Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39562565›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Diversity and inclusion have greater support than most Americans think.

Naomi Isenberg, Markus Brauer

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Naomi IsenbergDiversity Science, Clackamas, Oregon, USA.
Markus BrauerUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. markus.brauer@wisc.edu.

Funding

National Science Foundation BCS- 2017045
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a series of large-scale studies (N = 5,448) we show that Americans across many different demographic categories vastly underestimate their fellow Americans' support for diversity and inclusion. Trump voters were particularly inaccurate when their task was to estimate prevalent attitudes among Biden voters. Our results show that the degree of underestimation of others' support for diversity and inclusion predicts the frequency of conversations about diversity, reduced intentions to behave inclusively, and a smaller likelihood of confronting discrimination. Our last two studies (N = 723) demonstrate that it is possible to correct people's misperceptions through "social norms messaging," i.e., communications about statistics from national opinion polls highlighting that a majority of Americans are pro diversity. Our findings suggest that once people form accurate impressions of the high percentage of Americans who support diversity and inclusion, they will be more likely to be in favor of pro-diversity initiatives, behave more inclusively, and endorse policies aimed at reducing racial disparities.

Indexed as

Cultural DiversityAdultAttitudeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPoliticsUnited StatesDiscriminationDiversityInclusionMisperceptionPluralistic ignorance

Identifiers

PMID39562565
PMCPMC11576875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.