Symbolic racism scales measure a construct distinct from the policy preferences they predict.

Evidence

In sum, the strong effects of symbolic racism on racial policy preferences seem not to be explained by content overlap with the dependent variables. Purging symbolic racism scales of items with reference to government do not markedly reduce their effects on racial policy preferences, the effects of nonracial conservatism do not step in to replace those of the purged items, and the overall level of explanation provided by the models does not decrease markedly despite the loss of predictors thought to be tautological with the dependent variables. Again, the bottom line is that all conventional measures of symbolic racism have about the same effects. — Christopher Tarman and David O. Sears, The Conceptualization and Measurement…, 141

Categorization

• XREF: Directly serves the reading purpose on whether symbolic racism measures threat perception validly as distinct from political outcomes it explains. — connects to: Some symbolic racism items overlap tautologically with the policy attitudes they predict — Christopher Tarman and David O. Sears, The Conceptualization and Measurement…, 24; Symbolic racism explains racial policy preferences independent of conservatism. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 2179; Symbolic racism scales measure a distinct attitude rather than mere conservatism — Christopher Tarman and David O. Sears, The Conceptualization and Measurement…, 192 (+4 more)

Related

• Symbolic racism scales measure a distinct attitude rather than mere conservatism (similarity 0.94)
• Symbolic racism explains racial policy preferences independent of conservatism. (similarity 0.91)
• Some symbolic racism items overlap tautologically with the policy attitudes they predict (similarity 0.91)
• Symbolic racism’s discriminant validity from allied constructs is empirically testable (similarity 0.91)
• Distinct consequences indicate whether symbolic-racism variants are truly separate constructs. (similarity 0.90)
• Symbolic racism scales may measure opposition to big government, not racial attitudes. (similarity 0.89)
• Controversy over symbolic racism measures is empirically moot since all variants predict equally. (similarity 0.89)
• Subscale choice does not alter symbolic racism’s effect on racial policy even after controls. (similarity 0.89)
• Symbolic racism measurement is internally coherent and unified. (similarity 0.88)
• Different racism constructs predict political outcomes unequally (similarity 0.88)
• Symbolic racism may decompose into separate attitude factors rather than one coherent belief system (similarity 0.87)
• Response biases fail to explain symbolic racism’s predictive findings (similarity 0.87)
• Symbolic racism effects persist even after removing items about government programs (similarity 0.86)
• Symbolic racism should outweigh both older racism and race-neutral values in shaping policy views (similarity 0.86)
• Symbolic racism is not reducible to political conservatism (similarity 0.86)

Broader Connections

• Symbolic racism scales measure a distinct attitude rather than mere conservatism #corroborates (1.00) — Christopher Tarman and David O. Sears, The Conceptualization and Measurement…, 192
• Symbolic racism explains racial policy preferences independent of conservatism. #corroborates (0.95) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2179
• Symbolic racism measures may overlap conceptually with their outcome variables #complicates (0.95) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3659
• Symbolic racism’s discriminant validity from allied constructs is empirically testable #expands (0.80) — Christopher Tarman and David O. Sears, The Conceptualization and Measurement…, 147
• Symbolic racism scales conflate real political threat with prejudice #complicates (0.75)