A Mixed Methods Study of Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action, Colorblindness, and White Privilege Among White Women College Students in the US

The authors of this study use survey responses to examine white women college students’ levels of support for race-conscious affirmative action admissions policies, their reasons for supporting or opposing such policies, and the racial attitudes that may influence their reasoning.

Introduction

This study seeks to understand whether white women college students in the United States support or oppose race-conscious affirmative action in college admissions. In addition to measuring students’ levels of support for such policies, the study examines students’ stated reasons for their views and explores whether their responses may be associated with awareness of white privilege, willingness to confront white privilege, and/or adherence to colorblindness. 

In June 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court severely limited the extent to which universities receiving federal funding may consider race in their admissions processes. Following this ruling, the authors of this study seek to better understand contemporary attitudes toward affirmative action among young Americans. They note that white women have historically benefited the most from affirmative action in higher education and employment; however, prior research has produced conflicting findings regarding white women’s support for race-conscious affirmative action policies specifically. This study seeks to help clarify their perspectives and suggests potential avenues for antiracist education measures. 

The research team includes researchers with expertise spanning educational psychology, social psychology, and family and human development. Annabelle L. Atkin, Paul A. Robbins, and Nathan Lieng are researchers affiliated with the Department of Human Development and Family Science at Purdue University. Atkin is an assistant professor with a PhD in Family and Human Development from Arizona State University, Robbins is an assistant professor with a PhD in Educational Psychology from the University of Texas at Austin, and Lieng is a PhD student with a BA in Psychology from San Diego State University and an MA in Psychological Science from California State University, Northridge. Teri A. Kirby is an associate professor in the Department of Psychological Sciences at Purdue University with a PhD in Social Psychology from the University of Washington. Finally, J. Abigail Saavedra is a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Psychology at the University of Las Vegas, Nevada, with a PhD in Family and Human Development from Arizona State University.

Methods and Findings

The authors administered a survey to students enrolled in an undergraduate diversity course in the Human Development and Family Science program at a large public university in the Midwest during the Fall 2023 and Spring 2024 semesters. Although completing the survey was required for the course, students could choose whether to allow their responses to be included in the study. Participants self-reported their gender and race, and the authors identified 159 white women respondents for inclusion in the study’s analysis. 

Students responded to the following short-answer questions: “Based on your knowledge, what are your views on the role of race/ethnicity in college admissions? Do you believe it should be considered as a factor in the admissions process? Please explain your thoughts.” The authors coded students’ responses as support, oppose, participant unsure, or stance unclear. Out of the 159 students included in the study, 59 (37%) supported race-conscious affirmative action, 77 (48%) opposed it, 8 (5%) were unsure, and 15 (9%) did not make their stance clear. 

Students who supported affirmative action often argued that such policies could be used to advance racial equity by compensating for disadvantages that racial minorities face and by creating diverse student bodies on college campuses. In contrast, students who opposed affirmative action often argued that universities should only consider merit in the admissions process, with several students stating that considering race would be unfair. Notably, more than one-fifth of the participants in the study acknowledged the value of creating racially diverse college campuses but still did not believe that racial diversity alone is an important enough goal to justify the use of race-conscious admissions policies, insisting that college admissions should be solely based on merit. 

The survey also measured students’ awareness of white privilege, their willingness to confront white privilege, and their adherence to colorblind ideology. Students rated their agreement with a series of statements on a six-point likert scale, and the authors used these responses to generate scores for each student for each construct. Students who opposed affirmative action scored significantly higher on colorblindness, whereas those who supported affirmative action had significantly higher scores in terms of awareness of white privilege and willingness to confront it.

Conclusions

Although the white women college students in this study were more likely to oppose than to support race-conscious affirmative action, this study’s findings offer guidance for educators designing antiracist curricula for K-12 schools, colleges, and universities. The authors suggest that when students have an understanding of historic and systemic racism and are able to acknowledge the privileges held by white Americans, they may be more likely to support antiracist policies such as affirmative action. The authors also found that “the myth of meritocracy” appears to motivate many students’ opposition to affirmative action. As a result, they suggest that educating students about systemic racism and inequality may enable them to critically examine such mythologies and to embrace antiracist policy interventions.