“

Ka

b

a

ARRA

KAQRYUEC

1

i&trhiuia

0

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

journa l h om epa ge: www.elsev ier .com/ locate / i j in t re l

Just a Joke”: Young Australian understandings of racism

aine Grigga,∗, Lenore Mandersona,b

School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, AustraliaCentre for Health Policy, School of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:eceived 31 March 2014eceived in revised form 1 June 2015ccepted 1 June 2015

eywords:ustraliaualitative methodsacismouthnderstandingxperienceonceptualisation

a b s t r a c t

Lay understandings reflect the lived experience of racism, and our knowledge of these con-siderations assist with enhancing an appreciation of intergroup relations. Drawing on datafrom semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 30 school attendees from diversebackgrounds aged 14–22 years, conducted from December 2011 to January 2012 in Victoria,Australia, we critically examined their understandings of and experiences with racism. Datademonstrate the ambiguity of racism, while confirming that Australian youth from vari-ous racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds consistently conceptualise, explain,and classify racism, whilst minimising some forms of racism, including racist humour. Par-ticipants described racism through three primary domains: (a) Group versus Individual:racism stems from perceived differences, with individuals stereotyped as belonging tolarger groups; (b) Actions versus Beliefs: individuals are classified as racist or non-racistaccording to their actions and beliefs; and (c) Exceptions, Exclusions and Minimisation:racism is frequently excused and minimised. The present research highlights the need foradditional exploration of the nuances of racism in Australia from lay perspectives and pro-vides clear evidence of the need to address racism in Australian society. Further developingthe evidence base to understand the lived experience of racism in Australia could informand support the design and evaluation of anti-racism and pro-diversity initiatives. More-over, we hope that the present data can be drawn upon to enlighten the development ofinstruments to more accurately measure racist attitudes in Australian youth.

© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

. Introduction

Enhancing scholarly understandings of how lay people conceptualise racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious difference, anddentify racist speech and action, is critically important to reduce racism and promote alternate attitudes (Walton, Priest,

Paradies, 2013). The current study was conducted to explore perceptions of race and racism among young Victorians, soo enhance our understanding of the dynamics of racism, differential treatment due to perceived racial, ethnic, cultural, oreligious group membership, and its converse, racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious acceptance. We did not set out to testypotheses or an underlying theory; rather, we sought to generate and develop a conceptual and experiential understand-

ng of racism in Australia, using a qualitative approach. The potential of qualitative research to be an integral, in depth, and

nobtrusive component of instrument development has been highlighted previously (Walton et al., 2013). The conceptual-

sations provided by participants were therefore also intended to inform an attitudinal measure of racial, ethnic, cultural,nd religious acceptance, to be developed in subsequent work (see Grigg & Manderson, 2015).

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 438600989.E-mail address: kaine.grigg@gmail.com (K. Grigg).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.06.006147-1767/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

196 K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

Despite its pervasiveness in everyday language, there is no academic consensus on what characterises racism, and mostresearch fails to adequately define racism (Brondolo, Gallo, & Myers, 2009; Paradies, 2006a). Theories of racism vary fromthose understanding racism as inevitable, to those attributing racism to personality characteristics, to those proposingracism to be a product of societal norms and discourse. Racism has also been studied from both the perspective of thereflecting perpetrator and of the perceiving victim. In this sense, perceived racism refers to the subjective experience ofracism, prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination (Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams, 1999).

In its most basic form, racism refers to differential treatment due to the perceived racial membership of an individualor group based on stereotypic characteristics (Paradies, 2006b; Phelan, Link, & Dovidio, 2008). The term can also be appliedmore extensively to cultural and ethnic group differences, and contemporary definitions of racism have expanded to includereligious affiliation, with racialisation of religion considered especially important in Australia (Contrada et al., 2001; Dunn,Klocker, & Salabay, 2007). Broadly, racism can be defined as any behaviours, beliefs, or attitudes that underlie inequalitiesacross groups and disadvantage less dominant, or advantage dominant, groups, with the inequitable distribution of powerbeing essential for such racism and the consequent stigma (Fiske, 1993; Link & Phelan, 2001; Paradies et al., 2013; Phelanet al., 2008; Solorzano, Ceja, & Yosso, 2000).

Racism is expressed through stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination. Racist beliefs are viewed as cognition (i.e., stereo-typing); racist emotions and attitudes as affect (i.e., prejudice); and the enactment of racist laws, norms, and practices asbehaviour (i.e., discrimination) (Paradies, 2006a; Quillian, Cook, & Massey, 2006). Therefore, racism, as broadly defined inthe academic literature, includes any cognition, affective state, or behaviour that advances the differential treatment ofindividuals or groups due to their racial, ethnic, cultural, or religious background. Unlike other conceptualisations that viewracism as existing only from members of dominant to oppressed groups, this definition acknowledges that racism is notunidirectional. Both dominant and minority groups can be targeted, and racism may occur between members of a differentgroup (inter-racial racism) or the same group (intra-racial racism).

The phenomenon is manifested at all levels of society, from government policies to organisational structures, intergroupand interpersonal relations, and intraindividual attitudes (Sanson et al., 1998). Consequently, racism needs to be understoodand addressed at all levels. Although systemic racism, as reflected by structural inequalities, can be addressed to an extentby legislation and societal interventions, the underlying mechanisms of interpersonal racism and related intraindividualattitudes are less well appreciated, and effective interventions are limited.

Racist attitudes, like all attitudes, form from a young age and, depending on the environment, thrive or diminish(Lasker, 1929; Nesdale, 2011). Three ordered stages of racial attitude development have been proposed: awareness, self-identification, and attitude formation. Racial awareness denotes the ability to distinguish between members of differentracial, ethnic, cultural, and religious groups according to societal norms (e.g., skin colour) (Byrd, 2012). Self-identificationrefers to the capacity of an individual to identify their own racial, ethnic, cultural, and/or religious group membership (Byrd,2012). Finally, racial attitude formation refers to the development of crystallised attitudes and beliefs about the charac-teristics associated with individuals from distinct racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious groups (Byrd, 2012). Children asyoung as four years are racially aware and racial self-identification and the capacity to perceive racism is firmly establishedby adolescence, but the development of crystallised racist attitudes appears to continue into adulthood (Aroian, 2012;Byrd, 2012; Nesdale, Griffith, Durkin, & Maass, 2005). To date there is no consensus on how young people acquire andmaintain racist attitudes throughout this formative developmental period, or of how youth conceptualise and experienceracism.

However, as a complex social issue, a variety of explanations, perspectives, and theories of racism have been advanced,with evolving hypotheses appearing in distinct phases and forms across time and space. Correspondingly, but to a lesserextent, alternative measurement tools and techniques have been developed and utilised to assess understandings of racism.The prevalence and emergence of different theoretical orientations, and distinct theoretical explanations, has shifted inresponse to wider historical and social factors and the dominant psychological paradigm (Duckitt, 1992). Social circumstancesand historical events interact with changes in epistemology, methods, and investigative techniques, encouraging theseshifts. Alternate philosophies of racism have concentrated on varying causal factors, with no adequate general theories orintegrative frameworks yet able to provide a comprehensive explanation of racism and its causes (Duckitt, 1992). Originatingin the early 20th century, once scientific researchers began to question established beliefs of the racial inferiority of minoritygroups, racism research can be broadly viewed as stemming from three waves (Dovidio, 2001; Duckitt, 1992). In the firstwave, from around the 1920s to 1950s, racism was assumed to reflect psychopathology stemming from irrational andunjustified thought processes; in the second, throughout the 1960s to 1970s, it was considered to be rooted in processesrelated to the development of social norms; the third and current wave, emerging in the late 1970s, emphasises the covert,often unconscious, and multidimensional nature of racism (Dovidio, 2001; Duckitt, 1992).

Contemporary forms of racism are often described by theories of racial ambivalence, which are characterised by themutual coexistence of both positive and negative racial attitudes and of subtle and unintentional forms of bias. Such notionswere developed in response to the objectionable nature of overt racism in contemporary societies (Dovidio, 2001; Duckitt,1992). The theories of symbolic racism (Kinder & Sears, 1981), modern racism (McConahay, 1983), aversive racism (Gaertner

& Dovidio, 1977; Kovel, 1970), and later subtle prejudice (Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995), colour-blind racism (Neville, Lilly, Lee,Duran, & Browne, 2000), and racial microaggressions (Sue et al., 2007) are some notable examples. Stemming from theseunderstandings of modern racism, cognitive psychology offered an important distinction between implicit and explicitattitudes, with implicit attitudes proposed to lack conscious awareness, unable to be directly perceived, unintentionally

aG

dti(

ruaG2F(pmpt(

ldfawEtB

sBcht(ddAa

ceA

2

2

daaca

2

pr

K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208 197

nd automatically activated by the presence of an attitude object, and so requiring indirect measurement (Dovidio, 2001;reenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998).

In recent years, critical psychological and discourse analytic methods have begun to view racism as a product of societalialogue, proposing it to be beyond simple cognitions. Such approaches examine racism as a common discursive techniquehat rationalises, justifies, legitimises, and maintains existing power symmetries and inequalities (i.e., majority group dom-nance and minority group oppression), both in formal dialogue, such as political rhetoric, and in everyday informal talkAugoustinos, Tuffin, & Every, 2005; Augoustinos, Tuffin, & Sale, 1999; Essed, 1991).

To date the majority of research, using quantitative methods, has focused on the prevalence, causes, and effects ofacist attitudes of White towards African Americans. Comparatively little attention has been devoted to common-sensenderstandings and lived experiences within the US and internationally (Figgou & Condor, 2006). Differences in contextnd cultural milieu preclude the direct extrapolation of international findings to Australia (Pedersen, Beven, Walker, &riffiths, 2004). Yet within Australia, despite growing research interest in racism and racist discourse (Augoustinos et al.,005; Tuffin, 2008), there has been little work on the experiences of, and attitudes underpinning, racism (Pedersen, Dunn,orrest, & McGarty, 2012), and there is a dearth of qualitative studies investigating young people’s understandings of racismcf. McLeod & Yates, 2003; Poole, 1975). Moreover, most Australian research has focused on a single racial/ethnic group,redominantly relating to non-Indigenous and Indigenous Australians, with examinations of Arab/Muslim ’Others’ emergingore recently (Tuffin, 2008), and has tended to concentrate on conceptualisations of racism and racist discourse from the

erspective of perpetrators of racism (cf. Pedersen et al., 2012). Further qualitative research is therefore needed to examinehe complexities of racism across different groups among young Australians, both as targets and perpetrators of racismWalton et al., 2013).

Australia is an extremely diverse nation: one-quarter of the population is born overseas and an additional one-fifth has ateast one parent born overseas (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012c). Victoria is Australia’s most culturally and linguisticallyiverse state, with a population originating from over 230 countries, speaking more than 200 languages, and following 120aiths (Department of Health, Victoria Australia, 2012). The City of Greater Dandenong, 40 km south east of Melbourne CBDnd central for participant recruitment for the study on which we report, is the most culturally diverse municipality state-ide and the second most diverse nationally. Sixty per cent of residents are born overseas and half have heritage where

nglish is not the dominant language (City of Greater Dandenong Council, 2012). Adjacent areas targeted for recruitment inhis study are also rapidly growing in population and diversity, and are characterised by swift cultural change (Australianureau of Statistics, 2012a, 2012b).

Some 10–33% of Australians report that they have experienced racism, increasing to 50% of those from a non-Englishpeaking background and 90% of Indigenous people (Dunn, Forrest, Pe-Pua, Hynes, & Maeder-Han, 2009; Ziersch, Gallaher,aum, & Bentley, 2011). This is of particular concern given the increasingly consistent findings of serious mental and physi-al health problems resulting from exposure to racism (Paradies, 2006b; Williams, Neighbors, & Jackson, 2008). Australia’sistory of colonisation is important in this context, because early characterisations of Indigenous people provided the founda-ions for contemporary racist practices; Australian history has been essentially indivisible from the issues of race and racismMcCreanor, 1993; Tuffin, 2008). Yet racism is dynamic and ever-changing, with distinct groups suffering from racism atifferent stages and in alternate fashions after their arrival in Australia. Pedersen, Clarke, Dudgeon, and Griffiths (2005b)escribe the historical progression of racism in Australia as moving from targeting Yugoslavs, Italians, Asians, Arabs, tofghans. The past decade would most appropriately also include Indians and Africans, who are widely reported in the medias key out-groups in contemporary Australian society.

Due to the diversity that exists throughout Australia and the history of racism that continues to negatively impact aonsiderable number of inhabitants from all backgrounds, our core goal was to critically examine understandings of, andxperiences with, racism across racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious groups. The shortage of existing work investigatingustralian youth motivated our specific research focus of enhancing academic understandings of racism in young Australians.

. Method

.1. Recruitment

Participants were recruited via advertising flyers circulated through staff mailing lists of Monash University and Win-ermere Child and Family Services, and through a network of community service organisations involved with culturallynd linguistically diverse populations; additional participants were recruited through snowball sampling. The aim of thispproach was to recruit a diverse pool of participants of both minority and majority group backgrounds; no one racial, ethnic,ultural, or religious group was targeted. Interested participants contacted the lead author via e-mail and were invited tottend a consultation.

.2. Data collection

Interviews allow the exploration of the richness and diversity of participants’ experiences, while focus groups additionallyermit social interactions to elicit varying perspectives. These complementary methods have been widely used to investigateacism and related issues in youth aged as young as five years (Aroian, 2012; Connolly, 2000; Kennedy, 2001; McKown, 2004).

198 K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

However, we were concerned that youth under age 16 years might not be able to form a comprehensive and meaningfulnarrative of racism, and accordingly, we increased our minimum target age to include youths aged 16 to 20 years andcurrently attending high school. Thirteen individual interviews and three focus groups, involving 17 (two, seven, and eight,respectively) additional students, were conducted, ensuring the emergence of several strong and common themes andallowing theoretical saturation in the context of this study (Guest, Bunce, & Johnson, 2006).

Two formal means of data collection were utilised: a demographic questionnaire to obtain information on racial/ethnicbackground, country of birth, gender, and age for all participants; and a semi-structured interview schedule or focus groupguide (see Appendix A). The protocol for the interview schedule was developed from previous qualitative and conceptualinvestigations about racism, and an appraisal of the qualitative components of perceived and perpetrated racism measures.The flexible schedule enabled elicitation of spontaneous input from participants, providing insight into personal experiencesof racism. Use of both interviews and focus groups allowed stimulation of commentary from participants that would not berevealed in an individual or group setting alone. Interviews were completed prior to the commencement of focus groups,so that interview data informed group discussions. Focus group discussions drew out disagreements, contradictions, andsupplementary information. Questioning in both interviews and focus groups was iterative, with inquiries building on priorresponses and, as data collection progressed, addressing salient areas not anticipated in the original protocol.

The data provided insight into the experience of being a member of a particular racial, ethnic, cultural, or religious group;the implications of this membership for daily life; and how this influenced the experience and conceptualisation of racismand racial acceptance. Nine sets of questions aimed to explore understandings and experiences of racism: Defining racism;Racist beliefs and attitudes; Racist actions; Accepting beliefs and attitudes; Accepting actions; Attributing racism to actions;Witnessed racism experiences; Individual racism experiences; and Acknowledgement of difference.

All interviews were conducted in a private consultation room on the university campus or at the head office of a collabo-rating NGO. All focus groups were conducted in private consultation rooms: one at the university (FG1), one at a secondarycollege (FG2), the third at the offices of the local government authority associated with the study (FG3). Although the use ofofficial consultation rooms associated with the research may have impacted the content of the interviews and focus groups,their use was an appropriate way to ensure a consistent context for each interview and focus group. Ethics approval wasreceived from Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. English plain language statements were provided toparticipants and informed consent was obtained prior to initiation of each consultation. Participants were offered copiesof transcripts; two individuals and participants from two focus groups expressed interest and were provided with the rel-evant transcripts. In this article, pseudonyms with actual gender and age are utilised in quotations to protect participants’identities.

2.3. Data analysis

Transcription was driven by conventional (or inductive) content analysis, given the aim was to describe the phenomenonof racism in Australian youth. This form of content analysis is most suitable when existing theory, research, or understandingsare limited (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Hsieh & Shannon, 2005), and so was considered to be the most appropriate method forthe present study. We avoided the use of preconceived categories to allow the themes, their labels, and other insights to bederived directly and inductively from the raw data (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Hsieh & Shannon, 2005; Kondracki, Wellman, &Amundson, 2002; Moretti et al., 2011). Our analytical approach generated knowledge and understandings from participants’unique perspectives, based in the actual data, with the aim of giving voice to participants’ lay theories (Hsieh & Shannon,2005; Moretti et al., 2011). Such analysis is limited in theory development, instead focussing on concept development (Hsieh& Shannon, 2005; Moretti et al., 2011).

To enhance the internal validity and rigor of the data, transcription was undertaken by the interviewer, rather than anexternal party, and was completed within one week to ensure content was fresh and clear. Subsequently, the lead authorread and re-read the transcripts for an overall understanding of the data, to achieve immersion and obtain a sense of the datain entirety. The data were then re-read, with quotations capturing seemingly core concepts highlighted. As this process con-tinued, apparently salient themes that emerged were noted. The co-author consequently reviewed the transcripts, similarlyhighlighting and noting extracts and strong themes. The authors then agreed upon prominent themes and their labels andthe lead author extracted all significant passages, categorising and organising them into meaningfully related clusters. Oncethemes and superordinate domains were grouped, they were checked for emerging patterns, variability, and consistency byboth authors. Interpretation of the identified themes and domains was facilitated by a process of reading and re-reading,in addition to reviewing the relevant literature, and consulting with colleagues. The most prominent and representativequotes were audited and selected for potential inclusion in the current research report. Our final review ensured that thequotations were representative of the overall data.

2.4. Sample

Thirty Victorian youths (equal numbers male and female), aged 14–22 years (M = 16.77, SD = 1.76), participated. Nineparticipants (aged 14, 15 [×6], 21, and 22 years) from the focus groups and one interview participant aged 15 years wereoutside the a-priori target age; we included them due to their involvement in youth programs attended by other partici-pants. The mean age of interviewees was 16.77 years (SD = 1.01; five male and eight female). The mean age for focus group

K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208 199

Table 1Participant racial/ethnic background as provided by participants.

Racial/ethnic background Frequency %

Anglo Saxon/Indian 1 3Anglo Saxon/Indigenous Australian 1 3Australian 12 40Australian/Anglo Saxon/Indonesian/Portuguese 1 3Australian/South African 1 3Ethiopian/Ukrainian 1 3Indian/English 1 3Irish 1 3Italian/English 1 3Lebanese/Australian 1 3Oromo 1 3Polish 1 3Scottish 1 3Scottish/English 1 3

pta

3

a

3

Vityrrar

tssm

TO

Sri Lankan 3 10Sri Lankan/European 1 3Turkish/Ethiopian 1 3

articipants was 16.76 years (SD = 2.20; 10 male and seven female). Twelve participants (40%) self-identified as Australian;he remainder identified as belonging to 16 different racial/ethnic backgrounds (see Table 1). Sixteen participants (53%) hadt least one parent born outside of Australia.

. Results

Three core domains were identified and elaborated into 13 subordinate themes. A brief overview of the identified domainsnd themes is provided in Table 2. Each domain and theme is discussed in greater detail following.

.1. Group versus individual

The domain Group versus Individual encompassed five subordinate themes: ‘Others’ as Victims and Whiteness as Invisible,alues and Beliefs, Intra-Racial Racism, Hierarchy, and Degradation. Each theme related to a framework used to classify

ndividuals as a member of a particular racial, ethnic, cultural, or religious group. Most participants considered it racisto regard individuals as abstractly belonging to a specific group: “If you. . . have a certain idea about who someone is andou don’t know that person and you judge them based on their appearance, their background, their culture. . . that’s. . .acism” (Amanthi, F, 18). Conversely, ignoring group membership and acknowledging individuality was considered non-acist because “it’s important to respect everyone as an individual” (Amanthi, F, 18). Although this focus was on the individual,nd between individuals, most respondents defined racism as occurring between groups, with racial, ethnic, cultural, oreligious groups “targeting and discriminating against another” (Michael, M, 16).

Participants used an ‘Other’ and ‘White’ dichotomy to abstractly label racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious groups, although

his categorisation varied amongst participants. Perpetrators of racism were often described as “the typical white racisttereotype” (Asuntha, F, 17) and those subject to racism generally as non-White minority individuals. Skin-colour as aource of power and subjugation was described as internalised: one participant recollected that her sister “started to drinkilk because she thought that it would make her skin turn white” (Asuntha, F, 17).

able 2verview of identified domains and themes.

Domains Themes

Group versus individual ‘Others’ as victims and whiteness as invisibleValues and beliefsIntra-racial racismHierarchyDegradation

Actions versus beliefs Intent versus perceptionInaction as acceptingAcceptance of difference as non-racism

Exceptions, exclusions, andminimisation

Racism as a continuumRacism as pervasiveFear and ignoranceMulticulturalismDiscomfort with other groups

200 K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

Racism was associated with differences in beliefs, values, and culture: “[Racists] basically don’t understand your culture. . .your roots and what they mean to you” (Bindu, F, 17). Values and beliefs were central to how people were classified;participants reflected on how ‘racists’ categorise individuals as members of distinct groups, and how group membershipswere used to enact and justify racist behaviour: “[Racists] usually think that the other people are. . . wrong or that what theysay is better” (Michael, M, 16).

Although racism was predominantly considered to exist between groups, participants also drew attention to intra-racialracism, whereby cultural stereotypes informed racist behaviour in response to minor intra-group differences: “People don’teven have to be. . . a different race to be the subject of racism—you could be the same colour, from the same community,but still be different, and be the subject [of racism]” (FG2). One participant recounted her own experience: “They didn’t likeme because I was only half-Turkish. . . they would be extra proud of their Turkishness when I was around. . . you could classthat as racism” (Abeba, F, 17). Most participants considered intra-racial racism to be potentially more disorienting and self-eroding than inter-racial racism. One participant described her response to exposure to inter- and subsequently intra-racialracism: “I don’t fit in. . . [I’m] stuck in the middle. . . not an ethnic. . . not Australian. . . Where do I belong?” (Asuntha, F, 17).

Respondents identified a hierarchical social and cultural system in Australia, with racism enacted according to thishierarchy by ‘racist’ individuals on the basis of beliefs that “their own race or background is superior” (Tenagne, F, 16) andthat “the other people’s way of life is wrong” (Hinni, F, 17). Racist treatment perpetuated and reinforced inequality, implyingthat the recipient belonged to a “lower class of person” (Michael, M, 16).

A key outcome of racist behaviour was the degradation, dehumanisation, or deliberate subordination of groups andindividuals: “It was hard on me because I wanted to fit in . . . everyone wants to feel like they belong” (Abeba, F, 17). Thisled to people questioning their identity: “Does everyone. . . classify me as black? . . . Is that who I am?” (Asuntha, F, 17).Conversely, non-racist and accepting individuals humanised others, being “a nice person–just going up and treating themas a human” (Rajiv, M, 17).

3.2. Actions versus beliefs

The domain Actions versus Beliefs encompassed three subordinate themes, Intent versus Perception, Inaction as Accept-ing, and Acceptance of Difference as Non-Racism. Each theme was associated with the conceptual struggle of determiningwhat constitutes racism. Participants swayed between the relative importance of an individual’s actions and beliefs, andthe perception of the target of the racist behaviour, in determining what actions, and which people, might be considered tobe racist or non-racist. Examination of both the perpetrator and the victim was believed to be integral. The beliefs of indi-viduals – their “racist motivation” (FG1) – were considered more important than actions when judging if they were racistor non-racist: “It’s easy to blame the person who carries out the actions. . . [but people] are racist because they have racistviews” (Hinni, F, 17). However, a minority suggested that actions were more important because an actively racist person is“the bigger threat to society” (Asuntha, F, 17) with the potential to “hurt someone” (Hinni, F, 17).

The balance between beliefs and actions was also evident when participants examined acceptance of difference. Someparticipants believed that “you can have views. . . and not be very expressive. . . [That] doesn’t make you any less accepting. . .just. . . less verbal about expressing it” (Bindu, F, 17). This was because “[some people] are more confident and. . . believe inthemselves. . . whereas someone who. . . doesn’t act. . . [may] be afraid of repercussions” (Asuntha, F, 17). Others suggestedthat “a little knowledge that has action is greater than a lot of knowledge that remains idle” (Habib, M, 17) because “truenon-racist[s]. . . have a responsibility to stand up. . . Otherwise you accept racism. . . [and are] contributing to the racistattitudes of society” (Amanthi, F, 18). Consistently, actions – not only beliefs nor the contemplation of action – were oftenregarded by participants as a necessary constituent of anti-racism, because “it takes a lot more to act. . . rather than justthinking it” (Abeba, F, 17).

Beliefs were generally regarded as more dominant than actions, and the intent of an action more central than the percep-tion of an action. However, participants differed in whether they considered that the onus of categorising an act as racist laywith the perpetrator or the victim. Some participants believed that an act could be considered racist if it was so perceivedby the target, regardless of intentionality:

People. . . say “Oh that’s racist” when they have no racist intent whatsoever . . . you can still do something that is racistand not mean to be racist. . . It can still be racist to that other person. (Rajiv, M, 17)

Other participants believed that an action should be labelled ‘racist’ only when the person intentionally behaved in aracist manner:

Intent is important. . . people will. . . react in different ways to what they perceive as racist and some people can belike really over-sensitive and stuff. . . [and] automatically think that something that someone does is racist. (FG1)

Participants emphasised the importance of non-racist beliefs over specific actions: “[If] you don’t. . . care about the raceof a person. . . just judge them on who they are. . . actions [don’t] make. . . a difference” (Rajiv, M, 17). Participants struggledto name non-racist actions, and most concluded that a lack of racist behaviour constituted acceptance: “Sometimes it’s notwhat we do, it’s what we don’t do. . . just treat[ing] everyone normally [is non-racism]” (Amanthi, F, 18). A person who

da

“(

3

bGdpnfae

aiphd

bOe

hp

K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208 201

id not undertake any specific acts of acceptance, but did not enact any racist behaviour, was considered non-racist andccepting of difference:

[There are] people who will actually stand up for someone who is victimised. . . who take action when they see a racistsituation. . . they won’t just be the silent bystander. . . and then you have other people who aren’t racist who won’tsay anything. (Abeba, F, 17)

Beliefs of equality, openness to difference, and humanist beliefs and values were considered key to being non-racist:[Non-racists believe that] everyone should be treated equal” (Amanthi, F, 18) and “don’t prefer. . . everyone is the same”Viktor, M, 16). One participant portrayed non-racist individuals as:

More open minded. . . have more of an understanding of what is around them. . . [and] more willing to accept someoneif they are from a different race knowing that you guys are both human and [although] you might have different values,it shouldn’t matter. (Abeba, F, 17)

Another drew upon his religious knowledge:

The Quran. . . says “We have created you in different cultures, in different tribes and different groups so you can interactand know one another, so you know about each other.” We are created so different, not so we can stay different andgo against each other—it’s so we can interact and learn about each other. (Habib, M, 17)

.3. Exceptions, exclusions, and minimisation

The domain Exceptions, Exclusions, and Minimisation included five themes that excepted, excluded, or minimised racistehaviour: Racism as a Continuum, Racism as Pervasive, Fear and Ignorance, Multiculturalism, and Discomfort with Otherroups. Potentially racist behaviours were frequently re-evaluated as non-racist due to context or misinterpretation. Respon-ents offered various excuses for racist behaviour, including ignorance or lack of information, fear, insecurity, upbringing,rior negative experiences, societal pressures, the pervasiveness of racism, the impossibility of anyone being completelyon-racist, and “unconscious” action (Habib, M, 17) or innate psychological processes. Some even blamed victims of racism

or precipitating such attacks: “Refugees. . . don’t know. . . Australian ways and they think that they. . . are back home and. . .ct differently” (Habib, M, 17). One participant described how past negative interactions lead to “racism based on. . . previousxperience” (Viktor, M, 16).

Reflective of the overall domain, both minority and majority group members referred to racist humour as generallycceptable and so minimised its significance. That is, participants mentioned quips, jokes, and jests made by, and towards,ndividuals of all backgrounds, within and between groups, and considered these unimportant, depending on context. Onearticipant excused her peer group’s use of racist humour: “Little jokes. . . it’s just a joke. . . we don’t mean it and we don’tarm anyone. . . I don’t think that I’m racist.” (Kamila, F, 15). Another participant explained that jokes were acceptable ifelivered ‘appropriately’:

I do the whole. . . intra-racism thing, but it is always as a joke . . . There is a fine line. . . The way you say it. . . if youintend to harm someone, you will obviously say it in an intimidating way, but if you meant it as a joke, then you sayit in a comical way. (Bindu, F, 17)

Others pardoned potentially racist behaviour, suggesting that it can be misinterpreted:

You could be the type of person who thinks that everyone is racist, like every bad thing that happens to you in yourlife is due to racism, or you can be the opposite and think that it’s just meant to be and nothing is racist. (Asuntha, F,17)

People can use racism. . . as a scapegoat. . . like maybe “I didn’t get a job because of my background”—that’s not howthe world works now, I don’t think many people, or employers think about it. . . you got the qualifications, you got thepersonality, you get the job. (Rajiv, M, 17)

Participants proposed two independent categories of “racist” and “non-racist”: “Either you are accepting of other peopleeing from other places, or you’re not” (Tenagne, F, 16). However, most perceived that racism functioned along a continuum.ne person could be completely non-racist, believing in absolute equality and acceptance; another could hold beliefs ofxtreme racism; but most people were positioned between these extremes, with “everyone. . . racist to a degree” (FG3):

There are . . . people who are only a little bit racist, but they are. . . racist when compared to people who typicallyaren’t. So it would be difficult to have. . . “racist” and “not racist”. It would have to be a continuum. (Abeba, F, 17)

Racism was considered to be pervasive. Participants maintained that all people, even non-racist individuals, unavoidably

ad some racist thoughts: “everyone has said something racist. . . in their life” (FG3). Participants explained this inherentervasiveness:

Everyone. . . has an image of a certain race and no one can ever be innocent of never thinking, “Oh, it’s a typical Indiantaxi driver” or typical this, or typical that. . . we all exhibit racist thoughts to an extent. (Amanthi, F, 18)

202 K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

Yet a small minority argued that “[although] it’s hard. . . a bit of an ideal to be completely non-racist. . . you definitelycan” (FG1). Accordingly, occasional racist thoughts or behaviours did not necessarily lead to classifying someone as racist:

There are people who are non-racist. . . But even those people. . . once in their entire life have definitely thoughtsomething. . . racist. (Rajiv, M, 17)

Participants believed racism to stem from fear of difference, ignorance, “insecurity within themselves” (Abeba, F, 17), andto function to “hide the fact that [racists] are scared” (Tenagne, F, 16). Racism was excused where an individual had a badexperience leading to generalised fear and was rationalised when an individual lacked knowledge or understanding:

When they see something foreign they. . . attack it because they don’t understand. . . why it’s different. . . Kind of likebullying. . . they need to discriminate against others. . . so they feel better. (Abeba, F, 17)

Racism is. . . I wouldn’t say hatred. . . just not understanding. . . not enough information on different backgrounds, andthe only way to cure it is to learn about other cultures. (Rajiv, M, 17)

In noting Australia’s culturally diversity – “having most of the races” (Rajiv, M, 17) – participants rejected global racistlabels of Australia: “we are not a racist society” (Fianna, F, 16). Multiculturalism and racism were regarded as mutuallyexclusive:

We are the cultural. . . melting pot . . . and to say something racist. . . would be. . . contradictory because we can’tdeny. . . [Australia’s] diverse population. . . Saying. . . or doing something racist. . . would be. . . holding us back and. . .fabricating what Australia is. (Abeba, F, 17)

However, individual racism was also explained by Australian societal influences because “[no] one is born racist. . . it issomething that is bestowed upon kids. . . someone will tell them when they are young that they are better or worse than. . .some other racial background” (FG1). Such pressures were associated with systems and institutions that perpetuated aracist, prejudiced, and discriminatory worldview: “Society tends to ignore it and. . . by society ignoring it, it is accepting it”(Amanthi, F, 18). Participants illustrated how institutions contributed to racism:

In schools where the majority of the kids are Australian. . . racism is very, very, common. . . [but] racism will neverbe directly targeted because it is such a sensitive topic and no one wants to classify [or] consider their school to be aracist school with racist kids. (Abeba, F, 17)

Participants noted a conundrum that “when people isolate an ethnicity, that ethnicity. . . will. . . stick together. . . Thenwe judge them on being together, so they can’t win either way” (Amanthi, F, 18). Many suggested that such segregationand group affiliation was appropriate, justifiable, and so non-racist; for instance, where interactions with others causeddiscomfort. One participant explained this same-group affiliative need:

I stick to people who look like me, because I feel comfortable. . . [It isn’t] racism. . . if they just don’t feel comfortable. . .People are not going to talk to other people if they don’t feel comfortable. (Fianna, F, 16)

Such behaviour would be regarded as racist, however, if an individual remained uncomfortable in an extended interaction,or if interactions differed according to racial, ethnic, cultural, or religious background: “It is just a case of getting to knowpeople. . . if you still feel uncomfortable then it might be racism, but. . . initially you are always going to feel uncomfortable”(Asuntha, F, 17). Most participants considered that deliberate isolation from people of other backgrounds was ethnocentricand racist, even when the perpetrator was of minority background: “African kids. . . stick together because they are. . . afraidof expanding outwards. . . sometimes it’s. . . backwards racism. . . fighting racism with racism” (Asuntha, F, 17).

4. Discussion

Racism is defined and conceptualised in various ways, as illustrated by these everyday understandings of racism inAustralian youth. Although some variance was apparent in the conceptualisations of racism, understandings were generallyequivalent across racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious groups, and amid both traditional targets (i.e., Indigenous Australian,non-Australian, and other minority individuals) and traditional perpetrators (i.e., non-Indigenous Australian individuals)of racism. Moreover, youth from both minority and majority backgrounds viewed racism as able to be perpetrated bothfrom dominant and non-dominant group members towards individuals of all backgrounds. Such results are consistentwith European and US youth research (McKown & Strambler, 2009; Verkuyten, Kinket, & van der Wielen, 1997), but inconflict with general understandings drawn from established US and prior Australian findings (McGrane & White, 2007;McKown, 2004; McKown & Weinstein, 2003). Notably, the descriptions provided by Australian youth were largely congruentwith those reported in the existing literature, which is predominantly based on adults (Paradies, 2006b; Phelan et al.,2008). This suggests that, once developed, conceptualisations of racism remain relatively consistent from adolescence into

adulthood.

The conceptual literature delineates actions and beliefs as independent and distinct (Armitage & Christian, 2003). Layyouth and academic understandings both acknowledge the ambiguity of many potentially racist actions, suggesting thatbehaviours perceived as racist and as having racist intent are divergent from behaviours perceived as racist but without racist

iieani(u

(viMwV

tasati

naabmaoo2t

woSdip

sdlisNfrc

abapoflcmt2

K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208 203

ntent (Guerin, 2005; Stevens, 2008). Participants advocated acceptance and belief in equality as characteristic of non-racistndividuals, while offering varying views supporting, legitimating, and perpetuating racist opinions (see also Augoustinost al., 2005). For example, classifying individuals as non-racist in the absence of racist action suggests tolerance rather thancceptance. Tolerance is not equivalent to anti-racist action (Green & Sonn, 2005) and in its most basic form carries theegative connotations of enduring the offensive or unacceptable; this is problematic due to the inequitable power relations

ntrinsic to the expression that infers the dominant majority has the power and right to practice tolerance or intoleranceWeissberg, 1998). Indeed, tolerance may be most accurately viewed as the centre point on a continuum of accepting tonaccepting or racist (Weissberg, 1998).

Australian youths’ understandings of group and individual attributes suggest an underlying core psychological processsee also Allport, 1954), with the classification of people as in-group (individual’s membership group) or out-group (indi-idual’s non-membership group) supporting hierarchies of power (see also Hewstone, Rubin, & Willis, 2002). However,n interviews, young Australians illustrated the importance of within-group differences and intra-racial racism (see also

acNaughton, 2001), a less widely researched form of racism (Clark et al., 1999). This is in contrast to alternate researchith school aged youth that has explicitly considered racism to occur between in-groups and out-groups (Stevens, 2008;erkuyten et al., 1997).

Social identity, a component of the self-concept derived from group membership, theoretically leads to positive differen-iation of in-groups from out-groups (Tajfel & Turner, 1979; Turner, 1986), perpetuating prevailing social structures, racistction, and the promotion of the dominant culture, whilst systematically marginalising minority groups and culture. Suchocial hierarchies consisting of group beliefs of superiority and the inequitable distribution of power are essential for racismnd consequent stigma (Phelan et al., 2008; Solorzano et al., 2000). However, participants presented only vague concep-ualisations of, and explanations for, minority group disadvantage, and advocated dominant ideals of merit, hard work, andndividuality as core to success (see also Augoustinos et al., 2005).

Utilising majority values to assess all groups leads to a ‘White’ versus ‘Other’ binary, with ‘Others’ represented by exter-al White Australian interpretations rather than minority group introspection (Green & Sonn, 2005). The interrogation of,nd challenges to, normative ‘Whiteness’, privilege, and associated institutional racism, are therefore crucial to effectiventi-racism strategies (Green & Sonn, 2005; Hollinsworth, 2012; Riggs & Augoustinos, 2005). Fear of distinct groups, theireliefs, and differences, leads to the problematisation and moral exclusion of minorities (Pedersen et al., 2012). Furtherarginalisation occurs with expectations that English language and Australian values are adopted (Riggs & Due, 2011); such

ssimilatory beliefs are core to contemporary racism (Quayle & Sonn, 2009). In extremes these forms of fear, exclusion, andut-group rejection lead to depersonalisation, delegitimisation, and dehumanisation (Haslam, 2006; Tileaga, 2007). Suchn-going racist interactions degrade one’s sense of self, with a core effect being the internalisation of racist attitudes (Jones,000; Solorzano et al., 2000). Consistent with prior research, participants questioned their own identity after being subjectedo racism.

The domain Exceptions, Exclusions, and Minimisation was the one area where the participants’ views were inconsistentith prior research findings. Mitigation strategies downplayed racism while exonerating perpetrator(s), with participants

f all racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds utilising these techniques to minimise various forms of racism.ome participants may have held simplified understandings of racism focussing only on overt behaviours, leading to theirismissal of more covert forms of racism. However, participants emphasised the importance of the distinction between the

ntent and perception of an act, suggesting that their understandings of racism were generally complex, multifaceted, andredominantly congruent with the prevailing contemporary literature.

Victim blaming, classifying minority group ethnocentricity as racist, and ignoring the role of non-dominant group socialpaces in providing positive spaces for minority youth are some strategies highlighted in previous research that wererawn upon by participants (Solorzano, 1998; Solorzano et al., 2000). Minorities are principally blamed for problems, with

ittle responsibility placed with the wider community (Morrice, 2007; Pedersen et al., 2012; Riggs & Due, 2010), ignor-ng that intra-group contact is preferred because of important ethnocultural and linguistic similarities in friendship andubjective belonging, so enhancing youth wellbeing (Correa-Velez, Gifford, & Barnett, 2010; MacInnis & Hodson, 2012;esdale, 2011; Riggs & Due, 2010). Both minority and majority group participants felt more comfortable with people

rom their own background, yet questioned whether discomfort was racist; they generally considered that it was theesponsibility of minority group individuals to endure (and work to minimise) discomfort and interact with the majorityulture.

Participants referred to ‘human nature’, ‘societal influences’, and ‘ignorance’ as core to the development of racism (seelso Silva, 2012). In addition, they consistently made exceptions to, and minimised, the racist intent of discriminatoryehaviours, discounting the detrimental effect on racial interactions of microaggressions and their potentially devastatingdditive impact (Burdsey, 2011; Solorzano & Bernal, 2001; Sue et al., 2007). Racist humour in particular was dismissed:articipants found it difficult to classify jokes as racist because of their ambiguity, pervasiveness, and the capacity of peoplef all backgrounds to share in the humour (see also Roberts, Bell, & Murphy, 2008; Stevens, 2008). This perspective con-icts with much research on contemporary forms of racism, which acknowledge, and indeed emphasise, the importance of

overt and potentially ambiguous expressions of modern racism (Dovidio, 2001; Duckitt, 1992). Although casual racist com-ents may maintain social peer groups rather than endorsing racism, as our respondents noted, they also marginalise

argets and perpetuate hostility, derogation, and negative racial stereotypes (Burdsey, 2011; Guerin, 2003; Sue et al.,007).

204 K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

Participants highlighted the contradiction in the co-existence of Australian multiculturalism and racism, echoing previousscholarship on the discordance between reality and the cohesive multicultural society that Australians generally promote(Pedersen, Attwell, & Heveli, 2005a). Congruent with existing understandings, multiculturalism emerged as conditional andtainted by systemic, cultural, and interpersonal racism, which is deeply engrained within cultural and institutional practices,even where it is explicitly rejected (Billig, 1995; Howarth, 2004; Wetherell & Potter, 1992). Multicultural attitudes, likeall social attitudes and behaviour, are strongly influenced by institutions, structures, and socialisation processes (Louis,Mavor, & Terry, 2003; White & Gleitzman, 2006); media, peers, parents, and educational institutions all inform youngpeople’s understandings and attitudes (MacNaughton, 2001; Nesdale, 2011; Palmer, 1990; Watt & Larkin, 2010). Parentaland peer attitudes are especially influential (Palmer, 1990; Pedersen, Griffiths, Contos, Bishop, & Walker, 2000) and themedia is important in legitimating racism through the negative portrayal of minority groups as a societal threat, thusperpetuating social distance, further marginalisation, and acceptance of poor treatment (Quayle & Sonn, 2009; Sulaiman-Hill, Thompson, Afsar, & Hodliffe, 2011). Conversely, the media has the potential to encourage social inclusion and raiseawareness of multiculturalism and diversity by promoting positive normative messages (Watt & Larkin, 2010).

Contemporary racism has often been suggested to reflect a significant shift from earlier overt racism to a more subtleand flexible form (Sanson et al., 1998), and the present data supports this. Youth were uncertain and ambivalent aboutclassifying an action, thought, belief, or individual as categorically racist. Although none considered themselves to beracist, most admitted to occasional perpetration of racist acts, thoughts, or beliefs, highlighting the difficulty of under-standing, targeting, and therefore reducing racism. These results echo previous qualitative research (McLeod & Yates,2003; Walton et al., 2013) and provide a complementary and deeper insight into Australian youth conceptualisations ofracism.

The research literature primarily focuses on perceptions of racism by victims, or on racist attitudes in perpetrators. Ourfocus on everyday contexts and understandings of racism, outside of the accepted victim/perpetrator dichotomy, highlightsthe complexity of racism as understood by Australian youth. However, there is potential that younger participants especiallymay not have been able or willing to express their inner thoughts and opinions, or that older participants may have presenteddistinct conceptualisations. However, differences in opinion or understandings were not apparent across ages and there wasa strong and consistent reliable recurrence of themes. Similarly, use of focus groups with sensitive topics such as racism hasthe potential to lead to participants presenting only socially desirable responses or to groups being dominated by membersof the group with the strongest opinions. Again, neither of these issues were apparent in the focus groups conducted for thecurrent research. These observations indicate that our data are robust.

5. Conclusion

We have presented a comprehensive understanding of racism in Australian youth to complement existing academicconceptualisations and prior qualitative research conducted with Australian adults. Central to our results was the contrastbetween academic understandings and lay conceptualisations of racist humour, with Australian youth of all backgroundsminimising such racism. Significantly, all other domains were predominantly congruent with the scholarly literature exam-ining adults, suggesting that once formed, conceptualisations of racism remain relatively constant from adolescence toadulthood, albeit likely increasing in complexity and subtlety as attitudes mature. A related key finding was that the livedexperience of racism, including that surrounding racist humour, is highly ambiguous. The nature of racism is uncertain,and Australian youth were reluctant to classify an action, a thought, or a belief, as purely racist. The consequent diffi-cultly of classifying an individual as racist or non-racist was consistently expressed, and although no participant consideredhim or herself to be racist, most admitted to having partaken in a racist act, thought, or belief. This implies that racismis inherently difficult to target and therefore to reduce. Racism was defined and conceptualised in various ways by youngAustralians, albeit with an equivalent framework across racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious groups that addressed the dis-tinct, but interrelated, aspects of racism. These findings are a core step in enhancing scholarly understandings of how laypeople conceptualise racism, which is central to developing effective means to reduce racism and promote alternate positiveattitudes.

We have highlighted the need to further explore the nuances of racism in lay populations in Australia, to develop anevidence base to address the lived experience of racism. Further research in varying social, economic, and demographic con-texts and additional examination of the conceptualisations utilised by participants is required. Such deeper understandingscould subsequently be utilised to inform and support the design and evaluation of anti-racism and pro-diversity initiatives.We also hope that the present data can be drawn upon to enlighten the development of instruments to more accuratelymeasure racist attitudes in Australian youth.

Acknowledgements

The research on which this article is based was conducted as a component of the degree of Doctor of Psychology in ClinicalPsychology Specialising in Forensic Psychology at Monash University. The authors would like to acknowledge the supportof Windermere Child and Family Services throughout the research.

A

A

•

••

•

•

•••

•

•

•

•

A

d

c

a

d

K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208 205

ppendix A. Interview and Focus Group Schedule

.1. Introduction

Thank you for coming along to talk with me today. As you know, my name is Kaine Grigg, and I am a Doctor of Psychologypostgraduate student from Monash University.Before we start, have you read the information sheet?As outlined in the information sheet, this interview/focus group is part of my research which aims to develop an attitudinalmeasure of racial, ethnic and cultural acceptance.I have an interest in cross-cultural interactions partly due to the experiences of many of my friends who are from diversebackgrounds and live in Australia. I always hear stories about them being treated differently and I am hoping to understandwhy some people from different racial, ethnic and cultural backgrounds are treated differently and how they are treateddifferently in Australia.What I want to hear about today is your experiences of racism and your understanding of what racism is. Basically, I amtrying to understand what the term ‘racism’ means to young people from diverse racial, ethnic and cultural backgroundswithin Australia.The interview/focus group will last about 45 min/an hour and then we will have a short debriefing to discuss any issues.Now before we start there a just a couple of things I’d like to mention.Interview: The whole purpose of this discussion is to hear from you about your experiences, thoughts and ideas. I wantyou to feel free to say anything that comes to mind. There aren’t any right or wrong answers, just different perspectiveswhich I want to learn about.Focus Group: The whole purpose of this discussion is to hear from you about your experiences, thoughts and ideas. I wantyou to feel free to say anything that comes to mind. There aren’t any right or wrong answers, just different perspectiveswhich I want to learn about. So I can get everyone’s perspective, I want only one person to talk at a time and I wanteveryone to have a say.Interview: Everything discussed today is strictly confidential—this means that anything you talk about with me today willnot be discussed outside of this room.Focus Group: Everything discussed today is strictly confidential—this means that you can’t talk about what is discussedtoday outside of this room.Do you have/Are there any questions?

.2. Topic 1: Experiences of racism

1.1 What do you think that racism is exactly?[Probe: Treated unfairly, as if you are inferior, rudely, with disrespect, being ignored, insulted, harassed, stereotyped,

iscriminated against or having unfair assumptions made about you]1.2.1 Do you think you can classify some as a racist?1.2.2 What kind of beliefs or attitudes do you think a racist person holds?1.2.3 Why are these beliefs or attitudes racist?[Probe: What about these beliefs or attitudes make them racist?]1.3.1 What specific actions would a racist person undertake?1.3.2 Why are these actions racist?[Probe: What about these actions make them racist?]1.4.1 Do you think you can classify someone as a non-racist?1.4.2 What kind of beliefs or attitudes do you think a non-racist person holds—someone who is racially, ethnically and

ulturally accepting or tolerant?1.4.3 Why are these beliefs or attitudes non-racist?[Probe: What about these beliefs or attitudes make them non-racist?]1.5.1 What specific actions would a non-racist person undertake—someone who is racially, ethnically and culturally

ccepting or tolerant?1.5.2 Why are these actions non-racist?[Probe: What about these actions make them non-racist?]1.6.1 How easy is it to know if something that happens is due to racism?[Probe: Treated unfairly, as if you are inferior, rudely, with disrespect, being ignored, insulted, harassed, stereotyped,

iscriminated against or having unfair assumptions made about you]1.6.2 What would make you believe that something is due to racism?[Probe: Beliefs; attitudes; behaviours]

1.6.3 What would make you believe that something is not due to racism?[Probe: Beliefs; attitudes; behaviours]1.7.1 Have you ever witnessed anyone experiencing racism? Tell us about this.[Probe: Where? From whom? How?]

206 K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

1.7.2 Why do you believe that this experience was racism-based?[Probe: Beliefs; attitudes; behaviours]1.8.1 Have any of you ever experienced racism? Tell us about your experiences.[Probe: Where? From whom? How?]1.8.2 Why do you believe that this experience was racism-based?[Probe: Beliefs; attitudes; behaviours]1.9.1 Would you prefer to be treated differently by other individuals because they acknowledge your racial, ethnic and

cultural differences, or the same as everyone else, because everyone should be treated equally?[Probe: different experiences and reasons for varied treatment]1.9.2 Do you think that treating someone differently by acknowledging their racial, ethnic and cultural differences is

racist?[Probe: Why?; Why not?]

A.3. Topic 2: The draft survey

• Focus group discussions were also utilised to examine a draft measure of racist attitudes, not relevant to the current article.

References

Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New York, NY: Basic Books.Armitage, C., & Christian, J. (2003). From attitudes to behaviour: Basic and applied research on the theory of planned behaviour. Current Psychology, 22(3),

187–195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-003-1015-5Aroian, K. (2012). Discrimination against Muslim American adolescents. Journal of School Nursing, 28(3), 206–213.Augoustinos, M., Tuffin, K., & Every, D. (2005). New racism, meritocracy and individualism: Constraining affirmative action in education. Discourse & Society,

16(3), 315–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926505051168Augoustinos, M., Tuffin, K., & Sale, L. (1999). Race talk. Australian Journal of Psychology, 51(2), 90–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00049539908255341Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012a). 2011 Census QuickStats Cardinia. Retrieved from 〈http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census services/getproduct/

census/2011/quickstat/LGA21450?opendocument&navpos=220〉.Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012b). 2011 Census QuickStats Casey. Retrieved from 〈http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census services/getproduct/

census/2011/quickstat/LGA21610〉.Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012c). 2071.0—Reflecting a nation: Stories from the 2011 Census, 2012–2013. Retrieved from 〈http://www.abs.gov.au/

ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/2071.0main+features902012-2013〉.Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/

1478088706qp063oaBrondolo, E., Gallo, L. C., & Myers, H. F. (2009). Race, racism and health: Disparities, mechanisms, and interventions. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 32(1),

1–8.Burdsey, D. (2011). That joke isn’t funny anymore: Racial microaggressions, color-blind ideology and the mitigation of racism in English men’s first-class

cricket. Sociology of Sport Journal, 28(3), 261–283.Byrd, C. M. (2012). The measurement of racial/ethnic identity in children: A critical review. Journal of Black Psychology, 38(1), 3–31.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0095798410397544City of Greater Dandenong Council. (2012). Profiles of Victorian municipalities, 2011. Retrieved from 〈http://www.greaterdandenong.com/Documents.asp?ID=

18464&Title=Statistical+data+for+Victorian+Communities&Type=d〉.Clark, R., Anderson, N. B., Clark, V. R., & Williams, D. R. (1999). Racism as a stressor for African Americans: A biopsychosocial model. American Psychologist,

54, 805–816. Retrieved from 〈http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/amp/〉.Connolly, P. (2000). Racism and young girls’ peer-group relations: The experiences of South Asian girls. Sociology, 34(3), 499–519.Contrada, R. J., Ashmore, R. D., Gary, M. L., Coups, E., Egeth, J. D., Sewell, A., et al. (2001). Measures of ethnicity-related stress: Psychometric properties,

ethnic group differences, and associations with well-being. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1775–1820.Correa-Velez, I., Gifford, S. M., & Barnett, A. G. (2010). Longing to belong: Social inclusion and wellbeing among youth with refugee backgrounds in the first

three years in Melbourne, Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 71(8), 1399–1408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.018Department of Health, Victoria, Australia. (2012). Cultural and linguistic diversity. Retrieved from 〈http://www.health.vic.gov.au/diversity/cald.htm〉.Dovidio, J. F. (2001). On the nature of contemporary prejudice: The third wave. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 829–849.Duckitt, J. (1992). Psychology and prejudice: An historical analysis and integrative framework. American Psychologist, 47, 1182–1193.Dunn, K. M., Forrest, J., Pe-Pua, R., Hynes, M., & Maeder-Han, K. (2009). Cities of race hatred? The spheres of racism and anti-racism in contemporary

Australian cities. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 1(1), 1–14.Dunn, K. M., Klocker, N., & Salabay, T. (2007). Contemporary racism and Islamaphobia in Australia: Racializing religion. Ethnicities, 7(4), 564–589.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468796807084017Essed, P. (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinary theory. London, UK: SAGE.Figgou, L., & Condor, S. (2006). Irrational categorization, natural intolerance and reasonable discrimination: Lay representations of prejudice and racism.

British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 219–243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466605x40770Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. The American Psychologist, 48(6), 621–628.Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1977). The subtlety of White racism, arousal, and helping behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(10),

691–707. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.35.10.691Green, M. J., & Sonn, C. C. (2005). Examining discourses of Whiteness and the potential for reconciliation. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology,

15(6), 478–492. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.843Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D., & Schwartz, J. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: An implicit association test. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.Grigg, K., & Manderson, L. (2015). Developing the Australian racism, acceptance, and cultural-ethnocentrism scale (RACES). The Australian Developmental and

Educational Psychologist. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/edp.2015.7 (Advanced online publication)Guerin, B. (2003). Combating prejudice and racism: New interventions from a functional analysis of racist language. Journal of Community & Applied Social

Psychology, 13(1), 29–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.699Guerin, B. (2005). Combating everyday racial discrimination without assuming racists or racism: New intervention ideas from a contextual analysis. Behavior

and Social Issues, 14(1), 46–70.

G

H

H

H

H

H

J

KK

K

KLLL

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

N

N

N

PP

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

Q

Q

K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208 207

uest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough?: An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1),59–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1525822x05279903

aslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 252–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003 4

ewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 575–604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109

ollinsworth, D. (2012). Forget cultural competence; ask for an autobiography. Social Work Education, 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2012.730513

owarth, C. (2004). Re-presentation and resistance in the context of school exclusion: Reasons to be critical. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology,14(5), 356–377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.798

sieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

ones, C. P. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener’s tale. American Journal of Public Health, 90(8), 1212–1215. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/ajph.90.8.1212

ennedy, C. (2001). Methodological considerations in children’s focus groups. Nursing Research, 50(3), 184.inder, D. R., & Sears, D. O. (1981). Prejudice and politics: Symbolic racism versus racial threats to the good life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

40(3), 414–431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.40.3.414ondracki, N. L., Wellman, N. S., & Amundson, D. R. (2002). Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of

Nutrition Education and Behavior, 34(4), 224–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1499-4046(06)60097-3ovel, J. (1970). White racism: A psychohistory. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.asker, B. (1929). Childhood prejudices. Child Study, 6(5), 107–109.ink, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2001). Conceptualizing stigma. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 363–385.ouis, W. R., Mavor, K. I., & Terry, D. J. (2003). Reflections on the statistical analysis of personality and norms in war, peace, and prejudice: Are deviant

minorities the problem? Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 3(1), 189–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1530-2415.2003.00025.xacInnis, C., & Hodson, G. (2012). ‘Where the rubber hits the road’ en route to inter-group harmony: Examining contact intentions and contact behaviour

under meta-stereotype threat. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(2), 363–373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 2044-8309.2010.02014.xacNaughton, G. (2001). Beyond ‘Othering’: Rethinking approaches to teaching young Anglo-Australian children about Indigenous Australians. Contempo-

rary Issues in Early Childhood, 2(1), 83–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2001.2.1.10cConahay, J. B. (1983). Modern racism and modern discrimination: The effects of race, racial attitudes, and context on simulated hiring decisions. Personality

and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9(4), 551–558. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167283094004cCreanor, T. (1993). Pakeha ideology of Maori performance: A discourse analytic approach to the construction of educational failure in Aotearoa/New

Zealand. Folia Linguistica, 27(3-4), 293–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/flin.1993.27. 3-4.293cGrane, J. A., & White, F. A. (2007). Differences in Anglo and Asian Australians’ explicit and implicit prejudice and the attenuation of their implicit in-group

bias. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 10(3), 204–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2007.00228.xcKown, C. (2004). Age and ethnic variation in children’s thinking about the nature of racism. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 597–617.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2004.08.001cKown, C., & Strambler, M. J. (2009). Developmental antecedents and social and academic consequences of stereotype-consciousness in middle childhood.

Child Development, 80, 1643–1659. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1467-8624.2009.01359.xcKown, C., & Weinstein, R. S. (2003). The development and consequences of stereotype consciousness in middle childhood. Child Development, 74, 498–515.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.7402012cLeod, J., & Yates, L. (2003). Who is ‘us’? Students negotiating discourses of racism and national identification in Australia. Race Ethnicity and Education,

6(1), 29–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1361332022000044576oretti, F., van Vliet, L., Bensing, J., Deledda, G., Mazzi, M., Rimondini, M., et al. (2011). A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus

group discussions from different countries. Patient Education and Counseling, 82(3), 420–428.orrice, L. (2007). Lifelong learning and the social integration of refugees in the UK: The significance of social capital. International Journal of Lifelong

Education, 26(2), 155–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02601370701219467esdale, D. (2011). Social groups and children’s intergroup prejudice: Just how influential are social group norms? Anales de Psicologia, 27(3),

600–610.esdale, D., Griffith, J., Durkin, K., & Maass, A. (2005). Empathy, group norms and children’s ethnic attitudes. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,

26(6), 623–637. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2005.08.003eville, H. A., Lilly, R. L., Lee, R. M., Duran, G., & Browne, L. (2000). Construction and initial validation of the Color-Blind Racial Attitudes Scale (CoBRAS).

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 59–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-0167.47.1.59almer, G. (1990). Preschool children and race: An Australian study. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 15(2), 3–8.aradies, Y. C. (2006a). Defining, conceptualizing and characterizing racism in health research. Critical Public Health, 16(2), 143–157.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09581590600828881aradies, Y. C. (2006b). A systematic review of empirical research on self-reported racism and health. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35, 888–901.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyl056aradies, Y. C., Priest, N., Ben, J., Truong, M., Gupta, A., Pieterse, A., et al. (2013). Racism as a determinant of health: A protocol for conducting a systematic

review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews, 2, 85–91.edersen, A., Attwell, J., & Heveli, D. (2005). Prediction of negative attitudes toward Australian asylum seekers: False beliefs, nationalism, and self-esteem.

Australian Journal of Psychology, 57(3), 148–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00049530500125157edersen, A., Beven, J., Walker, I., & Griffiths, B. (2004). Attitudes toward Indigenous Australians: The role of empathy and guilt. Journal of Community &

Applied Social Psychology, 14(4), 233–249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.771edersen, A., Clarke, S., Dudgeon, P., & Griffiths, B. (2005). Attitudes toward Indigenous Australians and asylum seekers: The role of false beliefs and other

social-psychological variables. Australian Psychologist, 40(3), 170–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00050060500243483edersen, A., Dunn, K., Forrest, J., & McGarty, C. (2012). Prejudice and discrimination from two sides: How do Middle-Eastern Australians experience it and

how do other Australians explain it? Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 6(1), 18–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/prp.2012.3edersen, A., Griffiths, B., Contos, N., Bishop, B., & Walker, I. (2000). Attitudes toward Aboriginal Australians in city and country settings. Australian

Psychologist, 35(2), 109–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00050060008260332ettigrew, T. F., & Meertens, R. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25(1), 57–75.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420250106helan, J. C., Link, B. G., & Dovidio, J. F. (2008). Stigma and prejudice: One animal or two? Social Science & Medicine, 67(3), 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/

j.socscimed.2008.03.022oole, M. E. (1975). Learning more about migrants: Some adolescent views. Journal of Sociology, 11(3), 66–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/

144078337501100315uayle, A., & Sonn, C. C. (2009). The construction of Muslims as Other in mainstream Australia’s print media: An analysis of discourse. The Australian

Community Psychologist, 21(1), 8–23.uillian, L., Cook, K. S., & Massey, D. S. (2006). New approaches to understanding racial prejudice and discrimination. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 299–328.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123132

208 K. Grigg, L. Manderson / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47 (2015) 195–208

Riggs, D. W., & Augoustinos, M. (2005). The psychic life of colonial power: Racialised subjectivities, bodies and methods. Journal of Community & AppliedSocial Psychology, 15(6), 461–477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/casp.838

Riggs, D. W., & Due, C. (2010). Friendship, exclusion and power: A study of two South Australian schools with New Arrivals Programs. Australasian Journalof Early Childhood, 35(4), 73–80.

Riggs, D. W., & Due, C. (2011). (Un)common ground?: English language acquisition and experiences of exclusion amongst new arrival students in SouthAustralian primary schools. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 18(3), 273–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1070289x.2011.635373

Roberts, R., Bell, L., & Murphy, B. (2008). Flipping the script: Analyzing youth talk about race and racism. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 39(3),334–354.

Sanson, A., Augoustinos, M., Gridley, H., Kyrios, M., Reser, J., & Turner, C. (1998). Racism and prejudice: An Australian Psychological Society position paper.Australian Psychologist, 33(3), 161–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00050069808257401

Silva, G. M. D. (2012). Folk conceptualizations of racism and antiracism in Brazil and South Africa. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35(3), 506–522.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2011.589523

Solorzano, D. G. (1998). Critical race theory, race and gender microaggressions, and the experience of Chicana and Chicano scholars. International Journal ofQualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 121–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095183998236926

Solorzano, D. G., & Bernal, D. D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through a critical race and Latcrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicanostudents in an urban context. Urban Education, 36(3), 308–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042085901363002

Solorzano, D. G., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. J. (2000). Critical Race Theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African Americancollege students. Journal of Negro Education, 69(1-2), 60–73.

Stevens, P. A. J. (2008). Exploring pupils’ perceptions of teacher racism in their context: A case study of Turkish and Belgian vocational education pupils ina Belgian school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(2), 175–187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01425690701837539

Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M., Nadal, K. L., et al. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications forclinical practice. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.62.4.271

Sulaiman-Hill, C. M. R., Thompson, S. C., Afsar, R., & Hodliffe, T. L. (2011). Changing images of refugees: A comparative analysis of Australian and New Zealandprint media 1998-2008. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 9(4), 345–366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2011.616794

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations(pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.

Tileaga, C. (2007). Ideologies of moral exclusion: A critical discursive reframing of depersonalization, delegitimization and dehumanization. British Journalof Social Psychology, 46(4), 717–737. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466607x186894

Tuffin, K. (2008). Racist discourse in New Zealand and Australia: Reviewing the last 20 years. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 591–607.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1751-9004.2007.00071.x

Turner, J. C. (1986). The significance of the social identity concept for social psychology with reference to individualism, interactionism and social influence.British Journal of Social Psychology, 25(3), 237–252.

Verkuyten, M., Kinket, B., & van der Wielen, C. (1997). Preadolescents’ understanding of ethnic discrimination. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 158(1), 97–112.Retrieved from 〈http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/vgnt20/current#.VPPjv-GM6Dk〉.

Walton, J., Priest, N., & Paradies, Y. (2013). It depends how you’re saying it: The complexities of everyday racism. International Journal of Conflict and Violence,7(1), 74–90.

Watt, S. E., & Larkin, C. (2010). Prejudiced people perceive more community support for their views: The role of own, media, and peer attitudes in perceivedconsensus. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(3), 710–731. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1559-1816.2010.00594.x

Weissberg, R. (1998). The abduction of tolerance. Society, 36(1), 8–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02685968Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.White, F. A., & Gleitzman, M. (2006). An examination of family socialisation processes as moderators of racial prejudice transmission between adolescents

and their parents. Journal of Family Studies, 12(2), 247–260. http://dx.doi.org/10.5172/jfs.327.12.2.247Williams, D. R., Neighbors, H. W., & Jackson, J. S. (2008). Racial/ethnic discrimination and health: Findings from community studies. American Journal of

Public Health, 98(2), 29–37. Retrieved from 〈http://ajph.aphapublications.org/〉.Ziersch, A. M., Gallaher, G., Baum, F., & Bentley, M. (2011). Responding to racism: Insights on how racism can damage health from an urban study of

Australian Aboriginal people. Social Science & Medicine, 73(7), 1045–1053. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.06.058