A new study from the University of Copenhagen challenges the effectiveness of information campaigns aimed at combating discrimination. Social science research provides a clearer picture of the problem but fails to strengthen public backing for policy solutions.
Many people underestimate the extent of discrimination against ethnic minorities. Consequently, informing the public better will lead to greater support for anti-discrimination policies.
This belief - that information leads to support - forms the foundation of many anti-discrimination campaigns and educational programs combatting discrimination against minorities. And is it even true that people underestimate the extent of discrimination?
A new study from the University of Copenhagen suggests the answers are no.
Deep-seated societal problems, like discrimination, requires different, more structural solutions beyond simply providing more information.
In the study, researchers surveyed 4,800 Danes, testing whether information about the prevalence of discrimination against Muslims in Denmark influenced support for various policy solutions. Surprisingly, even testimonials from experts and those directly affected by discrimination had no measurable effect.
"If you ask people to reflect for a moment on discrimination in society, most people are already aware that discrimination is a significant problem," says Merlin Schaeffer, professor of sociology at the University of Copenhagen and one of the study's three authors (see box).
"Therefore, information campaigns are essentially preaching to the choir, and they fail to address the underlying reasons for the lack of support for anti-discrimination policies."
How the study was conducted
The study reaches its main conclusions thanks to a relatively complex survey design developed by Merlin Schaeffer in collaboration with co-authors Asmus Leth Olsen from the Department of Political Science and Krzysztof Krakowski from King's College London.
In the survey, 4,800 ethnic Danish respondents rated the level of discrimination faced by people with Muslim-sounding names when applying for jobs or making similar enquiries to public schools, local politicians and housing landlords. The perceived level of discrimination was then compared to the actual levels documented in previous field experiments known as 'audit studies'. These involve sending out identical applications, differing only in the applicant's name.
At the same time, participants were asked to respond to a series of questions about their views on discrimination as a societal problem, the causes of discrimination and a range of possible policy responses.
Finally, the participants - and this is the core of the study - were presented with varying degrees of additional information in distinct groups. One group of participants only provided their initial assessment. Another group was informed of the results of the social science audit studies. The third group received, in addition, statements explaining the problem of discrimination from either social scientists, lawyers, or individuals with lived experience of discrimination.
By employing a series of statistical analyses, the researchers were then able to isolate and measure the impact of additional information on participants' perceptions of discrimination.
For Merlin Schaeffer, the study calls into question awareness-raising campaigns as a panacea for deeper societal challenges such as discrimination.
"While investing in information and education is relatively convenient and cheap, it is largely ineffective. Deep-seated societal problems, like discrimination, requires different, more structural solutions beyond simply providing more information."
Overestimating the extent of discrimination
Contrary to the assumption that people underestimate discrimination, the extensive data (see methodology box above) indicate that most individuals - especially those with higher levels of education - even overestimate the extent of discrimination.
For instance, participants were asked to estimate the difference in positive responses to job applications submitted under Muslim-sounding names versus traditional Danish-sounding names. The results, illustrated in the figure, shows a tendency to overestimate the degree of disparity.
Perceived number of positive responses to job applications
The study reveals a consistent pattern: people tend to overestimate discrimination across various contexts, including interactions with landlords, employers, local politicians, and school principals.
At the same time, there is a resilience to support policy initiatives. Several key observations underscore this lack of effect:
- Providing additional information did not significantly alter participants' general perceptions of discrimination or their willingness to endorse policy solutions. The latter could be, for example, the introduction of a requirement to anonymise job applications during processing.
- Even presenting accurate data to those participants who initially underestimated the prevalence of discrimination did not lead to a change in their support for policy interventions.
- And when confronted with compelling explanations from researchers, legal professionals, or Muslims who have experienced it firsthand, participants' attitudes remained unchanged.
People were only more willing to donate to a center for immigrant women. However, the researchers believe that this may also be due to the guilty conscience that naturally arises when people are asked about discrimination.
Changing attitudes takes more effort
The study is published in the American Journal of Political Science under the title 'Correcting misperceptions about ethno-racial discrimination: The limits of evidence-based awareness raising to promote support for equal-treatment policies'. Access here.
The authors of the article are Professor Merlin Schaeffer, Department of Sociology, Professor Asmus Leth Olsen, Department of Political Science, and Assistant Professor Krzysztof Krakowski, Department of Political Economy, King's College London, UK.
The study has been supported through the Carlsberg Foundation's grant for Merlin Schaeffer's project 'Misperceptions about Ethnic Discrimination and Support for Equal Treatment Policies'.
According to Schaeffer, the study's findings deliver a sobering message: simply providing more information is not a quick or effective solution to deeply ingrained and complex social issues like discrimination. Conducting further research and soliciting expert opinions are simply insufficient.
Part of the explanation is not only that most people are already aware of discrimination and have entrenched opinions. Many also have strong opinions about possible causes, which the survey also asks about:
"With 76% agreement, the most common explanation given for discrimination against people with Muslim names is a perceived clash between non-Western and Danish norms and values. 57% also believe that discrimination partly stems from negative experiences people like employers or landlords have had with Muslims," Schaeffer says.
"This shows a tendency to blame the victims of unlawful discrimination, attributing the issue to minorities' failure to integrate. Effective solutions must therefore directly confront stereotypes and prejudices."
--
