Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

Date of Degree

9-2025

Document Type

Doctoral Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Program

Psychology

Advisor

Daryl Wout

Committee Members

Gabriel Camacho

Maureen Craig

Ana Gantman

Subject Categories

Social and Behavioral Sciences

Keywords

Reparations, Social Identity Thoery, Taboo Trade-Offs, Instrumental Uses Intervention, Moral Hypocrisy

Abstract

The economic gains America made from the enslavement of Africans have long been considered its original sin; indeed, most people living today would agree that such an enterprise was morally depraved. Yet, due to moral opposition, many White Americans reject reparative policies (i.e., reparations) that are developed to remedy the damages done to African Americans by slavery and the subsequent continued discrimination. The present research attempts to address two broad hypotheses across four empirical research studies. The first hypothesis tests whether White Americans' rejection of reparative policies related to slavery and Black discrimination is inherently a moral objection to taboo trade-offs and is referred to as the American moralist hypothesis. An alternative hypothesis was that White Americans may simply wish to avoid appearing as moral hypocrites. We termed this the American moral hypocrite hypothesis.

I contend that many White Americans reject reparative policies because such policies cause threats to their social identity that, in turn, force them to perceive such policies as having to compromise their sacred values and perceptions that America is fair and just for financial compensation (i.e., a taboo trade-off). Two experimental studies were designed to test whether social identity threat causes these taboo trade-off experiences (Studies 1 and 2) and attempted to leverage an instrumental uses intervention (i.e., highlights their financial self-interest in supporting the bill) borrowed from moral psychology to remedy the taboo trade-off, thereby increasing support for policies addressing social wealth inequality (Study 2). Across these two studies, I found that self-identified White Republicans experienced a type of social identity threat—meritocratic threat, which is the concern that the accomplishments that one achieves are due to their race and not effort, that led to experiencing a taboo trade-off when considering supporting reparations (Study 1). In addition, I found that the instrumental uses intervention increased support for reparations, but did so because it resolved a taboo trade-off experience for Republicans as opposed to Democrats (Study 2).

Alternatively, I developed two experiments that utilized information-based interventions to address the possibility that such reluctance can be swayed through highlighting moral hypocrisy (Studies 3 and 4). These interventions were proposed to work by highlighting social identity and biased wealth redistributive decisions, setting a psychological experience that most seek to avoid—moral hypocrisy. These moral hypocrisy interventions failed to shift people’s attitudes and behaviors to support collective action among outgroup members. Together, these findings support the American moralist hypothesis, while they also refute the American hypocrite hypothesis. The current research has significant potential to benefit the African diaspora and all Americans by addressing racial inequities and advancing social justice.

Download

Share

COinS