Implicit racial appeals produce an opposite-of-predicted backfire effect among low-resentment moderates.

Evidence

Examining Figure 1 suggests that this difference is driven by the responses of moderates, the baseline category in our models. Whereas moderates high in racial resentment showed lower welfare support after reading the explicit appeal, moderates low in racial resentment showed lower welfare support after reading the implicit appeal. This suggests that the interaction between liberalism, racial resentment, and the implicit racial appeal condition is driven in part by an opposite of predicted effect among moderates, where implicit appeals decrease the effect of moderates’ racial attitudes on their welfare evaluations. — Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer, Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle?…, 79

Categorization

• XREF: This is the backfire-asymmetry result the reader most wanted — implicit cues repel exactly the audience whose persuasion is ostensibly being attempted. — connects to: Explicit and implicit racial cues boost racial resentment equally in whites — Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer, Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle?…, 24; Racially encoded messages backfire among moderates high in racial resentment. — Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer, Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle?…, 147; Prior exposure to racialized elite cues hardens opposite positions against novel racial appeals. — Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer, Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle?…, 182 (+1 more)

Related

• Subtly racialized appeals mobilize high-resentment liberals but leave moderates and conservatives unmoved. (similarity 0.93)
• Explicit and implicit racial cues boost racial resentment equally in whites (similarity 0.91)
• Implicit racial appeals mobilize resentment among liberals as well as conservatives (similarity 0.90)
• Explicit racial appeals fail to shift welfare support whereas implicit racial cues succeed. (similarity 0.89)
• Racially encoded messages backfire among moderates high in racial resentment. (similarity 0.87)
• Prior exposure to racialized elite cues hardens opposite positions against novel racial appeals. (similarity 0.86)
• Racial appeals do not generally amplify the effect of racial attitudes on welfare support (similarity 0.85)
• Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer — Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle? Experimental Evidence That Racial Resentment and Political Ideology Condition Responses to Racially Encoded Messages (similarity 0.83)
• Dog-whistle appeals mobilize racially resentful white liberals, not conservatives (similarity 0.83)
• Racial appeals intensify racial-attitude influence on gun attitudes among liberals, not conservatives. (similarity 0.83)
• Liberal whites’ racial resentment is harnessed by racial appeals across ideologically opposed policy domains. (similarity 0.82)
• Implicit racial appeals boosted liberal support for gun control (similarity 0.82)
• Implicit racial appeals drive welfare opposition through reduced deservingness perceptions (similarity 0.81)
• Dog-whistle effects may cut opposite ways across ideology (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Racially encoded messages backfire among moderates high in racial resentment. #contradicts (0.75) — Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer, Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle?…, 147
• Prior exposure to racialized elite cues hardens opposite positions against novel racial appeals. #complicates (0.75) — Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer, Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle?…, 182