White guilt mediates privilege’s effect on affirmative action attitudes but not discrimination beliefs’ effect.

Evidence

In contrast, the mediational tests did not support the argument that White guilt would mediate the relationship between beliefs about the prevalence of discrimination and attitudes toward affirmative action (see Table 2). — Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller, White Guilt, 102

White guilt as a mediator. The same mediator analyses used in the previous two studies indicated that White guilt partially mediated the relationship from White privilege to attitudes toward affirmative action and from beliefs about the prevalence of discrimination to attitudes toward affirmative action (see Table 2). Although White privilege predicted attitudes toward affirmative action with and without White guilt included in the equation, the relationship was significantly weaker when White guilt was included. Similarly, beliefs about discrimination predicted attitudes toward affirmative action with and without White guilt included in the equation, but the relationship was significantly weaker when White guilt was included. — Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller, White Guilt, 120

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the debate over whether guilt or perceived-discrimination beliefs drive policy support — relevant to the reader’s question about what identity salience actually activates. — connects to: White guilt independently predicts affirmative action support beyond prejudice and ideology — Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller, White Guilt: Its Antecedents and…, 68; White shame rather than guilt may drive resistance to anti-racism efforts — Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller, White Guilt: Its Antecedents and…, 137; Zero-sum perceptions of economics drive white opposition to affirmative action — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3365 (+1 more)
• DEFINE: Clarifies the mediation claim central to the reader’s question about whether guilt is the operating mechanism versus glorification.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller, White Guilt: Its Antecedents and…, 102; Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller, White Guilt: Its Antecedents and…, 120

Related

• White privilege boosts affirmative-action support only through White guilt, while discrimination beliefs do not. (similarity 0.92)
• Beliefs about White privilege drive affirmative-action attitudes only through White guilt. (similarity 0.91)
• White guilt independently predicts affirmative action support beyond prejudice and ideology (similarity 0.89)
• White shame rather than guilt may drive resistance to anti-racism efforts (similarity 0.85)
• White guilt correlates with belief in White privilege and anti-discrimination awareness (similarity 0.83)
• Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller — White Guilt Its Antecedents and Consequences for Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action (similarity 0.83)
• Guilt motivates corrective actions while shame triggers defensive reactions to inequality (similarity 0.81)
• Zero-sum perceptions of economics drive white opposition to affirmative action (similarity 0.81)
• White guilt links to prejudice independent of political orientation (similarity 0.80)
• White guilt stays low partly because privilege is hard to detect as an absence (similarity 0.80)
• Exposure to pervasive racism knowledge triggers and sustains White guilt (similarity 0.79)
• Denial of discrimination may itself result from prior guilt feelings (similarity 0.78)
• White guilt should correlate with negative evaluation of one’s racial group membership. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• White shame rather than guilt may drive resistance to anti-racism efforts #complicates (0.75) — Janet K. Swim and Deborah L. Miller, White Guilt, 137
• Zero-sum perceptions of economics drive white opposition to affirmative action #qualifies (0.72) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3365
• White objections to racial change defend group privilege rather than prejudice #qualifies (0.70) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3362