Abstract
This study broadens the framework within which the psychology of support for affirmative action policies is examined to include the institutional framework within which such policies are developed and implemented. This broader framework includes concern with electoral support for those who implement affirmative action policies, as well as considering the impact of implementing such policies on the overall legitimacy of government. It also includes evaluations of the fairness of the two key social institutions shaping such policies—government authorities and markets. The results of a survey of Americans suggest that this institutional framework had an important influence on reactions to affirmative action policies that was distinct from direct reactions to policies themselves. In particular, people were more supportive of policies intervening in markets when they believed that markets represented unfair social allocation procedures. Those politicians who supported such policies received greater electoral support when people viewed market procedures as being unfair and when they felt that government decision-making procedures were fair. Evidence suggests that outcomes did not directly shape electoral support or judgments about the legitimacy of government.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bobocel, D. R., Son Hing, L. S., Davey, L. M., Stanley, D. J., and Zanna, M. P. (1998). Justice-based opposition to social policies: Is it genuine? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 75: 653-669.
Citrin, J., Green, D. P., and Sears, D. O. (1990). White reactions to Black candidates: When does race matter? Public Opin. Q. 54: 74-96.
Crosby, F. J., and Franco, J. L. (2003). Connections between the ivory tower and the multicolored world. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 7: 362-373.
Crosby, F. J., Iyer, A., Clayton, S., and Downing, R. A. (2003). Affirmative action: Psychological data and the policy debates. Am. Psychol. 58: 93-115.
Crosby, F. J., and Stockdale, M. S. (2003). The Psychology and Management of Workplace Diversity, Blackwell Publishers, New York.
Crosby, F. J., and Vandeveer, C. (2000). Sex, Race, and Merit, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
Danziger, S., and Gottschalk, P. (1994). Uneven Tides: Rising Inequality in America, Russell-Sage, New York.
Danziger, S., and Gottschalk, P. (1995). America Unequal, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Federico, C. M., and Sidanius, J. (2002a). Racism, ideology, and affirmative action, revisited: The antecedents and consequences of ‘principles objections’ to affirmative action. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 82: 488-502.
Federico, C. M., and Sidanius, J. (2002b). Sophistication and the antecedents of Whites' racial policy attitudes: Racism, ideology, and affirmative action in America. Public Opin. Q. 66: 145-176.
Feldman, S. (2003). Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. In Sears, D. O., Huddy, L., and Jervis, R. (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 47-92.
Freeman, R. B. (1999). The New Inequality. Beacon Press, Boston.
Glaser, J. M. (2002). The preference puzzle: Educational differences in racial-political attitudes. Pol. Behav. 23: 313-334.
Heilman, M. E., Battle, W. S., Keller, C. E., and Lee, R. A. (1998). Type of affirmative action policy: A determinant of reactions to sex-based preferential selection? J. Appl. Psychol. 83: 190-205.
Hochschild, J. L. (1981). What's Fair: American Beliefs About Distributive Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Huddy, L., and Sears, D. O. (1995). Opposition to bilingual education: Prejudice or the defense of realistic interests? Soc. Psychol. Q. 58: 133-143.
Jencks, C. (1979). Who Gets Ahead? The Determinants of Economics Success in America, Basic Books, New York.
Jost, J. T., Blount, S., Pfeffer, J., and Hunyady, G. (2003). Fair market ideology: Its cognitive-motivational underpinnings. Res. Organ. Behav. 25: 53-91.
Keiser, L. A. (2000). Wealth in America: Trends in Wealth Inequality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kluegel, J. R., and Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs About Inequality: Americans' Views of What is and What Ought to Be, Adegruyter, New York.
Kravitz, D. A. (1995). Attitudes toward affirmative action plans directed at Blacks: Effects of plan and individual differences. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 24: 2192-2220.
Kravitz, D. A., and Klineberg, S. L. (2000). Reactions to two versions of affirmative action among Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics. J. Appl. Psychol. 85: 597-611.
Kravitz, D. A., Klineberg, S. L., Avery, D. R., Nguyen, A. K., Lund, C., and Fu, E. J. (2001). Attitudes toward affirmative action: Correlations with demographic variables and with beliefs about targets, actions, and economics effects. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 30: 1109-1136.
Lane, R. (1962). Political Ideology, Free Press,New York.
Lind, E. A., and Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Plenum, New York.
McClosky, H., and Zaller, J. (1984). The American Ethos: Public Attitudes Toward Capitalism and Democracy, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Montada, L. (1995). Applying social psychology: The case of redistributions in united Germany. Soc. Justice Res. 8: 73-90.
Montada, L., and Schneider, A. (1989). Justice and emotional reactions to the disadvantaged. Soc. Justice Res. 3: 313-344.
Nacoste, R. B. (1992). Toward a psychological ecology of affirmative action. Soc. Justice Res. 5: 269-289.
Parkin, F. (1971). Class Inequality and Political Order, Praeger, New York.
Peterson, R. S. (1994). The role of values in predicting fairness judgments and support of affirmative action. J. Soc. Issues 50: 95-115.
Phillips, K. (2002). Wealth and Democracy, Broadway books, New York.
Sears, D. O., and Funk, C. L. (1990a). Self-interest in Americans' political opinions. In Mansbridge, J. J. (ed.), Beyond Self-Interest, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 47-92.
Sears, D. O., and Funk, C. L. (1990b). The limited effect of economic self-interest on policy attitudes in the mass public. J. Behav. Econ. 19: 247-271.
Sears, D. O., and Funk, C. L. (1991). The role of self-interest in social and political attitudes. In Zanna, M. (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 24, Academic press, Orlando, FL, pp. 47-92.
Sears, D. O., and Henry, P. J. (2003). The origins of symbolic racism. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 85: 259-275.
Sears, D. O., and Huddy, L. (1993). The symbolic politics of opposition to bilingual education. In Worchel, S., and Simpson, J. A. (eds.), Conflict Between People and Groups, Nelson-Hall, New York, pp. 47-92.
Sears, D. O., and Kinder, D. R. (1985). Whites' opposition to busing. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 48: 1148-1161.
Sears, D. O., Lau, R. R., Tyler, T. R., and Allen, J. M.,Jr. (1980). Self-interest vs. symbolic politics in policy attitudes and presidential voting. Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 74: 670-684.
Skitka, L. (2002). Do the means always justify the ends, or do the ends sometimes justify the means? A value model of justice reasoning. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28: 588-597.
Skitka, L., and Houston, D. A. (2001). When due process is of no consequence: Moral mandates and presumed defendant guilt or innocence. Soc. Justice Res. 14: 305-326.
Skitka, L., and Mullen, E. (2002). Understanding judgments of fairness in a real-world political context. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28: 1419-1429.
Skitka, L. J., Mullen, E., Griffin, T., Hutchinson, S., and Chamberlin, B. (2002). Dispositions, scripts, or motivated correction? Underlying ideological differences in explanations for social problems. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 83: 470-487.
Skitka, L. J., and Tetlock, P. E. (1993). Providing public assistance. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 65: 1205-1223.
Smith, H. J., and Tyler, T. R. (1996). Justice and power. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 26: 171-200.
Sondak, H., and Tyler, T. R. (2003). What Shouldn't Money Buy?: The Psychology of Preferences for Resource Allocation Procedures in Groups, Unpublished manuscript, School of Management, University of Utah.
Son Hing, L. S., Bobocel, D. R., and Zanna, M. P. (2002). Meritocracy and opposition to affirmative action. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 83: 493-509.
Steiner, D. D., and Gilliland, S. W. (1996). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in France and the United States. J. Appl. Psychol. 81: 134-141.
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why People Obey the Law, Yale, New Haven.
Tyler, T. R. (1986). Justice and leadership endorsement. In Lau, R. R., and Sears, D. O. (eds.), Political Cognition, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 47-92.
Tyler, T. R. (2000). Social justice; Outcome and procedure. Int. J. Psychol. 35: 117-125.
Tyler, T. R. (2001). A psychological perspective on the legitimacy of authorities and institutions. In Jost, J. T., and Major, B. (eds.), The Psychology of Legitimacy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., and Huo, Y. J. (1997). Social Justice in a Diverse Society, Westview, Boulder, CO.
Tyler, T. R., and Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the Law, Russell-Sage, New York.
Tyler, T. R., and Lind, E. A. (2002). Understanding the nature of fraternalistic deprivation. In Walker, I., and Smith, H. J. (eds.), Relative Deprivation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Tyler, T. R., and McGraw, K. (1986). Ideology and the interpretation of personal experience: Procedural justice and political quiescence. J. Soc. Issues 42: 115-128.
Tyler, T. R., and Mitchell, G. (1994). Legitimacy and the empowerment of discretionary legal authority: The United States Supreme Court and abortion rights. Duke Law J. 43: 703-814.
Tyler, T. R., Rasinski, K., and McGraw, K. (1985). The influence of perceived injustice on support for political authorities. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 15: 700-725.
Wolff, E. N. (2002). Top Heavy, New Press, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tyler, T.R. Affirmative Action in an Institutional Context: The Antecedents of Policy Preferences and Political Support. Social Justice Research 17, 5–24 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SORE.0000018090.84298.5b
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SORE.0000018090.84298.5b