504. Rose, L. F. R. (1982/83). Theoretical and methodological issues in the study of Black culture and personality. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 1_Q, 320-338. Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psycholpgical Monpgraphs: General and Applied, 89, 1-28. Rotter, J. B. (1990). lntemal versus external control of reinforcement. American Psychologist, 15, 489-493. Sabnani, H. B., 8 Ponterotto, J. G. (1992). Racial/ethnic minority- specific instrumentation in counseling research: A review, critique, and recommendations. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling m Development, 2_4, 161-187. Stokes, J. E., Murray, C. B., Peacock, M. J., 8 Kaiser, R. T. (1994). Assessing the reliability, factor structure, and validity of the African self- consciousness scale in a general population of African Americans. Journal of Black Psychology, Q, 62-74. Sullivan, H. C. (1953). The interpersonal theory of stchigtyy. New York: Norton. 100 Tashakkori, A., 8 Thompson, V. D. (1991). Race differences in self- perception and locus of control during adolescence and early adulthood: Methodological implications. Genetic, Social, and General Psycholpgy Monpgraphs, m, 135-152. Taylor, S. E., 8 Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of the head phenomena. Advances in Experimental Social Psycholpgy, _2_, 249-288. Thomas, C., 8 Thomas S. (1971). Something borrowed, something Black. In C. Thomas (ed.) Boys no more (pp. 101-116). Beverly Hills, CA: Glencoe. Thomas, M. B. (1986). The use of expectancy theory and the theory of learned helplessness in building upon strengths of ethnic minorities: The Black experience in the united states. lntemational Journal fpr the Advancement of Counseling, 9, 371-379. Turner, 8. F ., 8 Turner, C. B. (1975). Race, sex, and perception of the occupational opportunity structure among college students. Lbs Sociological Quarterly, fi, 345-360. Walkey, F. H. (1979). lntemal control, powerful others, and chance: A confirmation of Levenson’s factor structure. Journal pf Personalm Assessment, _4_3, 532-535. Webb, C. T., Waugh, F. E., 8 Herbert, J. D. (1993). Relationship between locus of control and performance on the national board of medical examiners, part I, among black medical students. Psycholpgical Reports, 12,1171-1177. Yanico, B. J., Swanson, J. L., 8 Tokar, D. M. (1994). A psychometric investigation of the black racial identity attitude Scale-Fonn 8. qumal of Vocational Behavior, 4_4, 218-234.