Citation
The role of covert racial prejudice, attitudinal ambivalence, and guilt in receptivity to multicultural training

Material Information

Title:
The role of covert racial prejudice, attitudinal ambivalence, and guilt in receptivity to multicultural training
Creator:
Shanbhag, Marnie G
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vii, 106 leaves : ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Ambivalence ( jstor )
Cross cultural training ( jstor )
Guilt ( jstor )
Multicultural counseling ( jstor )
Multiculturalism ( jstor )
Prejudices ( jstor )
Psychological counseling ( jstor )
Racial identity ( jstor )
Racism ( jstor )
White people ( jstor )
Counseling Psychology thesis, Ph.D ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Counseling Psychology -- UF ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 1998.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 93-105).
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Marnie G. Shanbhag.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
029547647 ( ALEPH )
40139233 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











THE ROLE OF COVERT RACIAL PREJUDICE, ATTITUDINAL
AMBIVALENCE, AND GUILT
IN RECEPTIVITY TO MULTICULTURAL TRAINING














By

MARNIE G. SHANBHAG



















A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

1998














ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


I wish first to express deep appreciation to my

chairperson, Dr. Martin Heesacker. Despite difficult

initial circumstances, he agreed to supervise my

dissertation work and has handled the process with amazing

equanimity. My only regret is that our scholarly

association did not begin sooner. Special acknowledgement

also goes to Dr. Dave Suchman, who since the beginning of my

clinical training, has remained a profound mentor and

personal friend.

Next, I would like to thank the other members of my

committee, Drs. Dorothy Nevill, Lisa Brown, and Max Parker,

for their time, effort, and support. Throughout my graduate

training, Dr. Nevill handled my many questions and

bureaucratic crises with humor and grace. I also would not

have survived graduate school without Dr. Brown's

professional and personal guidance. Dr. Parker willingly

brought a much-needed perspective to my work.

Finally, I wish to acknowledge the encouragement of my

parents, L. V. and Nanda Shanbhag, whose generous financial

support particularly in the Summer of 1997, allowed me to








devote needed time to this project. A McLaughlin

Dissertation Fellowship provided additional funding.


iii















TABLE OF CONTENTS




ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . ... .ii

ABSTRACT . . ... .vi

CHAPTERS

1 INTRODUCTION . .. ... 1

Overview . . 1
Purpose of the Study . .. 11
Hypotheses . . 12
Importance of the Study . .. .13

2 LITERATURE REVIEW OF MULTICULTURALISM .. .15

Overview . . .. .15
History . . .17
Current Approaches to Multicultural Training 21
Current State of Multiculturalism ... .28
Summary . . 42

3 METHOD . . . 44

Participants . ... .44
Manipulation of Forewarning . .. .45
Measured Variables . ... .46
Procedure . . .. .53
Planned Data Analyses . 55

4 RESULTS . . 57

Statistical Analyses Procedures . .. .57
Descriptive Statistics . .. .57
Hypotheses . . 59
Ancillary Analyses . . 64
Summary . . 67









5 DISCUSSION . . 69

Summary and Interpretation of the Results ... .70
Implications of Current Findings . .. .78
Limitations of the Current Study . .. .79
Suggestions for Future Research . .. .83
Conclusions . . .84

APPENDICES

A INFORMED CONSENT FORM . .. .86

B FOREWARNING MESSAGE. . .88

C INTENT TO ATTEND A MULTICULTURAL WORKSHOP ... .89

D DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION AND MANIPULATION CHECK 90

E DEBRIEFING FORM . .. .92

REFERENCES . . . 93

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . .. .106















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


THE ROLE OF COVERT RACIAL PREJUDICE, ATTITUDINAL
AMBIVALENCE, AND GUILT
IN RECEPTIVITY TO MULTICULTURAL TRAINING

By

Marnie G. Shanbhag

August 1998


Chairperson: Martin Heesacker, Ph.D.
Major Department: Counseling Psychology

This dissertation identified several potential

weaknesses in the current multicultural training literature

and addressed their viability empirically. These weaknesses

centered around the possible existence in Whites of

underlying racial attitudinal ambivalence and covert

prejudicial thoughts, despite overt endorsements of

multicultural sensitivity.

It was hypothesized based on social psychological

research, that White students would engage in anticipatory

opinion shifts, in the interest of self-presentation, when

they expected to receive some type of multicultural

education. It was further hypothesized that students who








indicated that they would voluntarily attend multicultural

training presentations would be the least in need of such

training, as evidenced by their lower scores on measures of

prejudice. In addition, the relationships between race-

related ambivalence, prejudice, and guilt were examined.

Participants were 134 White undergraduate students from

one introductory psychology class. Students filled out the

Modern Racism Scale, Pro-Black Anti-Black Attitude

Questionnaire, White Racial Identity Attitudes Scale, Mosher

Guilt Scale, and a behavioral intention measure of one's

likelihood of attending a multicultural presentation. Half

the sample received a forewarning that an upcoming presenter

would lecture on racial issues; the other constituted the

control group.

Results failed to support the hypotheses. However,

ancillary analyses revealed that students actually increased

in anti-Black affect and hostile reintegration attitudes as

a result of receiving a forewarning. Furthermore, prejudice

and guilt were inversely related as were prejudice and

intention to attend a multicultural presentation.

Findings are discussed in light of previous research,

and suggestions for future research are explored, along with

the implications for current multicultural training

practices.


vii














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION



Overview



Although the inclusion of a multicultural perspective

to counseling psychology has been a welcome and needed

addition, this dissertation identifies several potential

weaknesses in the current multicultural training literature,

which have seldom been addressed empirically. First, the

attempt to focus multicultural training on the acquisition

of culture-specific information has been achieved at the

expense of an emphasis on prejudice-reduction. Second,

multicultural training has not sufficiently taken into

account the possibility that White people engage in overt

self-presentational strategies to appear culturally aware,

while still harboring covert racist attitudes and beliefs.

Finally, multicultural literature has failed to address the

role of White guilt in motivating Whites to adopt the patina

of multicultural sensitivity, which prevents honest dialogue

regarding their prejudicial attitudes and beliefs.










Heralded as the fourth force in psychology,

multiculturalism has confronted the reality that existing

psychological paradigms do not address the mental health

needs of ethnic-minority populations and that counselors

are not adequately prepared to facilitate the development of

their clients of color (Pedersen, 1990; Sue & Sue, 1990).

Evidence for these claims came from the under-utilization

and premature termination rates of clients of color (Mays &

Albee, 1992; Ponterotto & Casas, 1987; Sue & Sue, 1990).

Subsequently, psychology (especially counseling psychology)

underwent a dramatic transformation with a new emphasis on

understanding and helping diverse populations (Essandoh,

1996). The 1980s, in particular, witnessed an unprecedented

growth in the attention given to multicultural issues in

counseling literature and in counseling training programs

(Ponterotto & Casas, 1991). Journals began devoting space

to multiculturalism and training programs, mandated by APA,

began offering multicultural curricula designed to prepare

students for the ever-changing cultural makeup of

populations seeking services. This multicultural focus has

remained central in counseling psychology for good reason:

the United States continues to undergo dramatic demographic

changes, and projections now indicate that by the year 2050,

Americans of color will become the numerical majority.










With an eye to America's increasingly pluralistic

society, counseling psychology training programs have

invested much energy in developing ways of training

counselors (particularly White counselors) to work more

effectively with racially diverse clients (Hills & Strozier,

1992; Lee & Richardson, 1991). Concurrently, universities

around the United States have encouraged counselors to

provide "cultural diversity" training workshops to students

and staff in an effort to increase racial harmony and

decrease the incidence of racial conflict on college

campuses (McCormack, 1995; Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994).

Most of the training models designed to increase

cultural sensitivity aim to increase knowledge, awareness,

and skills with respect to culturally relevant variables.

They operate from three basic premises (Richardson &

Molinaro, 1996). First, in order to become more effective

in working with persons from different backgrounds,

counselors need to expand their knowledge base of various

cultural groups. Second, counselors need to recognize

cultural differences between these groups. Third,

counselors need to expand their repertoire of skills,

including skills associated with communication styles and a

broad array of interventions. Cultural diversity workshops

aimed at improving intergroup relations operate from the

same premises but deliver the information within a shorter










time-frame (i.e., a one session workshop versus a semester-

long course; Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994). Unfortunately, the

link between providing workshops on campus and decreasing

Whites' antipathy toward members of other racial and ethnic

groups remains undocumented. Furthermore, little evidence

exists to support the idea that training counselors in

multicultural education actually increases the quality or

availability of counseling services provided to ethnically

diverse populations (Das, 1995; Wierzbicki & Pekarik, 1993).

Several researchers have raised the concern that

providing counselors only with culture-specific information

has the deleterious effect of encouraging stereotyping

(Arbona, 1995; Patterson, 1996; Sue & Zane, 1987). Instead,

some professionals have emphasized the need (particularly in

White individuals) for learning about oneself as a racial,

ethnic, and cultural being before learning about others

(Carter, 1991; McRae & Johnson, 1991; Sue, Arredondo, &

McDavis, 1992).

One of the most widely employed models for training

both counselors and the general population involves a stage

theory of racial identity development (Corvin & Wiggins,

1989; Helms, 1984; Ridley, 1989). In particular, a minimum

level of White racial identity development has been viewed

as integral to White counselors achieving multicultural

competence (Helms, 1990; Ponterotto, 1988; Sabnani,










Ponterotto, & Borodovsky, 1991). Although none of these

models posits that only counselors who are in the end stages

of racial identity development are able to be cross-

culturally effective, model-driven research findings do

suggest that the adoption of a more advanced White racial

identity is related to Whites' increased self-reported

multicultural therapy competencies (Neville et al., 1996;

Ottavi, Pope-Davis, & Dings, 1994). According to Richardson

and Molinaro (1996), as a counselor moves through the

various stages of White racial identity, he/she is

increasingly likely to abandon racist ideology and to

develop a positive, nonracist White identity.

Despite little empirical support, the theoretical

literature suggests that exposure to multicultural training

should be associated with increased levels of multicultural

therapy competency and White racial identity development

(D'Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991; Pope-Davis & Ottavi,

1994). In the only study uncovered that assessed

multicultural training and levels of competence, Neville et

al. (1996) found that completion of a multicultural

diversity course was associated with increased self-reported

multicultural competency and with White racial identity

development, an increase that remained stable over a one-

year period.










The multicultural literature, however, has only

occasionally addressed the reduction of Whites' prejudice

against ethnic-minority people and has focused instead on

the acquisition of cultural knowledge. Training workshops

often fail to address clearly how enduring attitude change

regarding race and culture will be achieved. Moreover,

measures of participants' racial and ethnic prejudice are

rarely included in studies of multicultural training

efficacy.

In establishing multicultural training models,

counseling psychologists have largely overlooked the

information on American racism and prejudice obtained by

social psychologists. First, social psychologists have long

understood that conscious decisions to renounce prejudice do

not eliminate prejudicial behaviors (Allport, 1954; Devine,

1989; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; Rokeach, 1973), and that

overcoming racially prejudicial socialization can take a

lifetime. Second, sincere expressions of, for example, pro-

Black feelings, can and often do coexist with negative

attitudes toward Blacks, commonly referred to as attitudinal

ambivalence, as White Americans' attitudes toward people of

color have become more complex and differentiated (Katz,

Wackenhut, & Hass, 1986). Third, robust findings indicate

that people who report nonprejudiced attitudes in surveys

often manifest covert prejudiced attitudes when tested via










measures of less consciously controllable responses (Crosby,

Bromley, & Saxe, 1980; Devine, 1989; Gaertner & Dovidio,

1986; McConahay, 1986). Consciously controllable verbal

reports about racial and ethnic attitudes may primarily

reflect Whites' self-presentational strategies, which can be

influenced by prevailing social norms, which sanction

overtly racist behavior.

Self-presentational strategies, however, are more than

calculated endorsements of particular attitudes or beliefs

to achieve the approval of others. Gaertner and Dovidio

(1986, 1981) have suggested that whereas most Whites harbor

some racist feelings and beliefs, most (particularly those

who view themselves as political liberals) are also invested

in viewing themselves as nonprejudiced and

nondiscriminatory. These so-called aversivee racists" do

not endorse traditionally hostile and aggressive forms of

racism; they willingly acknowledge past injustices, support

affirmative public policies, and identify with politically

liberal social agendas; however, they also typically possess

negative feelings regarding members of ethnic-minority

groups (Gaertner, & Dovidio, 1986, p. 69). Their

prejudicial feelings are usually outside of awareness, which

may function to preserve the positivity of their self-

concepts. When situations bring to consciousness this

internal conflict between their egalitarian values and their










underlying negative beliefs about people of color, aversive

racists respond with feelings of discomfort, uneasiness, and

guilt (Devine, 1996; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986).

Because of the affective discomfort caused by the

discrepancy between beliefs and actual feelings, people

often respond in one of two ways: they either become

hypervigilant against committing perceived transgressions

indicative of racial antipathy, or they engage in avoidance

behaviors. In both cases, people are motivated to distance

these negative underlying feelings from their self-images,

in an attempt to maintain a nonprejudiced sense of self.

Instead of being able to be authentic and spontaneous,

aversive racists' vigilance leads them to amplify their

positive behavior toward minority group members so as to

reaffirm their nonracist convictions or to express "the

underlying negative portions of their attitudes but in

subtle, rationalizable ways" (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986, p.

62).

Finally, several studies from social psychology confirm

the existence of anticipatory attitude changes. These are

opinion shifts that occur when people expect to hear a

persuasive communication designed to influence their

opinions (Cialdini & Petty, 1981; Romero, Agnew, & Insko,

1996). The process by which people are informed of an

upcoming communication is referred to as forewarning and has










key features in common with the process by which students

typically sign up to take a multicultural workshop or

course, such as a description of the presentation or course

and the intended outcome. Several explanations exist as to

why anticipatory opinion effects occur, including a desire

to protect one's self-esteem from damage, conformity

pressures, and a motivation to appear more moderate

(Cialdini, Levy, Herman, & Evenback, 1973; McGuire &

Millman, 1965; White, 1975). These anticipatory opinion

shifts, however, are not necessarily indicative of conscious

attempts at self-presentation, but may also reflect internal

attitude change, but of an impermanent nature.

Anticipatory opinion shifts are important for

multicultural scholarship because they suggest that Whites'

self-reported attitude change following multicultural

training may not always be trustworthy or stable. Results

suggest that anticipatory shifts are either strategic in

nature or reflect only temporary attitude change. After

situational pressures are eased, people's opinions are

likely to shift back to their original positions (Cialdini,

Levy, Herman, & Evenback, 1973).

These findings from social psychological research on

prejudice, racism, and anticipatory attitude change

processes are particularly problematic for the field of

counseling psychology because they suggest that counseling










psychology's approach to multicultural counseling training

may be flawed. This multicultural approach fails to

differentiate between overt self-presentational strategies

and temporary attitude shifts from Whites' enduring race-

related attitudes and beliefs. Furthermore, counseling

psychology's current multicultural training models do not

openly acknowledge the possibility that Whites may overtly

endorse their own multicultural competence and the benefits

of multicultural training while harboring covert prejudicial

thoughts (see Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; Katz, Wackenhut, &

Hass, 1986).

Instead, by increasing the awareness of the discrepancy

between a person's belief in his/her nonracist identity and

his/her covert prejudicial thoughts, multicultural training

actually may be encouraging an unintended outcome: those

who undergo multicultural training may respond to

multicultural situations by engaging in hypervigilant and

avoidance behaviors, driven by defensiveness and guilt.

Hypervigilant and avoidant responses are not beneficial

because the focus remains on the White person and on how

he/she is being perceived and not on any internal processes

that can reduce racist or prejudicial responses toward

people of color. Finally, the multicultural literature has

not explored the idea that those who attend multicultural

workshops voluntarily may be the persons who least need such










training. If counseling psychology fails to recognize or

address these potential occurrences and reactions, then

multicultural training may not produce fundamental

improvements in attitudes and beliefs toward people of

color. Instead, multicultural training may be teaching

Whites how to become more skilled at overt pro-multicultural

self-presentational strategies, while exerting little

influence on Whites' underlying beliefs and attitudes

regarding people of color.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to assess the viability of

these concerns, based on the four weaknesses just identified

in current multicultural training literature. First,

multicultural training has failed to address the existence

in students of both underlying attitudinal ambivalence and

covert prejudicial thoughts. In other words, the

multicultural literature has not adequately addressed the

possibility that Whites are engaging in self-presentational

strategies when they attest to their improved multicultural

awareness and skills. Second, multicultural training has

assumed that White racial identity development is an

appropriate measure of prejudicial attitudes. Third,

multicultural training has not adequately considered the

role of White guilt and its implications for multicultural

training. Lastly, the multicultural literature has not








12

sufficiently addressed the idea that the White students most

likely to volunteer to attend multicultural workshops or

classes may be those who least need such training.

In this dissertation, I argue that White students

engage in anticipatory opinion shifts, in the interest of

self-presentation, when they expect to receive some type of

multicultural education. In addition, I believe that

students at many levels of Helm's White racial identity

development may harbor similar amounts of prejudice when

tested by more covert measures. I also examine the

relationship between race-related ambivalence, underlying

prejudice, and guilt. Finally, I assess whether those

students who voluntarily attend multicultural presentations

may be the students who least need such information.

Ultimately, I am interested in Whites' underlying

attitudes toward people of color, generally. However, given

that the majority of the prejudice and racism literature and

virtually all of the available measures address only

attitudes toward Blacks, this study remains similarly

confined.

Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1: Forewarning White students of racially

relevant message content should lead to anticipatory race-

based attitude shifts in the less-prejudiced direction,










increased feelings of guilt, and increased race-related

attitudinal ambivalence.

Hypothesis 2: White students at all levels of White

racial identity will endorse similar levels of covert

prejudice; there will be no significant relationship between

White racial identity level and prejudice scores.

Hypothesis 3: White students who endorse higher levels

of racial attitudinal ambivalence regarding members of

ethnic-minority groups will show significantly lower levels

of prejudice.

Hypothesis 4: White students high in racial

ambivalence will be high in guilt; there will be a

significant relationship between racial ambivalence and

guilt.

Hypothesis 5: White students who express the strongest

intentions to attend multicultural training workshops will

be those who demonstrate the lowest need. That is, those

Whites with the strongest intentions will also score lowest

on measures of prejudice.

Importance of the Study

This study has important potential implications for

both the utility of offering cultural diversity workshops to

volunteer participants (e.g., though classroom

presentations) and for the effectiveness of multicultural

training as it is currently practiced in counseling










psychology. The ultimate goal of multiculturalism is not

under dispute in this study. Increasing the quality of

services offered to ethnic-minority clients and decreasing

racial majority members' racial prejudices are noble goals.

However, the multicultural literature has mostly avoided

addressing the possibility that people may be engaging in

self-presentational strategies, rather than in fundamental

self-analysis and change. Moreover, if multicultural

training does not reduce covert prejudice and attitudes,

then providing multicultural training may only serve as an

appeasement gesture to placate concerns that Whites are not

being adequately trained to work with people of color.

Finally, the multicultural literature must assess the role

of White guilt which may actually promote hypervigilant

self-presentations and avoidance behaviors, instead of

genuine self-awareness and change.














CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW OF MULTICULTURALISM



Overview



This chapter covers the relevant literature concerning

multiculturalism in psychology and the current status of

multicultural training. The chapter is divided into three

sections. The first section provides a history of

multiculturalism in counseling psychology. In the second

section, the current major multicultural training models are

discussed. The final section addresses several potential

drawbacks in current multicultural thinking that may serve

to keep multiculturalism as a fringe movement.

The literature covered in this chapter was first

sampled via a computerized search using several databases

that provided information on articles and books published

from 1966 onwards. Searches were conducted on PsychInfo,

Clinpsych, and ERIC, using the following terms:

multiculturalism, history, multicultural training, race,

ethnicity, prejudice, racism, racial ambivalence, and guilt.

Only those articles that were directly relevant to the










status of multicultural training or to the movement of

multiculturalism in psychology were retained for review.

The relevant terms were used in various combinations and

alone until the searches began producing overlapping

citations. In addition, a scan through the reference lists

of relevant articles produced additional sources. Thus, a

reasonably complete and comprehensive literature review was

assured.

For the purposes of this dissertation, prejudice is

defined as negative attitudes or sentiments towards another

person based on stereotypic attitudes held about that

person's particular ethnic/racial group (Jones, 1997).

Covert prejudice is simply prejudice that is only

acknowledged through the use of less consciously

controllable measures (Crosby, Bromley, & Saxe, 1980;

Devine, 1989; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; McConahay, 1986).

Attitudinal ambivalence refers to the co-existence in Whites

of both positive and negative feelings toward Blacks (Katz,

Wackenhut, & Hass, 1986). Guilt is defined as the feeling

that arises when a violation of one's internalized moral

standards occurs or is anticipated (Drake, 1995; Mosher,

1979; 1988). White guilt refers to the guilt that may arise

in Whites in response to violations of their race-related

internalized moral standards.










Despite some 40 years of a multicultural presence in

psychology, much work remains to be done. Ethnic-minority

psychologists still only make up 5% of APA's total roster,

ethnic-minority clients continue to underutilize mental

health services, and the call to increase multicultural

competencies remains somewhat unheeded by the majority of

doctoral training programs (D'Andrea & Daniels, 1995; Das

1995). Multiculturalism appears to have stalled on the

brink of achieving a lasting legitimacy in psychology, and

recent multicultural dialogues have been fraught with

dissension and tension (Eckstrom, 1997; Fowers & Richardson,

1996; Mio & Iwamasa, 1993).

History

It is common to date the beginning of the multicultural

movement to the mid 1960s and 1970s, in the immediate

aftermath of the civil right's movement (Casas, 1984;

Jackson, 1995; Wehrly, 1995). In fact, the first stirring

of multiculturalism in psychology date back even further

(Wehrly, 1995). Abraham Maslow, in 1954, devoted much space

in his classic text Motivation and Personality to the role

of culture in maintaining personality, and in the same year

Gordon Allport (1954) published his seminal work The Nature

of Prejudice. Soon after, George Kelly (1955) encouraged

clinicians to assess cultural variations in clients, while

also admonishing clinicians not to fall into the trap of










viewing clients through a culturally-stereotyped lens.

Other psychologists including Theodora Abel (1956) and

Gilbert Wrenn (1962) urged counselors to avoid being

culturally-encapsulated when working with clients from

different cultures.

Despite the beginnings of cultural awareness, much of

the ethnic-minority research conducted, usually on Blacks,

during this time period focused on the deficit model. Using

this model, scientists studied groups of Blacks and Whites

and focused on how these groups differed. For example,

research focused on the study of intellectual and

personality differences (Davidson, Gibby, McNeil, Segal, &

Silverman, 1950; Sperrazzo & Wilkins, 1959).

Psychology's most influential contribution to race-

related public policy fell under the rubric of the deficit

model. Kenneth Clark's "Doll Studies" (1965, 1991), which

eventually formed the basis both for Thurgood Marshall's

case arguments in favor of school desegregation and for the

Supreme Court's ensuing decision in Brown v. Board of

Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954), were used extensively to

document the detrimental effects of mandatory segregation on

Black children (Cook, 1984). Although Clark's studies were

fraught with methodological and interpretational problems

(Farrell & Olson, 1983; Semaj, 1979; Spencer, 1984), his

work was part of the initial stirring of multicultural










psychology and deserves recognition in any history of

multicultural psychology. Moreover, no other psychological

study to date has influenced national public policy to such

an extent. Clark's work is also important in multicultural

history, because his work reminds psychologists that deficit

research of ethnic-minorities was not only the domain of

White researchers but of African-American researchers as

well, influenced by the prevailing intellectual forces of

their time, a point that is sometimes overlooked by current

multicultural rhetoric.

The advent of the 1960's and 1970'S, however, gave rise

to the awakenings of multicultural psychology in its current

form, which initially relied on a Consciousness Raising

Model. Despite the contributions of psychologists prior to

the Civil Rights movement, psychological science was still

being conducted within a monocultural framework, focused on

White, Westernized values. The Civil Rights movement gave

activist psychologists the national political backing to

demand that psychology as a field broaden its theoretical

bases (Jackson, 1995; Wehrly, 1995). In short succession,

several early pioneers, including Vontress (1967, 1970) and

Attneave (1969) challenged the ethnocentrism of psychology

and of counseling in particular (see Wehrly, 1995, for a

detailed description of these early works). Instead of

viewing ethnic-minority groups as culturally deprived, a










multicultural or pluralistic model emerged which did not

view difference as evidence of pathology or inferiority

(Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992). By the 1970's the stage

was set for multicultural research to flourish (Guthrie,

1976; Pedersen, Lonner, & Draguns, 1976; Sue & Sue, 1971).

Psychologists at the organizational level followed at the

1973 Vail Conference and suggested that it was unethical to

treat culturally different clients without adequate training

(Korman, 1973). In addition, Sue and Sue (1971) encouraged

psychologists to think multiculturally in more than Black or

White terms, so that by the end of the 1970's

multiculturalism could be clearly defined as a burgeoning,

distinct movement within psychology.

Today, multiculturalism is sometimes referred to as the

fourth force in professional psychology (Pedersen, 1991;

Ponterotto & Casas, 1991), building upon the three previous

theoretical movements of psychodynamism, behaviorism, and

humanism. Although it is still arguable whether

multiculturalism has met all the epistemological

requirements to warrant fourth-force status (Essandoh,

1996), there is little doubt that for a majority of

counseling psychologists, "a multicultural perspective has

changed the way we look at counseling across fields and

theories" (Pedersen, 1991, p. 6).










With this growing recognition that culture helps to

explain human behavior has come the need to give counselors

a greater variety of counseling tools and techniques to use

with clients from different cultures, and the multicultural

movement's focus has shifted from demanding that

psychologists think critically about racial and ethnic

issues to exploring the makeup of multicultural competencies

(Hills & Strozier, 1992; Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992).

At the national level, professional groups, including the

American Psychological Association (APA) and the American

Personnel and Guidance Association (APGA) have called on

academic programs to provide their students with

multicultural counseling skills (American Psychological

Association, 1983; Casas, 1984; Carter & Qureshi, 1995).

Many counseling psychology and counselor education programs

have begun offering multicultural courses in their curricula

to address these concerns (Heath, Neimeyer, & Pedersen,

1988; Ponterotto & Casas, 1987). This focus on

multicultural training and competency has occupied much of

multicultural scholarship's priority in the 1990's.

Current Approaches to Multicultural Training

Today, most professional programs in psychology offer

some type of multicultural training for their students

(Hills & Strozier, 1992). Unfortunately, the field still

lacks consensus concerning training models (Carey, Reinat, &








22

Fontes, 1990; Pedersen, 1988), and the plethora of current

courses offered across the United States differ widely in

both process and content (D'Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991).

"This lack of consensus reflects both our current

understanding as to what constitutes effective multicultural

counseling training as well as the individual counselor-

educator's preference regarding the type of content to be

covered by such a course" (D'Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991,

p. 143).

Most multicultural experts fall into one of two camps.

They either favor a broad, universal definition of

multiculturalism, sometimes referred to as an etic

perspective, or prefer a more culture-specific or emic

perspective (Essandoh, 1996; Patterson, 1996; Sue & Sue,

1990). The terms "emic" and "etic" originate from

linguistic rules of phonemic and phonetic analysis, which

separate the specific and general aspects of language (Pike,

1966). Proponents of a broad approach define

multiculturalism to include societal and cultural variables

such as race, ethnicity, age, gender, social class, sexual

orientation, nationality, and disability (Fukuyama, 1990;

Pedersen, 1991). Culture-specific perspectives view

cultures as distinct, each requiring counselors to hold

specific knowledge, skills, and awareness in order to be

cross-culturally effective (Sue & Sue, 1990).










The universal or etic approach is the most similar to

traditional counseling theories in that its focus is on the

individual (Carter & Qureshi, 1997; Sue, 1990), and all

counseling can be referred to as multicultural in nature

(Speight, Myers, Cox, & Highlen, 1991). While etic

approaches acknowledge the existence of cultural and

societal oppressive practices, they rely on the universal

value of shared human experiences (Fukuyama, 1990). Several

advantages exist in having a universal perspective toward

counseling. First, this approach acknowledges the

uniqueness of each individual. In doing so, it avoids

stereotyping people by expecting that all individuals

belonging to a cultural group experience reality in the same

way. Second, by avoiding narrow culture-specific techniques

and skills, a universal definition aligns more closely with

a theoretical approach to counseling than a methodological

one (Pedersen, 1991). Third, etic perspectives acknowledge

the complexity of multiculturalism and recognize that

diversity is not subsumed by any one ethnographic,

demographic, or affiliative variable.

Several multiculturalists disagree with this approach

(Lee, 1991; Locke, 1990; Triandis, Bontempo, Leung, & Hui,

1990). For example, Lee (1991) has argued that an etic

definition renders the term "multicultural" almost

meaningless, because it is defined so inclusively. There is










some merit to this argument because constructs such as race,

gender, and sexual orientation may be viewed as holding

equivalent influence on daily life under an etic approach.

Triandis, Bontempo, Leung, and Hui (1990) suggested that

cultural constructs such as dialects, norms, roles, and

values overshadow virtually all other demographic variables,

such as age or gender. Moreover, most members of minority

groups still define race as the crucial factor in their

societal interactions, and an etic or universal perspective

only serves to dilute the importance of race in the everyday

lives of ethnic-minorities (Locke, 1990). Finally, a

universal approach may be used to overemphasize

similarities, which can serve to further trivialize cultural

difference (Pedersen, 1996).

Proponents of the culture-specific or emic perspective

argue that different cultural groups are best served by

different counseling approaches (Sue & Sue, 1990) and

acknowledge the value in viewing multicultural counseling as

being first and foremost about visible racial and ethnic

minorities, or VREGS (Helms & Richardson, 1997; Lee, 1991;

Locke, 1990). This approach focuses on culture-specific

education and requires that all behavioral analysis occur

within the realm of internal group criteria (Pedersen,

1995). Although some attention has been given to cultural

groups residing outside the United States (Pedersen,








25

Draguns, Lonner, & Trimble, 1989), most of the focus remains

on the four major ethnic-minority groups within the US:

African American, Asian American, Hispanic/Latino, and

Native American/Indian (Stone, 1997). Training programs are

structured toward increasing trainees' awareness, skills,

and knowledge and broadening theoretical, intervention, and

assessment approaches with respect to each of the four

ethnic-minority groups (D'Andrea & Daniels, 1991). Although

one can infer that culturally-specific knowledge is

sufficient for a more beneficial outcome, it is more likely

that cultural information is necessary but not sufficient

for effective treatment (Sue & Zane, 1987).

The biggest advantage to the emic approach is its

attention to the sociopolitical histories of each of the

four major ethnic-groups (Sue & Sue, 1990) and its inclusion

of the idea that trainees need to understand the varied

cultural values, behaviors, and expectations of different

clients. The emic perspective is also largely responsible

for the overall consciousness raising that has occurred in

counseling psychology with respect to cultural hegemony in

the United States (Stone, 1997).

The emic approach has several disadvantages as well.

First, the overemphasis on cultural differences can often

lead to stereotyping (Arbona, 1995) and disregards the need

for common ground and universal humanity (Patterson, 1996;








26

Pedersen, 1996). This overemphasis on cultural diversity in

conjunction with culture-specific counseling techniques also

has the potential of leading to chameleon-like counselors,

who change from client to client (Patterson, 1996), which

may be inconsistent with Rogers' notions of authenticity and

genuineness in counseling (Rogers, 1957). Moreover,

Patterson (1996) has argued that an emic perspective ignores

the reality of the global village phenomenon in which

cultural practices are increasingly becoming unified across

boundaries and migratory patterns. He warns that the emic

perspective's preconceived notions of client behavior could

lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy, in which clients behave

in the way that the counselor expects simply because the

counselor expects it. Finally, there "is a limit to the

degree to which the fundamental psychological-therapeutic

orientation can be compromised" (Ho, 1985, p. 1214) given

that counseling as currently envisioned in the West relies

on such qualities as verbal facility about personal problems

for success. It is potentially unwise to abandon those

aspects that are crucial to therapeutic progress, such as

the centrality of the relationship between the counselor and

client.

Given the lack of consensus regarding appropriate

multicultural education, most counseling educators try to

offer training that combines an etic and emic focus to help








27

their students expand their awareness, skills, and knowledge

about culturally diverse populations (D'Andrea & Daniels,

1991; Hollis & Wantz, 1994). Much of this multicultural

training is provided through a single course, as opposed to

an integrative curriculum approach (D'Andrea & Daniels,

1991). The one-course approach may be more popular because

of budget constraints, a low number of faculty who believe

in the importance of multicultural education, a low number

of faculty capable of providing multicultural training, and

the desire to avoid revamping curricula (Reynolds, 1995;

Ridley, Mendoza, & Kanitz, 1994). Currently, 73% of

counseling psychology programs offer a multicultural course,

but fewer than 50% make the course a requirement (Quintana &

Bernal, 1995).

Despite honorable intentions, however, much of the

multicultural information provided by programs is

superficial and stereotypic (Corey, 1991; D'Andrea &

Daniels, 1991; Pedersen, 1988). Few graduating students

feel competent to work with culturally-diverse populations

(Allison, Crawford, Echemendia, Robinson, & Knepp, 1994).

It appears that multicultural training efforts to date have

yet to achieve their desired outcomes, and that much

progress remains to be made before programs systematically

provide their students the necessary training for

multicultural competence (D'Andrea & Daniels, 1991;










Reynolds, 1995).

At present, psychologists have not yet arrived at a

consensus regarding multicultural training. Although most

agree that psychologists need to receive some training to

work effectively with people from a variety of backgrounds,

little agreement exists as to how best to instantiate this

training. Sue, Arredondo, and McDavis (1992) published what

has arguably become the standard for multicultural

competence; however, APA has yet to incorporate their

suggestions into national accreditation requirements.

Current State of Multiculturalism

Despite 30 years of a multicultural presence in

psychology, the multicultural movement still appears to be

struggling for legitimacy (Das, 1995; Essandoh, 1995). In

the process of examining current multicultural literature,

potential drawbacks have surfaced that may in part shed some

light on the current struggle for legitimacy. First, the

voluminous nature of multicultural writing may leave all but

the most committed academic scholars confused as to the

direction in which to proceed. Second, much of the

multicultural literature often confuses the need for

training imperatives with multicultural politics, which

potentially alienates those who disagree with the politics

but acknowledge the need for culturally-relevant skills.

Third, multicultural literature has avoided openly










addressing the possibility that students engage in self-

presentational strategies, which raises questions as to

whether multicultural training results in internal and

enduring changes that are reflected in behavior. Finally,

the tone of some multicultural dialogues may alienate many

psychologists from entering the multicultural conversation.

These points represent a summary of an analysis of potential

drawbacks in current multicultural thinking. These

observations are offered to facilitate the development of

multiculturalism, so that it can and will one day assume its

rightful place as a legitimate and necessary theoretical

foundation in psychology.

Multicultural Conceptual Variety

Currently, myriad definitions exist of the term

"multicultural" (Stone, 1997), and multiculturalists have

yet to agree on a direction in which to proceed with the

multicultural theoretical movement. Multicultural training

may consist of universal perspectives (Patterson, 1996), a

variety of technique specific approaches (Ponterotto, Casas,

Suzuki, & Alexander, 1995), and a host of conceptual

competency models (Pope-Davis & Coleman, 1997); all of these

models contain some commonalities but also many differences

in their approach which contributes to the field's image as

lacking in theoretical consensus (Leach & Carlton, 1997;

Ponterotto, Alexander, & Grieger, 1995). "Multiculturalism"










may have been rendered an almost meaningless construct as a

result of its diversity of meanings, particularly when it

can be used to refer to "whatever particular dimension is of

interest to some advocate" (Helms & Richardson, 1997, p.

71). Without general agreement as to what constitutes both

the core definition of multiculturalism and the core

components of adequate multicultural competence, educators

are free to provide multicultural training based on their

own interpretations, supported by only part of the

multicultural literature.

The lack of multicultural theoretical and definitional

consensus directly affects the quality of multicultural

counseling research as well (Ridley, Espelage, & Rubinstein,

1997). Without a sound theoretical foundation from which to

work, much of multicultural research remains anecdotal, with

little empirical data for support (Ponterotto & Casas,

1991). Research is further hampered by a lack of adequate

assessment instruments, a reliance on analogue designs, and

an overemphasis on inter-group differences at the expense of

intra-group differences (Ponterotto & Casas, 1991; Ridley,

Espelage, & Rubinstein, 1997). Theoretical confusion and

inadequate research studies keep multicultural topics

relegated to special-issue and special-section status. In

order to enter the mainstream, multicultural researchers may

need to reach consensus on key issues of controversy in










order to achieve a more lasting impact on the larger

discipline.

Distinguishing Politics from Training Imperatives

Although the multicultural political movement was the

precursor to the multicultural counseling movement, the two

are not synonymous. It was no coincidence that the

political movement coherently organized in the era of the

civil rights and antiwar movements, which were rapidly

exposing "the linkages among racism, capitalist

exploitation, and a general lack of social justice (Outlaw,

1995, p. 45). Multiculturalism as a political movement was

based, and to some extent still is, on the politics of

identity, difference, and recognition, which challenge

sacred notions of individualism, assimilation, and

democratic liberalism. These multicultural positions are

valuable in that they serve both to secure a group's rights

and to broaden cultural and economic access.

However, these multicultural political perspectives are

not universally accepted by scholars within psychology and

across disciplines (D'Souza, 1991; Fowers & Richardson,

1996; Steele, 1990), and critics often point to the former

Yugoslavia as one example of the politics of nationalism and

ethnic differences taken to an extreme (see Schlesinger's

The Disuniting of America, 1992). Those who fear the

solidarities that multicultural politics encourage may have








32

valid concerns, and it is irresponsible of multiculturalists

to dismiss their critics as conservative or reactionary

without seriously addressing their claims.

The differentiation between the politics of

multiculturalism and the multicultural counseling movement,

which the current multicultural literature fails to make, is

important because this distinction allows honest debate

about the philosophical foundations of the first while

leaving the need for the second intact. Advocates of

multiculturalism seldom acknowledge that the political

position may be orthogonal to the knowledge and skills

needed to work effectively with clients of color. For

example, a person's dislike of the airline pilots' union is

unrelated to his or her effectiveness in flying an airplane.

Ultimately, the training imperative to provide psychologists

with the knowledge and skills to be effective counselors

with people of all colors may be more important for the

profession than garnering political agreement from

psychologists. In addition, given the recent backlash

against political correctness, with which multiculturalism

is often closely associated, distinguishing politics from

training imperatives may be doubly necessary to ensure the

very survival of the multicultural counseling movement

(Leach & Carlton, 1997).










The Role of Self-Presentation

The multicultural literature has not directly addressed

the possibility that workshop participants may engage in

self-presentational strategies to appear more culturally

aware and less racist then they are. Yet, research from

social psychology has clearly demonstrated that people often

shift their opinions when they expect to hear a persuasive

communication, particularly when the views being presented

are different from their own (Cialdini, & Petty, 1981;

Romero, Agnew, & Insko, 1996). Reasons for these conscious

or unconscious opinion shifts include the desire to protect

one's self-esteem from damage, conformity pressures, and a

motivation to appear more moderate (Cialdini, Levy, Herman,

& Evenback, 1973; McGuire & Millman, 1965; White, 1975).

Once the situation changes, people may revert back to their

original positions (Cialdini, Levy, Herman, & Evenback,

1973).

These findings from social psychology are problematic

for multicultural training because they suggest that

students might overtly indicate their own multicultural

competence and acknowledge having benefitted from

multicultural training while covertly harboring prejudicial

thoughts. The possibility that participants engage in self-

presentational strategies is increased because of the power

differentials that are thought to influence the efficacy of










multicultural training (Stone, 1997). Frequently,

multicultural courses are taught by university faculty or

others in positions of power to directly affect a trainee's

progress in an academic training program. Because mastery

of multicultural counseling competencies often involves the

examination of personal and societally-sanctioned

prejudicial viewpoints, the likelihood that trainees engage

in self-presentational strategies to appear less prejudiced

and more multiculturally competent must be seriously

entertained in this research literature.

Given these power differentials between faculty and

students, are educators being realistic when they expect

trainees to acknowledge openly and fully their own prejudice

and racism? Faculty may underestimate their trainees when

they assume that students are not cognizant of the power

dynamics of graduate school and do not conduct themselves in

a way that furthers their own interests. Programs may need

to be willing to create safe spaces for trainees to examine

their own racism without fear of adverse consequences, and

students must be convinced of their safety before they may

be willing to engage in such exploration.

Multicultural Dissension and Dialogue

The tone of some multicultural dialogues may discourage

psychologists not previously committed to multiculturalism

from entering the field. Two examples illustrate this










discouragement. The first example comes from a symposium

held at the 1990 APA convention that subsequently made a

Counseling Psychologist special issue topic (Mio & Iwamasa,

1993), the second comes from a 1996 article by Fowers and

Richardson in the American Psychologist.

The 1990 APA convention symposium examined the role of

White researchers in addressing multicultural issues and

addressed several topics, including the historical role of

White researchers in cross-cultural psychology, the ways in

which science has reinforced stereotypic views of minority

individuals, the role of White racial identity development,

and the relationship between White and ethnic-minority

researchers (Mio & Iwamasa, 1993). In particular, Thomas

Parham discussed the feelings of resentment on the part of

some ethnic-minority researchers at the reality that it was

not until White researchers began studying people of color

that multicultural research gained an intellectual

legitimacy in the dominant culture. As a result, he

described the continued disenfranchisement in psychology of

many multicultural researchers from ethnic-minority

backgrounds and asked the question, "Who truly spoke for

multicultural counseling?" (Mio & Iwamasa, 1993; Parham,

1993).

Although Parham's frankness was valuable in honestly

describing the interactional subtleties of the relationship










between White and non-White multicultural researchers, his

comments in the symposium suggested that a new litmus test

was being developed in counseling psychology regarding who

could serve as a multicultural researcher. Being a person

of color was emerging as the necessary qualifier for

producing multicultural research that could be assured not

to derive from racist, colonial, or patriarchical

motivations.

The questioning of the motivations of White researchers

who study multicultural topics sets up unfair standards in

several ways. First, although White multicultural

researchers are scrutinized as to their racial identity

development stage, guilt, racism, and colonial

underpinnings, multicultural scholars from ethnic-minority

backgrounds do not receive the same scrutiny, despite the

fact that "color, gender, and sexual orientation do not make

people diversity experts" (Hall, 1997, p. 645). Second,

discouraging White researchers from pursuing multicultural

research ultimately decreases the number of studies on a

much needed topic. Third, the question as to what drives

psychologists to spend their lives studying a particular

issue may be applied to almost all psychologists and their

respective areas of interest, although such a question is

seldom posed. Finally, many psychologists study issues with

little outward relevance to their own lives; yet, their










motivations are rarely scrutinized. For example, it seems

undoubtedly probable that those psychologists who study the

issues of poverty and homelessness belong comfortably to the

middle class themselves. To question the motives of White

multicultural researchers only serves to discourage more

Whites from pursuing this interest area.

These multicultural practices are in many ways the

result of double standards already in place in psychology.

Parham (1993) described many of these unfair practices,

including the irony that many ethnic-minority researchers

are denied tenure for studying communities of color while

White multicultural researchers receive promotion for doing

the same. In addition, journal editors often appear more

willing to publish the ethnic research of White colleagues,

yet reject similar articles from psychologists of color

(Parham, 1993).

Parham's (1993) open examination of these inequities

and honest exploration of the resentment among minority

researchers toward their majority colleagues was an

important step in the examination of multicultural

scholarship. However, multicultural researchers have fought

long to have access to scholarly productivity, and their aim

has never been to create unfair practices of their own. To

turn around and question the rights of others to engage in

multicultural research ultimately limits scholarly










competition and the search for cross-culturally effective

treatments. At a time when more multicultural research is

sorely needed, turning away willing hands, which Mio and

Iwamasa (1993) discouraged, would not only be a travesty but

also narrow the diversity of scholastic voices from which

multiculturalism develops and matures.

The second more recent example of multicultural

dissension and dialogue occurred in the pages of the

American Psychologist. Two White male psychologists, Fowers

and Richardson (1996) wrote a lengthy article on the

pitfalls of multiculturalism labeled "Why Is

Multiculturalism Good?" Although they briefly acknowledged

the multicultural value of promoting all human welfare, they

took umbrage at the anti-European, anti-White nature of

multiculturalism and demanded "that the majority culture

deserves the same presumption of moral legitimacy as any

other group" (p. 613). This article illuminates the current

status of multiculturalism in three ways. First, the

article described several perceived inconsistencies in

multiculturalism's message that multiculturalists have yet

to address. Second, the article elicited the reactions of a

variety of psychologists and showed the tensions that

currently exist in multicultural psychotherapeutic training.

Finally, the authors and those who responded in print to








39

their article showed how far multiculturalism in psychology

has yet to travel to achieve a lasting consensus.

Fowers and Richardson (1996) made four major points,

briefly summarized here, to illustrate several

inconsistencies in multicultural scholarship. The authors

first wondered why, if psychology were truly such a racist

discipline, had it embraced multiculturalism? Second, they

were discouraged by a multiculturalism that heightened

cultural separatism even though they acknowledged the self-

protective motives that often underlie inter-ethnic

distance. Third, the authors explored the moral conflict

involved in promoting tolerance and respect for cultural

practices that violated international standards of human

welfare; for example, virginity tests, female circumcision,

and ethnic "cleansing." Finally, Fowers and Richardson

explored the intricacies of radical cultural relativism. In

sum, the authors accused proponents of multiculturalism of

failing to be self-reflective about the inconsistencies in

multiculturalism's messages and cautioned that psychology

"confronts these issues thoughtfully rather than rushing

pell-mell to embrace multiculturalism, even in the service

of important aims" (p. 620).

The published reactions to Fowers and Richardson came

from those who agreed and disagreed with the original

authors. The first reaction came from proponents of










multiculturalism in psychology (Hall et al., 1997) who

chastised Fowers and Richardson for simplifying

multiculturalism, minimizing discrimination and racism, and

engaging in blatant ethnocentrism. Despite aptly refuting

some of Fowers and Richardson's points (1996), Hall et al.

failed to address the underlying tenor of the debate, that

is that one side held significant reservations about

multiculturalism that the other side did not.

In fact, Fowers and Richardson's (1997) subsequent

response to the comments of Hall et al. (1997) confirmed

this divisiveness and made reference to "the overwhelmingly

negative tone of their reaction. We read Hall et al.'s

(1997) statement with great regret because they find little

of value in our article (Fowers & Richardson, 1996) or in

mainstream Euro-American culture and deny any progress in

the fight against racism. Unfortunately, this confirms our

worst fears about how difficult it will be for committed

multiculturalists to engage in dialogue" (p. 660).

Interestingly, Hall et al. were the only scholars who, in

their commentary, extended no gratitude towards Fowers and

Richardson for their scholarly contribution.

Other reactions to the Fowers and Richardson article

gave further evidence of the existing distrust on the part

of some psychologists towards multicultural messages.

Ekstrom (1997) thanked Fowers and Richardson for "their








41

lucid and extremely balanced discussion of multiculturalism.

Everything I have read on this topic until now has been

tendentious and polemical, driving me to view such writing

with a jaundiced eye" (p.658).

It appears that despite several notations of fourth-

force status (Essandoh, 1995), several psychologists have

serious reservations about the direction multiculturalism

has taken in psychology (Eckstrom, 1997; Fowers, &

Richardson, 1996; Karp, & Sutton, 1993); yet the current

multicultural literature has done little to address their

concerns. In the end, it may be far easier to dismiss the

critics of multiculturalism as misguided (or perhaps

ethnocentric) than to engage in frank, sometimes painful

dialogue through which a meaningful and lasting

multiculturalism might be achieved.

Multiculturalism has made a valuable contribution to

both the theory and practice of psychology (Hall, 1997;

Pope-Davis & Coleman, 1997; Sue & Sue, 1990). However, the

fields' inability to acknowledge radical countervailing

views in a constructive manner keeps multicultural

scholarship as a fringe endeavor, and the status quo remains

unchanged. Committed multicultural scholars may not have

the luxury that, say, constructivist theorists do in writing

for a select group of individuals who agree on the

parameters of the theory or discussion. In order for








42

multiculturalists to accomplish their aim, all psychologists

need to be equally responsive to the utility of

multiculturalism. Moreover, given the continued

diversification of the United States population,

multicultural efforts may be one of the best vehicles by

which to ensure the economic survival and social relevance

of professional psychology (Hall, 1997).

Summary

This chapter presented an overview of multicultural

perspectives in psychology. The first section reviewed the

historical antecedents to current multicultural scholarship

including the influence of early thinkers such as Abel

(1954), Allport (1954), Clark (1965) and Wrenn, (1962), and

of the Civil Rights Movement. The next section discussed

three topics related to multicultural training issues: (a)

the major approaches to multicultural training including

both universal or etic perspectives and the more culture-

specific or emic models, (b) the advantages and

disadvantages of each approach, and (c) the practices

involved in offering multicultural training. The final

section explored potential drawbacks in multicultural

practices, such as the unfocused nature of much of the

multicultural scholarship, the infusion of multicultural

politics into multicultural training, the lack of focus on

the role of self-presentational processes by trainees, and








43

the rise of positions and processes among multiculturalists

that discourage countervailing viewpoints.

This chapter was designed to lay the foundation for the

empirical work in this dissertation, which explores several

potential weaknesses in the current multicultural training

literature. These weaknesses, explained in the empirical

portion of the dissertation, include the following: (a)

failure of multicultural training models to address the

existence in trainees of underlying attitudinal ambivalence

and covert prejudicial thoughts, (b) over-reliance on White

racial identity development as the key to cross-culturally

relevant counseling skills, (c) absence of a literature on

the role of White guilt, and (d) lack of research addressing

the possibility that trainees engage in self-presentational

strategies to appear multiculturally sensitive.















CHAPTER 3
METHOD



Participants



Participants were recruited from one Psychology

Department summer undergraduate class at the University of

Florida. Students were randomly assigned to two groups.

One group received a forewarning of the race-related content

of the study; the other group receive no such warning.

Students received extra course credit for their

participation. Data from non-Whites were collected but not

analyzed for this dissertation.

Of the 198 students who elected to participate,

eighteen were dropped from the data set initially because

they either neglected to fill out their racial/ethnic

background or failed to complete 90% of the questionnaire

packet. Of the remainder, 134 participants identified

themselves as White or Anglo American.

In order to ensure that all of the White participants

whose responses were to be analyzed had adequately

understood the conditions of the experiment, participants










were asked to respond to a manipulation check included at

the end of the questionnaire packet. All who failed to

answer the manipulation check item or responded with an

impossible value were dropped, leaving 105 White students

whose responses comprised the actual data set for analysis.

Students ranged in age from 17 to 44 years old, with a

mean of 19.1 years (SD=2.7). Fifty-seven percent of the

participants were first year students, 43% were upperclass

students. Females comprised 78% of the sample (n=81)

whereas men comprised 22% (n=24). Thirty-five percent of

participants identified themselves as psychology majors.

The majority of the individuals (62%) were from the state of

Florida.

Manipulation of Forewarning

Whether or not participants received a forewarning,

constituted the manipulated variable. The control group

received an information sheet at the front of their packet

of materials stating that a presenter would be coming later

in the week to give a lecture on stress and was interested

in soliciting their opinions on a wide variety of topics.

The forewarned group received the identical packet, except

that the information sheet stated that a presenter would be

coming later in the week to give a lecture on racial issues

and was interested in getting an idea of participants'

opinions on a variety of topics, including attitudes on race










(see Appendix B for copies of the two information sheets).

Measured Variables

Prejudicial beliefs. As a measure of racial prejudice,

the Modern Racism Scale (MRS; McConahay, Hardee, & Batts,

1981) is designed to measure prejudicial beliefs toward

Blacks in a nonreactive fashion. The MRS consists of 22

items, seven of which are used to calculate the racism

score. For example, Item #9 reads, "Over the past few

years, blacks have gotten more economically than they

deserve." Items are scored on a Likert-type scale, from -2

(strongly disagree) to +2 (strongly agree), with a possible

range of -14 (low prejudice) to +14 (high prejudice).

The MRS's Cronbach's alphas have ranged from .76 to .83

(McConahay, Hardee, & Batts, 1981; Monteith, 1996).

Although (and perhaps because) the scale is not face valid,

the MRS has shown sound construct validity. The MRS is

significantly correlated with anti-black feeling as measured

by the Feeling Thermometer (Campbell, 1971) and the Old-

Fashioned Racism Scale (McConahay, 1982) and is

significantly negatively correlated with the scale of

Sympathetic Identification with the Underdog (McConahay, &

Hough, 1976). Finally, McConahay's experimental study of

simulated hiring decisions (1983) showed that high scorers

on the MRS were less willing to hire a Black candidate than

a White candidate with identical credentials, suggesting










that the MRS is a valid measure of racism. Discriminant

validity is evidenced by Polin (1982) who showed that

beliefs in a just world cannot be used to explain prejudiced

responses to the MRS; in two different samples, the

correlations between the MRS and the Belief in a Just World

Scale (Rubin & Peplau, 1973) were not statistically

significant. In addition, the lack of significant effects

in several studies for race of the experimenter supports the

notion of the nonreactiveness of the MRS (McConahay, 1986).

White racial identity development. The White Racial

Identity Attitudes Scale (Helms & Carter, 1993) was used to

assess level of racial development of the participants. The

WRIAS is based on Helm's (1984) five stages of White racial

identity development in which Whites increasingly abandon

racism and define a positive White identity. The stages

consist of the following: (a) Contact--limited

understanding of racial and cultural issues. Sample items

include "I hardly think about what race I am," and "I find

myself watching Black people to see what they are like;" (b)

Disintegration--awareness of race as a social construct

(e.g., "Society may have been unjust to Blacks, but it has

also been unjust to Whites," and "I do not understand what

Blacks want from Whites"); (c) Reintegration--idealization

of Whiteness and denigration of Blackness (e.g., "I get

angry when I think about how Whites have been treated by








48

Blacks"); (d) Pseudoindependence--acknowledgment of racism

and ability to recognize personal responsibility (e.g., "I

feel as comfortable around Blacks as I do around Whites");

and (e) Autonomy--appreciation of multiculturalism and

positive definition of Whiteness (e.g., "I value

relationships with Black friends" and "I am not embarrassed

to admit that I am White").

The overall scale consists of 50 Likert-type items,

ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Each of the five subscales contains 10 items. Higher scores

indicate greater adherence to a particular subscale. Helms

(1993) indicates that scores can be interpreted both by the

single highest subscale score suggestive of the particular

stage of development, or a profile of scores indicating the

relationship of each subscale to the others. Alpha

coefficients have been found to range from .50 for the

Contact subscale (Pope-Davis, 1994) to .80 for the Pseudo-

Independence subscale (Helms, 1993). Subscale correlations

suggest that the WRIAS is measuring different constructs

(Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994). In the initial construction,

each item met a minimum item-total subscale correlation of

.30, and the interscale correlations were not suggestive of

redundancy (Helms, 1993). Criterion validity was

established by obtaining adequate scale correlations (in the

hypothesized direction according to identity theory) with











other measures of personality constructs, such as the

Fundamental Interpersonal Relationship Orientation scale

(McCaine, 1986). A principal components factor analysis

confirmed that items from the same subscales had factor

loadings in the same direction; however, some items did load

significantly across more than one factor (Helms, 1993).

None of the items correlated significantly with the Crowne

and Marlowe Social Desirability scale.

Racial ambivalence. The Pro-Black and Anti-Black

Attitude Questionnaire (PAAQ; Katz & Hass, 1988) is designed

to assess racial ambivalence toward Blacks. The pro-Black

items indicate level of positive feelings toward Blacks as a

disadvantaged group while anti-Black items measure the

degree to which people are critical of Blacks.

The two scales (one pro-Black and one anti-Black) have

10 items each, with items using a Likert-type scale ranging

from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). One

example of a pro-Black item states "Many Whites show a real

lack of understanding of the problems that Blacks face;" an

anti-Black item reads, "Blacks don't seem to use

opportunities to own and operate little shops and

businesses." Ambivalence scores are computed from the

product of both Pro-Black and Anti-Black scores.

In the initial construction of the PAAQ, a principal-

components factor analysis confirmed that the two scales










constituted two essentially unrelated dimensions, and a low

non-significant correlation (r=.12) attested to the

independence of the two scales (Katz & Hass, 1988). All

items that did not show significant correlations with the

total score for other items of the same type, or showed a

high correlation with the total score on items of the

opposite type were dropped. Support for the construct

validity of the PAAQ was found through tests of convergent

and discriminant validity. Both the Pro-Black and Anti-

Black scales were significantly correlated in the expected

directions with various conceptually-related racism scales,

such as the Derogatory Beliefs Scale and the Ease in

Interracial Contacts Scale (Brigham, Woodmansee, & Cook,

1976; Woodmansee, & Cook, 1967). Neither the Pro-Black nor

the Anti-Black scale correlated significantly with the

Crowne and Marlowe Social Desirability Scale. Several

additional studies have attested to the PAAQ's validity

(Hass, Katz, Rizzo, Bailey, & Eisenstadt, 1991; Hass, Katz,

Rizzo, Bailey, & Moore, 1992; Katz & Hass, 1988). Reported

Cronbach's coefficient alphas equal .73 for the Pro-Black

scale and .80 for the Anti-Black scale.

Guilt. One of the most widely used measures, the

Mosher Guilt Inventory (MGI; Mosher, 1968; 1988) was used to

measure guilt. The MGI measures three aspects of guilt:

sex-guilt, hostility-guilt, and guilty-conscience. For the










purposes of this study, only the guilty-conscience subscale

was used, which Mosher defines as the generalized expectancy

for self-mediated punishment for violating internalized

standards of moral behavior or anticipating the violation of

such standards.

The inventory has been described favorably with regard

to convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity (Fehr &

Stamps, 1979; Green & Mosher, 1985; Kelley, 1985; Mosher &

Vonderheide, 1985). Criterion validity is evidenced by the

MGI's ability to discriminate first offenders from

recidivists at the Ohio Penitentiary (Mosher & Mosher, 1966)

and delinquent boys from matched controls (Ruma, 1967). In

addition, the MGI has correlated significantly with several

other personality inventories, including the Edwards

Personality Profile Inventory (Abramson, Mosher, Abramson, &

Wochowsi, 1977) and with global clinical ratings of guilt

(Fehr & Stamps, 1979). Finally, the MGI has shown

predictive validity with respect to authoritarianism, moral

judgment, Machiavellianism, and a host of sexuality-related

attitudes including contraceptive attitudes (Drake, 1995;

Mosher & Vonderheide, 1985; Ruma & Mosher, 1967). Split-

half reliability coefficients have averaged approximately

.90 (Mosher & Vonderheide, 1985; Mosher, 1968).

The guilty-conscience subscale consists of 22 items

with higher scores indicating more guilt. For example, Item










21 reads "I detest myself for thoughts I sometimes have."

Items are scored using a 7 point Likert-type rating scale,

anchored by 0 "Not At All True for Me" and 6 "Extremely True

of Me." Scores on guilty-conscience can range from 0 to

132.

Intent to attend a multicultural workshop. In order to

measure the degree to which students would attend a

multicultural workshop, a questionnaire was constructed.

The questionnaire was composed of three items measuring the

likelihood of attending a multicultural workshop across

varying times and contexts. These three items were summed

to form an intention measure. This general method of

measuring behavioral intention is widely employed in the

attitude literature (see Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; see

Appendix C for a copy of this questionnaire). A principle

components factor analysis of the three items revealed only

a single factor with an eigenvalue greater than 1.0. Item-

total correlations ranged from .60 to .83. Cronbach's alpha

for the measure was .82, suggesting adequate internal

consistency reliability. Intention was also dichotomized

into clear intent versus nonintent. Clear intent was

operationally defined as agreeing or strongly agreeing to

attend at least one diversity/multicultural workshop at the

university in the next month or year.








53

Demographics. A Demographic Questionnaire was used to

gather information on participants, including age, gender,

race, and year in college (see Appendix D for a copy of the

items).

Procedure

First, interested participants were solicited from one

of the psychology departments' undergraduate summer classes

by presenting participation in this study as a voluntary,

extra-credit opportunity. Data was collected during a

single class meeting with all class members who elected to

participate. The principal investigator supervised the

overall data collection process; however to minimize the

effects of racial priming, two White male students actually

administered the data collection.

Participants were randomly divided into two groups.

Both groups received an identical packet of materials

including an Informed Consent Form, the White Racial

Identity Attitudes Scale, the Modern Racism Scale, the Pro-

Black Anti-Black Attitude Questionnaire, the Mosher Guilt

Inventory, and the Intention to Attend a Workshop. In

addition, the first group received an information sheet at

the beginning of the packet of materials stating that a

presenter would be coming later in the week to give a

lecture on stress and was interested in soliciting opinions

on a wide variety of topics. The forewarned group received










an information sheet stating that a presenter would be

coming later in the week to give a lecture on racial issues

and was interested in getting an idea of participants'

opinions on a variety of topics, including their attitudes

on race.

At the beginning of the data collection, participants

were told that all materials would be treated anonymously

and coded only by number to protect participants'

identities. Additionally, the participants were told that

they were free to leave at any time during the

administration. All participants were then asked to read

and sign the human subjects consent form (see Appendix A).

Next, they were given a packet of materials containing, in

the following order, the Demographic Questionnaire, the

Modern Racism Scale, the White Racial Identity Attitudes

Scale, the Pro-Black Anti-Black Attitude Scale, the Mosher

Guilt Inventory, and the Intent to Attend a Workshop Form.

All responses were entered by each participant on a scanable

bubble sheet. Participants were told that the packet would

take approximately 30 minutes to complete. After completion

of the study, all participants received debriefing

instructions (see Appendix E). Extra-credit was awarded by

obtaining students' names from the Informed Consent Forms.










Planned Data Analyses

Hypothesis 1: The hypothesis that forewarning would

lead to anticipatory race-based attitude shifts, increased

feelings of guilt, and increased attitudinal ambivalence was

tested by three one-way between subjects analyses of

variance (ANOVA). Group (forewarning vs. control) served as

the independent variable and prejudice scores (MRS), racial

attitudinal ambivalence (PAAQ), and guilt scores (MGI)

served as the dependent variables.

Hypothesis 2: The hypothesis that there would be no

significant relationship between White racial identity level

and prejudice scores was tested with a one-way, between-

subjects ANOVA. White racial identity stage level (WRIAS)

served as the independent variable and prejudice scores

(MRS) served as the dependent variable.

Hypothesis 3: This hypothesis stated that White

students who endorsed higher levels of attitudinal

ambivalence regarding members of ethnic-minority groups

would show significantly lower levels of prejudice. A

Pearson product moment correlation was performed with

attitudinal ambivalence (PAAQ) and prejudice scores (MRS)

serving as the correlated variables.

Hypothesis 4: The hypothesis that a significant

relationship would exist between racial ambivalence and

guilt was tested with a Pearson product moment correlation,








56

with guilt scores (Guilt Inventory) and attitudinal

ambivalence scores (PAAQ) serving as the correlated

variables.

Hypothesis 5: This hypothesis stated that students who

expressed the strongest intention to attend multicultural

training workshops would also score the lowest on measures

of prejudice. To test this hypothesis, a one-way, between-

subjects ANOVA was used with the independent variable being

clear intention to attend a workshop versus no intention to

attend. The dependent variable was prejudice scores (MRS).














CHAPTER 4
RESULTS



Statistical Analyses Procedures



This chapter presents the results of statistical

analyses designed to test the hypotheses under study.

First, descriptive data are presented. Then, the results of

the analyses to test the hypotheses follow. Finally, post-

hoc analyses are presented.

The data collected in the current study were analyzed

using SAS software (SAS Institute Inc., 1990). In order to

compensate for unequal cell sizes, the general linear model

procedure and the Type III Sum of Squares were used in all

analyses of variance.

Descriptive Statistics

Prejudice was measured using McConahay's Modern Racism

Scale (MRS; McConahay, Hardee, & Batts, 1981) employing a

Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5

(strongly agree). Obtainable scores range from 7 to 35,

with the higher scores representing more prejudice. The










mean MRS was 17.2 with a standard deviation of 4.7.

Students scores ranged from a low of 7 to a high of 29.

White racial identity was measured using Helms White

Racial Identity Attitudes Scale (Helms & Carter, 1993). The

five subscales (Contact, Disintegration, Reintegration,

Pseudoindependence, and Autonomy) consist of 10 items each

ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Higher scores indicate greater adherence to a particular

subscale. Only three students fell in the first stage

(Contact) of White racial identity development and were

eliminated because of the small sample size. Nine

individuals fell in Stages 2 and 3, which were combined

because of conceptual similarities. The majority of

individuals fell in Stage 4 (n=24 or 26%) or 5 (n=55 or

60%).

Racial ambivalence was measured using the Pro-Black

Anti-Black Attitude Questionnaire (PAAQ; Katz & Hass, 1988).

The two scales have 10 items each, with items using a

Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5

(strongly agree). Scores may range from 0 to 50 on each

scale. Students scores on the Pro-Black scale ranged from 3

to 44, with a mean of 26.3 (SD = 7.7). Anti-Black scale

ranged from 9 to 47, with a mean of 26.8 (SD = 8.7). Scores

on the two scales were moderately and inversely correlated

with each other (r = -.3, p = .001). Ambivalence scores,










which were computed by multiplying Pro and Anti scores,

ranged from 100 to 1710 (out of a possible 0 to 2,500), with

a mean of 682.4.

Guilt was measured using the Guilty-Conscience Subscale

of the Mosher Guilt Inventory (MGI; Mosher, 1988; 1968).

The MGI consists of 22 items, each using a Likert-type

rating scale ranging from 0 to 6. Possible scores may range

from 0 to 132. The MGI mean was 62.9 (SD = 16.2), with a

range of 5 to 94.

Intent to attend a multicultural workshop was measured

by summing a three-item questionnaire using a Likert-type

scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Scores could range from 3 to 15. Students' responses ranged

from 3 to 14 (M = 8.4, SD = 2.8). Clear intent to attend a

multicultural workshop was operationally defined as

participants having agreed or strongly agreed that they

would voluntarily attend a workshop in the next month or

year. Forty-three of the 105 participants expressed clear

intent to attend.

Hypotheses

The first hypothesis predicted that forewarning

students of the race-based nature of the study would lead to

significant anticipatory race-based attitude shifts,

increased feelings of attitudinal ambivalence, and increased

guilt. This hypothesis was tested by three one-way,








60

between-subjects ANOVAs. In order to ensure that only those

students who fully understood the manipulation were included

in this analysis, students's initial forewarning group

(identified by the coded number on the front of each

questionnaire packet referring to forewarning or control)

had to match their final response on the manipulation check.

In other words, participants had to have accurately

acknowledged that they were expecting either a lecture on

racial issues or on stress, and their response had to match

the actual condition to which they were randomly assigned.

Eighty-five White students met the necessary condition, with

55 students in the forewarning group and 30 in the control.

The first one-way, between-subjects ANOVA used

forewarning as the independent variable and prejudice scores

from the Modern Racism Scale (MRS) as the dependent

variable. Results showed that prejudice did not differ

significantly by group [F(l, 84) = 0.23, p = .64].

The second one-way, between-subjects ANOVA used

forewarning as the independent variable and ambivalence

scores from the Pro-Black Anti-Black Attitudes Questionnaire

(PAAQ) as the dependent variable. No support was found to

suggest that attitudinal ambivalence differed by forewarning

group [F(l, 84) = 0.67, p = .41].

The third one-way, between-subjects ANOVA used

forewarning as the independent variable and guilty-










conscience scores from the Mosher Guilt Inventory (MGI) as

the dependent variable. Again, results showed that guilt

did not differ significantly by group [F(l, 84) = 1.73, E =

.19]. A comparison of the means for prejudice (MRS),

ambivalence (PAAQ), and guilt (MGI) for forewarning versus

control can be found in Table 1.


Table 1
Prejudice (MRS), Ambivalence (PAAQ), and Guilt (MGI) Means
by Forewarning Group

Control Forewarning
n = 30 n = 55
MRS
M 16.9 17.4
SD 4.7 4.7

PAAQ
M 653.1 701.2
SD 201.6 284.4

MGI
M 65.1 62.7
SD 17.1 13.5


The second hypothesis posited that students at all

levels of White racial identity would show similar levels of

prejudice scores (MRS). This hypothesis was tested by a

one-way, between-subjects ANOVA with White racial identity

stage level (WRIAS) as the independent variable and

prejudice scores (MRS) as the dependent variable. The

original planned analysis was modified slightly because only

three students fell in the first (or Contact) stage of

WRIAS; therefore, Stage 1 was eliminated for the purposes of










this analysis. Stage 2 (Disintegration) and Stage 3

(Reintegration) were combined because of their small sample

sizes and conceptual and numerical similarities. White

racial identity level now consisted of three stages for the

purpose of this analysis. Results did not support the null

hypothesis that no differences would exist in prejudice by

identity stages [F(2, 87) = 6.84, p = .002].

Follow-up Tukey comparisons showed that students in

Stages 4 and 5 endorsed significantly less prejudice than

students in Stage 2/3 [p < .05]. However, students in

Stages 4 and 5 did not significantly differ from each other

in their amount of prejudice [p > .05]. In both these

latter stages, a degree of prejudice was present, suggesting

that individuals in higher stages of White racial identity

development may not necessarily be prejudice free. Means

for each stage are presented in Table 2 (MRS obtained range

7 to 29, possible range 7 to 35).

Table 2
Mean Prejudice Scores by Level of White Racial Identity
(WRI)

WRI Stage n Mean MRS SD
2/3 9 22.1 4.0
4 24 17.7 5.0
5 56 16.5 3.8

The third hypothesis stated that White students who

endorsed higher levels of attitudinal ambivalence regarding

race would show lower levels of prejudice. A Pearson










product moment correlation was performed with attitudinal

ambivalence (PAAQ) and prejudice scores (MRS) serving as the

correlated variables. The correlation failed to reach

statistical significance (r = 0.08, p =.41), suggesting that

no relationship existed between ambivalence and prejudice.

However, White students's prejudice scores did correlate

significantly with their scores from the Anti-Black scale

from the PAAQ (r = .49, p < .001) and correlated

significantly in a negative direction with their Pro-Black

scores from the PAAQ (r = -.45, E < .001). These results

suggest that independently Pro-Black and Anti-Black scores

do correlate with prejudice scores, but that when Pro-Black

and Anti-Black scores are multiplied (to indicate

ambivalence), the relationship between ambivalence and

prejudice remains unclear.

The fourth hypothesis predicted that a significant

relationship would exist between racial ambivalence (PAAQ)

and guilt (MGI). To test this hypothesis, a Pearson product

moment correlation was used with guilt scores and

attitudinal ambivalence scores serving as the correlated

variables. This correlation also failed to reach

significance (r = -0.01, p =.97), indicating no relationship

existed between racial ambivalence and guilt.

The fifth and final hypothesis stated that students who

expressed the strongest intention to attend multicultural










training workshops would score the lowest on measures of

prejudice. A one-way, between-subjects ANOVA was used with

the independent variable being clear intention to attend a

workshop versus no intention to attend. The dependent

variable was prejudice scores (MRS). The results of the

ANOVA when intention was grouped in two categories (clear

expressed intent vs. no intent), failed to attain

significance [F(l, 105) = 0.26, p = .61]. In looking at

mean data, students expressed uncertainty as to the

likelihood of their attending any multicultural workshop in

the next 5 years (M = 3.1, SD = 1.2). This uncertainty

moved closer to disagreement when students were asked the

likelihood of their attending a multicultural workshop in

the next month (M = 2.6, SD = 1.0). However, an inverse

relationship did exist between intention to attend a

workshop and prejudice, with those who expressed more intent

endorsing significantly less prejudice (r = -.24, p = .02).

Ancillary Analyses

All hypotheses that involved racial ambivalence (PAAQ)

were analyzed with ambivalence separated into its two

components, Pro-Black and Anti-Black scales; thus,

Hypotheses 1, 3, and 4 were reanalyzed. The first

hypothesis, which stated in part that ambivalence would

differ by forewarning, was tested by two one-way between-

subjects ANOVAs. The first ANOVA used group (forewarning










vs. control) as the independent variable and Pro-Black

scores as the dependent variable. No significant results

were found to suggest that Pro-Black scores differed by

forewarning [F(l, 84) = 1.26, p = .26]. The second ANOVA

used group (forewarning vs. control) as the independent

variable and Anti-Black scores as the dependent variable.

In this case, results did differ significantly [F(l, 84)

5.54, p =.02], with those who received forewarning actually

reporting more anti-Black sentiment (M = 29.1, SD = 8.9)

than those who received no forewarning (M = 24.5, SD = 7.7).

The third hypothesis, which had predicted a significant

relationship between ambivalence and prejudice, was tested

by two Pearson product moment correlations looking at the

relationship between prejudice and pro-Black or anti-Black

feelings. In the first correlation, Pro-Black and prejudice

(MRS) scores served as the correlated variables. A

significant inverse relationship was found between MRS and

Pro-Black scores (r = -.45, p < .001). In the second

correlation, Anti-Black and prejudice (MRS) scores served as

the correlated variables. A significant relationship was

found between MRS and Anti-Black scores (r = .49, p < .001).

The fourth hypothesis, which had predicted a

significant relationship between ambivalence and guilty-

conscience (MGI), was reanalyzed using two Pearson product

moment correlations to assess the relationship between guilt










and Pro-Black or Anti-Black scores. Neither correlation

attained significance [MGI and Pro-Black scores, r = .12, p

= .21; MGI and Anti-Black scores, r = .07, p = .50].

Interestingly, a significant inverse relationship was found

between prejudice, as measured by the MRS, and guilt; the

more prejudice students endorsed, the lower their guilty-

conscience scores (r = -.23, p = .02).

To see if White racial identity differed by

forewarning, five one-way, between-subjects ANOVAs were run,

with group (forewarning vs. control) serving as the

independent variable in all ANOVAs and the score on each

subscale of White racial identity serving as the dependent

variable. The only racial identity level score that

differed as a function of forewarning was Reintegration,

which refers to an idealization of Whiteness and a

denigration of Blackness, [F(l, 84) = 3.96, p = .05]. Those

who received a forewarning actually expressed higher

Reintegration attitudes (M = 26.1, SD = 6.4) than those who

received no forewarning (M = 23.5, SD = 4.5), suggesting

that scores on the Reintegration subscale may be susceptible

to forewarning effects.

In order to explore whether students in different

classes expressed different amounts of prejudice, a Pearson

product moment correlation was conducted with year-in-school

and prejudice (MRS) scores serving as the two variables. A










small but statistically significant relationship existed

between MRS and year (r = -.20, p < .05).

Finally, to test for systematic gender differences in

response to the dependent variables, several one-way,

between-subject ANOVAs were run, with gender as the

independent variable and MRS, Pro-Black scores (from PAAQ),

Anti-Black scores (from PAAQ), racial ambivalence (full

PAAQ), and guilt (MGI) as the dependent variables. A gender

effect was found on guilt [F(1, 102) = 5.25, p = .02], with

women reporting significantly more guilt (M = 64.79, SD =

15.6) than men (M = 56.13, SD = 17.2). None of the other

gender analyses reached statistical significance.

Summary

In summary, data did not support the hypothesis that

people would engage in attitude shifts regarding their

prejudice, ambivalence, or guilt if they anticipated

receiving a lecture on racial issues. However post-hoc

analysis revealed that contrary to the expected direction,

students actually reported more anti-Black sentiment and

greater Reintegration attitudes when they expected to

receive a lecture on racial issues than when they expected a

lecture on an innocuous subject, in this case stress.

Second, White students at higher levels of racial

identity did report significantly less prejudice than those

at lower levels, which is consistent with Helm's theory








68

(1993), but contrary to Hypothesis 2. Interestingly, 85% of

the sample fell in the two, most advanced, stages of racial

identity development.

Third, no relationship existed between prejudice (MRS)

and racial ambivalence (PAAQ), or racial ambivalence (PAAQ)

and guilt (MGI); therefore, Hypotheses 3 and 4 were not

supported. A positive relationship was found between

prejudice and anti-Black sentiment (from the PAAQ), whereas

a negative relationship existed between prejudice and pro-

Black sentiment (from the PAAQ). This pair of results

supports the validity of the MRS. Although not

hypothesized, an inverse relationship was also found between

prejudice (MRS) and guilt (MRS).

Finally, although there was a significant inverse

relationship between intent to attend a multicultural

workshop and expressed prejudice, there was no significant

prejudice level difference between those who expressed clear

intent and those who did not express clear intent to attend

a multicultural workshop. Thus, Hypothesis 5 was only

partially supported.














CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION



Overview



In this chapter, the results of this study's hypotheses

are discussed along with possible explanations to account

for the findings. First, I briefly review the purpose of

the study. Then, I describe the study's findings in light

of previous research and explore the limitations in the

current study. Finally, I offer suggestions for future

research.

This study's purpose was to assess the viability of

several potential weaknesses identified in current

multicultural literature, based on previous findings from

social psychology. These findings from social psychology

confirm that Whites harbor more prejudice toward Blacks than

they willingly admit (Crosby, Bromley, & Saxe, 1980;

Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; McConahay, 1986), that Whites are

ambivalent about their racial attitudes (Katz, Wackenhut, &

Hass, 1986), and that Whites often selectively change their










attitudes to appear more moderate (Cialdini & Petty, 1981;

Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986).

This study looked at the possibility that White people

engage in overt self-presentational strategies to appear

culturally aware while still harboring covert prejudiced

attitudes and beliefs. Second, the study explored the role

of guilt in motivating Whites to adopt the patina of

multicultural sensitivity, while also motivating Whites to

avoid honest dialogue regarding their prejudicial attitudes

and beliefs. Finally, I suggested that Whites who

voluntarily choose to attend multicultural workshops are

potentially the persons who least need such training.

Summary and Interpretation of the Results

Hypothesis 1 stated that forewarning White students of

an upcoming racial issues lecture on prejudice would lead to

a shift in race-based attitudes. According to this

hypothesis, students who believed they were to receive a

racial issues lecture would endorse less prejudice, more

guilt, and more race-related ambivalence. Data did not

support this hypothesis. In fact, a post-hoc analysis

revealed that forewarning students of an upcoming racial

issues lecture actually led to their endorsing more anti-

Black sentiment than students who thought they were to

receive a lecture on stress. Students who received a

forewarning also showed stronger Reintegration attitudes, on










the White Racial Identity Scale. That is, forewarned

students were more likely to denigrate Blacks and over-

idealize Whites than students in the control group. These

findings suggest that anticipating the possibility of

receiving a lecture on racial issues may actually increase

anti-Black sentiment in Whites.

Although these findings are contrary to the original

hypothesis, they are consistent with some of the extant

anticipatory opinion research. Research indicates that when

people expect to receive a persuasive communication, they

often react by either moderating their views or amplifying

them towards the extreme (Agnew & Insko, 1996; Cialdini &

Petty, 1981). The students in the current study appear to

have amplified their anti-Black views in response to the

expectation of an upcoming lecture on race.

The increase in anti-Black sentiment and in

Reintegration attitudes following forewarning may also be

the result of semantic priming (Lepore & Brown, 1997).

Research has shown that both high and low prejudiced White

students exhibit more negative cognitions toward Blacks

after being primed to either the category of Blacks or the

negative stereotypic attributes about Blacks (Devine, 1989;

Wittenbrink, Judd, and Park, 1997). In this study, the

simple act of informing students of an upcoming racial

issues lecture may have activated both the category of











Blacks for participants as well as the stereotypes

associated with this category. Therefore, the increase in

anti-Black sentiment shown by the forewarning group may

simply have been a result of semantic priming. Both

potential explanations, however, have important implications

for the efficacy of multicultural training, insofar as

multicultural training is not intended to increase negative

sentiment towards members of ethnic-minority groups.

Contrary to the second hypothesis, students at all

levels of White racial identity development did not show

similar levels of prejudice; students in the combined

Disintegration and Reintegration stages, acknowledged more

prejudice than students in the latter two stages. This

finding is consistent with Helm's (1993) racial identity

developmental theory in that Whites in the Disintegration

and Reintegration stages experience anxiety about racial

issues and may denigrate Blacks, using paternalistic and

stereotypical thinking.

Interestingly, 85% of the sample fell into the two

highest stages of Helm's (1993) racial identity development.

Although published normative data from college students are

not available for the White Racial Identity Development

Scale, it seems unlikely that most of a collegiate sample

would really be so advanced in their racial identity

development. This finding, however, is consistent with








73

previous studies which have found that college students tend

to fall into the latter stages of racial identity

development, when a discrete stage model is utilized

(Carter, 1990; Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994). The possibility

that most college individuals consistently appear to fall

into only certain stages of racial identity development

raises questions about the validity of Helm's model (1993)

or the method by which White racial identity development is

measured (Tokar & Swanson, 1991).

In addition, those students in this sample who fell in

the latter two stages of racial identity development

(Pseudoindependence and Autonomy) still endorsed a degree of

prejudice. This result suggests that advances at the latter

stages of racial identity development may not necessarily be

adequate indicators of the absence of prejudice. Such a

finding may be important given that White trainees' racial

identity development has frequently been cited as a key to

multicultural competence (Neville et al., 1996; Ottavi,

Pope-Davis, & Dings, 1994; Ponterotto, 1988; Sabnani,

Ponterotto, & Borodovsky, 1991). For example, Neville et

al. found that their multicultural course (covering 45 hours

of training) encouraged trainees to adopt a more positive

White racial identity and increased students' multicultural

competencies. However, Neville et al.'s course had no

significant impact on trainees' Contact, Disintegration, or










Reintegration attitudes, suggesting further that the

adoption of a positive White racial identity may not be

linked to the abandonment of racism and prejudice (White,

1994).

Although the data did not support Hypothesis 2, the

findings raise some doubts as to the validity of using

increases in White racial identity development as an

indicator of both prejudice reduction and multicultural

competence for the reasons discussed above. Treating

prejudice and White racial identity as distinct may

encourage multicultural scholars to use both measures in

outcome research of multicultural efficacy, rather than

relying only on an increase in White racial identity level

as an adequate indicator of the benefits of training.

No significant relationship existed between White

students' level of prejudice and attitudinal ambivalence;

thus, Hypothesis 3 was not supported. Although racial

ambivalence and prejudice may simply be unrelated, the lack

of a significant relationship may lie in the way racial

ambivalence is currently measured. By simply multiplying

Pro and Anti scores, the ability to distinguish between all

but the most ambivalent people is lost. Presumably those

with high Pro and low Anti scores would have different

prejudice levels from those with low Pro and high Anti

scores. The ambivalence measure used in this study,










however, does not allow for such a differentiation, and

valuable information may be getting lost in the process.

Whereas no relationship existed between racial

ambivalence and prejudice, students who endorsed more

prejudice also endorsed more anti-Black sentiment and less

pro-Black sentiment. This finding lends support to the idea

that the prejudice measure and the Pro-Black and Anti-Black

scales of the Ambivalence Questionnaire were tapping into

related constructs, and suggests a possible inadequacy in

the method of computing ambivalence. In addition, the Pro-

Black and Anti-Black scales were only moderately correlated

with each other which may be viewed as further evidence in

favor of methodological difficulties in measuring

ambivalence and not in the presence of ambivalence itself,

consistent with Katz and Hass' (1988) theory that Whites

often hold both pro-Black and anti-Black feelings.

Hypothesis 4 failed to receive support; no relationship

was found between racial ambivalence and guilt. However,

the same cautions regarding the measurement of ambivalence

described previously may apply here. In addition, post-hoc

analysis revealed that a relationship did exist between

prejudice and guilt. The more prejudice students endorsed,

the lower their guilty-conscience scores.

This finding raises important issues for multicultural

training. If students with greater guilty-consciences











endorsed less prejudice, is it because they indeed harbor

less prejudice in conjunction with a higher moral standing,

or is it that their guilt motivates them to adopt only the

patina of greater multicultural sensitivity? At first

glance, a motivation based on guilt may seem useful in the

reduction of prejudiced responses toward clients. However,

White guilt may constitute an equally-harmful reaction to

Black clients (and all clients of color) because the

experience of guilt may generate self-preoccupation at the

expense of genuine concern for and openness to others

(Niedenthal, Tangney, Gavanski, 1994; Steele, 1990).

With respect to guilty-conscience, women in this

sample reported significantly more guilt than men. One

explanation for the difference in guilt scores may be due,

in part, to gender differences in interpersonal orientation

and moral development (Gilligan, 1982). However, no gender

differences existed in prejudice, White racial identity

scores, or racial ambivalence.

Finally, contrary to Hypothesis 5, those students who

expressed clear intent co attend a workshop did not differ

in their expressed prejudice scores from those who did not

express that intent. Clear intent was measured as agreeing

or strongly agreeing to attend at least one

diversity/multicultural workshop at the university in the

next month or year. On the cther hand, dichotomizing intent










scores into intent versus nonintent may not have adequately

captured the desired information, because when intent was

kept as a continuous variable, intent to attend a

multicultural workshop was significantly and negatively

related to prejudice. This finding suggests some support

for the idea that those who voluntarily attend multicultural

workshops may least need such training. Despite support for

the idea that current multicultural training may only be

reaching those Whites already amenable to the message of

multiculturalism, most White students in the sample

acknowledged that they would be unlikely to attend a

multicultural workshop in any case.

The lack of enthusiasm shown by the current sample

towards multicultural/diversity workshops is discouraging

given that at the graduate level, several counseling

psychology doctoral programs do not require their students

to take a multicultural course (Quitana & Bernal, 1995).

The current data suggest most students would fail to take

such a course of their own volition. Anecdotal evidence

gathered from counseling and clinical psychology doctoral

students confirms this perception of the lack of interest in

multicultural training among White individuals. The

students (and faculty) that express interest in

multicultural training are often members of ethnic-minority

groups (D'Andrea & Daniels, 1995).











Implications of Current Findings

The lack of findings supporting this study's hypotheses

suggests either that the original ideas are flawed or that

flaws exist in the research design. For example, this

study's results may suggest that forewarning of an upcoming

racial issues lecture may not affect or moderate Whites

attitudes towards Blacks. It is possible that people are

honest on self-report questionnaires of prejudice without

moderating their opinions in the face of an upcoming

diversity presentation, or in the context of multicultural

training. Perhaps White students do not engage in self-

presentational strategies to appear more sensitive on racial

issues. Although such a conclusion is consistent with the

lack of empirical support for the hypothesis, it appears

somewhat unlikely given the wealth of social psychology

research on prejudice. Such research has extensively

documented the difference between White people's explicit

and implicit manifestations of prejudice (Crosby, Bromley, &

Saxe, 1980; Dovidio & Fazio, 1992; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986;

McConahay, 1986; Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995). A more likely

explanation is that the forewarning message in this study

did not evoke the intended reaction. This explanation is

described in detail in the following limitations section.

Second, although no hypothesis was upheld by the data,

post-hoc analyses did provide evidence to suggest some











validity for the original ideas proposed. Data supported a

link between forewarning and some shift in racial attitudes,

but in a direction different from the one predicted. White

students who received the forewarning actually increased in

their anti-Black sentiment and Reintegration attitudes. In

addition, most students fell into the two highest categories

of racial identity development, despite little difference in

their respective prejudicial attitudes, which lends support

to the idea that White racial identity development as it is

measured by the White Racial Identity Attitudes Scale

(Helms, 1990) may not be an adequate measure of prejudice

reduction. Furthermore, guilt and prejudice were inversely

related, which attests to the potential importance of guilt

in the field of multicultural training, an association that

multicultural literature often overlooks. Finally, the more

likely White students were to voluntarily attend

multicultural workshops, the lower their prejudice scores;

multicultural training may indeed be "preaching to the

choir."

Limitations of the Current Study

The limitations of the current study center around

possible flaws in the design: the forewarning message, the

sample used, and the quality of the study's measures.

First, the forewarning message may have been too weak to

evoke student's awareness. The message informed students










that an upcoming presenter would lecture on racial issues;

the control group would receive a lecture on stress.

Receiving a lecture on racial issues in a large

undergraduate class in which anonymity is present to a

certain degree differs from actively participating in a

small-group multicultural or diversity workshop. Perhaps, a

different result would have been obtained had the

forewarning informed of a diversity workshop that would be

held with the students as participants. Such a forewarning

message may not have been as believable given that data were

collected in a large class; however, this message would have

more closely resembled the scenario that students experience

when they take multicultural courses.

Second, data were collected from an undergraduate

psychology class consisting mainly of first-year students.

Using this population assumes both that first-year students

know what lectures on racial issues and, in a larger

context, what multicultural presentations entail and that

first-year students and fourth-year students do not differ

significantly in their self-report of prejudice. Yet,

several participants acknowledged after the study that they

were unclear as to what the term "multicultural workshops"

meant. If participants did not understand the terminology

used in this study, then the results may be suspect.









81

The number of fourth-year students in this sample were

too few to test whether their prejudice scores differed

significantly from first year students. However, one may

argue that the university experience does offer a particular

socialization regarding the acceptability of prejudice and

the openness with which racial issues may be discussed. The

racial climate on university campuses often differ markedly

from students' previous experiences, and as one moves

through a university, a "politically correct" socialization

occurs, influenced by campus life, administrative actions,

and the aftermath of race-related incidents (D'Souza, 1991;

Magner, 1988). It would be interesting to run the study

again with only fourth-year students and compare those

results with the current ones because fourth-year students

may more willingly moderate their expressions of prejudice

when forewarned. Fourth-year students may also resemble

most closely the first year graduate students in counseling

psychology programs who take multicultural training and

counseling courses.

Third, the measures used may not have been adequate to

address the hypotheses. The potential inadequacy of both

the forewarning message and the ambivalence measure have

already been discussed. In addition, the validity of Helm's

White Racial Identity Attitudes Scale is questionable, given










that its properties do not appear to support a stage-model

of racial identity development (Behrens, 1997).

Recently, J. E. Helms (personal communication, July,

1997) has been encouraging a move away from using her scale

to measure discrete stages of identity development, and

instead recommending that researchers focus on the way each

of the five subscales compare to the others. However,

Helms' model (1990) is described as a linear stage-model of

racial identity development and is taught as such in

multicultural training programs. Advancing levels is

interpreted as a sign of increasing multicultural competence

(Ottavi, Pope-Davis, & Dings, 1994; Ponterotto, 1988;

Sabnani, Ponterotto, & Borodovsky, 1991). If the WRIAS is

no longer a stage-based measure, then to continue using it

as a valid indicator of multicultural competence following

training (as shown by progressing to more advanced stages)

is not justified.

The Mosher guilty-conscience scale used in this study

measures guilt, generally, (Mosher, 1988; 1968) not

specifically White guilt regarding racial issues.

Unfortunately, I uncovered no such measure. Before the link

between prejudice, ambivalence, and White guilt can truly be

established or discounted, a measure of White guilt must be

constructed and validated.











Lastly, this study design relied on self-report

measures of sensitive personal information, such as

prejudice. Research has already documented that survey data

on prejudice often underestimate the amount of prejudice

present (Crosby, Bromley, and Saxe, 1980; Dovidio & Fazio,

1992; Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995). Despite all attempts to

ensure anonymity of the participants, time constraints led

to the next class's students coming in and to participants

being rushed to finish their questionnaires, which may have

compromised the results. Finally, the question still

remains as to the link between explicit and implicit levels

of prejudice and actual prejudiced behavior towards others

(Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 1997). Further research is

needed to address such a question.

Suggestions for Future Research

Because much of the research conducted in this study

was new, the first step in future research would be to

replicate this study using the present design to compare

findings. Next, use of a stronger forewarning measure is

warranted, along with use of a sample of more advanced

students to test whether a socialization process regarding

the acceptability of acknowledging prejudice exists on

university campuses. It would also be relevant to include

Mosher's Hostility-guilt scale in addition to the Guilty-

conscience scale to differentiate between these two aspects











of guilt. Conceivably, White students may have hostile

guilt in response to prejudice rather than guilt resulting

from conscience. Finally, a measure of White guilt needs to

be developed.

Long term, it would be interesting to include pre and

post measures of prejudice such as the Modern Racism Scale

(McConahay, Hardee, & Batts, 1981) and measures of White

guilt as part of the evaluation of multicultural training

effectiveness. These measures would address whether

multicultural training produces unintended outcomes such as

hypervigilant and avoidance behaviors, driven by

defensiveness and guilt, on the part of White students.

Including these measures would also shed light on whether

White students overtly endorse their own multicultural

competence while covertly harboring prejudicial thoughts.

Conclusions

This dissertation empirically addressed several

identified weaknesses in the current multicultural training

literature. These potential weaknesses included the idea

that Whites might engage in self-presentational strategies

to appear culturally aware, while still harboring covert,

racially-prejudiced attitudes, that White guilt might play a

role in encouraging Whites to adopt the patina of

multicultural sensitivity in order to avoid honest dialogue

regarding their own prejudice, and that White racial









85

identity development as a construct may not be synonymous

with prejudice.

Although the lack of anticipated findings in this study

is disappointing, the evidence gathered suggests that the

original ideas about the potential weaknesses in current

multicultural training practices are still viable. The

design of the present study may not have been the ideal

vehicle to test such ideas.















APPENDIX A
INFORMED CONSENT FORM


You are being asked to volunteer as a participant in a
research study conducted by M. G. Shanbhag, a doctoral
candidate in the Department of Psychology. This form is
designed to inform you about the study and to answer any
questions you may have. The purpose of this study is to
obtain people's opinions on a wide variety of topics.

Participants in this study will be asked to complete four
questionnaires. Participants will be asked not to put their
names on any questionnaires to insure their anonymity.
Instead, each questionnaire in a packet will have the same
numerical code on it for correlation purposes only. You do
not have to answer any question you do not wish to answer.
It will take approximately 30 minutes to complete this
study.

For your participation, you will receive 2 extra-credit
points in PCO 2714. Following the study, you will have the
chance to learn more about the nature of the study. Any
questions or concerns that participants may have as a result
of participating in this study will be addressed at that
time.

There are no risks or discomforts anticipated for
participants in this study. You may benefit by learning
more about your own opinions. If you wish to discuss any
potential discomforts you may experience, you may call the
Principal Investigator at 392-0601. Please read the
statement attached and print and sign the form. Questions
or concerns about research participants rights may be
directed to the UFIRB office, P.O. Box 112250, UF,
Gainesville, FL 32611 or call 392-0433.








87



I have been fully informed of the procedure in this study .
I am free to withdraw my consent and to discontinue
participation in this study at any time without consequence.
I will receive no compensation other than extra-credit for
participation in this study at any time. I agree to
participate in the procedure and have received a copy of
this description.





Participant's Name [Print] Date

Participant's Signature M. G. Shanbhag, M.S.















APPENDIX B
FOREWARNING MESSAGE


Students in the forewarning group received the following
message on the first page of their packet of materials:

The class lecture on racial issues will be given by a guest
speaker later this week. He is interested in getting an
idea of your attitudes on a variety of topics, including
your attitudes on race. Remember, your responses will be
completely anonymous. In no way will your answers be
traceable to you, so please be as honest as possible. Thank
you.







Students in the non-forewarning, control group received the
following message on the first page of their packet of
materials:

The class lecture on coping with stress will be given by a
guest speaker later this week. He is interested in getting
an idea of your attitudes on a variety of topics, including
your attitudes on stress. Remember, your responses will be
completely anonymous. In no way will your answers be
traceable to you, so please be as honest as possible. Thank
you.















APPENDIX C
INTENT TO ATTEND A MULTICULTURAL WORKSHOP


Please use the following scale to indicate your degree of
agreement with each item:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree


1. I plan to attend voluntarily at least one multicultural
training workshop sometime in the next 5 years.

2. If a multicultural training workshop is offered one
evening within the next year at UF, I would volunteer
to attend.

3. If a multicultural training workshop is offered one
evening would volunteer to attend.

















DEMOGRAPHIC


1. Age:


2. Gender: M


3. Ethnicity:










4. Class








5. Home State


APPENDIX D
INFORMATION AND MANIPULATION CHECK





0 F 1


0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7


0
1
2
3
4
5
6


African American
Asian American
Hispanic American and Latino
White or Anglo American
American Indian/ Native American
International (please specify)
Biracial (please specify)
Other (please specify)


First year
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Graduate Student
Post-Bac
Other (please specify)


0 South Florida (Dade and Broward)
1 Florida
2 Southeast
(GA,AL,NC, SC, KY, TN, LA,MS,AR)
3 Midatlantic (MD,DC,DE,NJ,VA,WV)
4 Northeast
(PA,NY,MA, CT,NH,ME,VT,RI)
5 Mideast
(OH,OK, IL, IN,KS,MI,MN,MO,IA,NE)
6 Midwest (ID,MT,ND,SD,WY)
7 Southwest (AZ,TX,CO,NM,NV,UT)
8 West (CA,WA,OR,AL,HI)
9 Other









91

6. Major 0 Psychology
1 Social Science (Sociology, etc.)
2 Engineering
3 Natural Sciences (Biology,Math..
4 Humanities (English, History..
5 Business
6 Education
7 Other
8 Undecided


7. I understand that later this week a guest speaker will
lecture on

(0) time management
(1) stress
(2) racial issues
(3) sexually transmitted diseases
(4) none of the above















APPENDIX E
DEBRIEFING FORM


Thank you for your participation in this experiment. Your
responses to the questionnaires will be kept completely
anonymous; you will be identified by code number only.

The purpose of this study was to examine White people's
attitudes toward African Americans and to determine whether
racism, ambivalence toward Blacks, and guilt are related.
Moreover, this study looks at whether receiving a
"forewarning" of the multicultural intent of the
investigation influences people's responses. This study may
ultimately help clarify the benefits of providing
multicultural training to college students.

Thank you again for your participation in this study. If
you have any questions about the study, please feel free to
contact the Principal Investigator, Marnie G. Shanbhag, at
392-0601.















REFERENCES


Abel, T. M. (1956). Cultural patterns as they affect
psychotherapeutic procedures. American Journal of
Psychotherapy, 10, 728-740.

Abramson, P. R., Mosher, D. L., Abramson, L. M., &
Woychowski, B. (1977). Personality correlates of the
Mosher guilt scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 41,
375-382.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding
attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Allison, K. W., Crawford, I., Echemendia, R., Robinson,
L., & Knepp, D. (1994). Human diversity and professional
competence: Training in clinical and counseling psychology
revisited. American Psychologist, 49, 792-796.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

American Psychological Association. (1983). Criteria
for accreditation of doctoral training programs and
internships in professional psychology. Washington, DC:
Author.

Arbona, C. (1995). Culture, ethnicity, and race: A
reaction. Counseling Psychologist, 23, 74-78.

Attneave, C. L. (1969). Therapy in tribal settings
and urban network intervention. Family Process, 8, 192-210.

Brigham, J. C., Woodmansee, J. J., & Cook, S. W.
(1976). Dimensions of verbal racial attitudes: Interracial
marriage and approaches to racial equality. Journal of
Social Issues, 32, 9-21.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483
(1954).




Full Text
REFERENCES
Abel, T. M. (1956). Cultural patterns as they affect
psychotherapeutic procedures. American Journal of
Psychotherapy, 10, 728-740.
Abramson, P. R., Mosher, D. L., Abramson, L. M., &
Woychowski, B. (1977). Personality correlates of the
Mosher quilt scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 41,
375-382.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding
attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Allison, K. W., Crawford, I., Echemendia, R., Robinson,
L., & Knepp, D. (1994). Human diversity and professional
competence: Training in clinical and counseling psychology
revisited. American Psychologist, 49, 792-796.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
American Psychological Association. (1983). Criteria
for accreditation of doctoral training programs and
internships in professional psychology. Washington, DC:
Author.
Arbona, C. (1995). Culture, ethnicity, and race: A
reaction. Counseling Psychologist, 23, 74-78.
Attneave, C. L. (1969). Therapy in tribal settings
and urban network intervention. Family Process, 8, 192-210.
Brigham, J. C., Woodmansee, J. J., & Cook, S. W.
(1976). Dimensions of verbal racial attitudes: Interracial
marriage and approaches to racial equality. Journal of
Social Issues, 32, 9-21.
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483
(1954).
93


42
multiculturalists to accomplish their aim, all psychologists
need to be equally responsive to the utility of
multiculturalism. Moreover, given the continued
diversification of the United States population,
multicultural efforts may be one of the best vehicles by
which to ensure the economic survival and social relevance
of professional psychology (Hall, 1997).
Summary
This chapter presented an overview of multicultural
perspectives in psychology. The first section reviewed the
historical antecedents to current multicultural scholarship
including the influence of early thinkers such as Abel
(1954), Allport (1954), Clark (1965) and Wrenn, (1962), and
of the Civil Rights Movement. The next section discussed
three topics related to multicultural training issues: (a)
the major approaches to multicultural training including
both universal or etic perspectives and the more culture-
specific or emic models, (b) the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach, and (c) the practices
involved in offering multicultural training. The final
section explored potential drawbacks in multicultural
practices, such as the unfocused nature of much of the
multicultural scholarship, the infusion of multicultural
politics into multicultural training, the lack of focus on
the role of self-presentational processes by trainees, and


indicated that they would voluntarily attend multicultural
training presentations would be the least in need of such
training, as evidenced by their lower scores on measures of
prejudice. In addition, the relationships between race-
related ambivalence, prejudice, and guilt were examined.
Participants were 134 White undergraduate students from
one introductory psychology class. Students filled out the
Modern Racism Scale, Pro-Black Anti-Black Attitude
Questionnaire, White Racial Identity Attitudes Scale, Mosher
Guilt Scale, and a behavioral intention measure of one's
likelihood of attending a multicultural presentation. Half
the sample received a forewarning that an upcoming presenter
would lecture on racial issues; the other constituted the
control group.
Results failed to support the hypotheses. However,
ancillary analyses revealed that students actually increased
in anti-Black affect and hostile reintegration attitudes as
a result of receiving a forewarning. Furthermore, prejudice
and guilt were inversely related as were prejudice and
intention to attend a multicultural presentation.
Findings are discussed in light of previous research,
and suggestions for future research are explored, along with
the implications for current multicultural training
practices.
vii


75
however, does not allow for such a differentiation, and
valuable information may be getting lost in the process.
Whereas no relationship existed between racial
ambivalence and prejudice, students who endorsed more
prejudice also endorsed more anti-Black sentiment and less
pro-Black sentiment. This finding lends support to the idea
that the prejudice measure and the Pro-Black and Anti-Black
scales of the Ambivalence Questionnaire were tapping into
related constructs, and suggests a possible inadequacy in
the method of computing ambivalence. In addition, the Pro-
Black and Anti-Black scales were only moderately correlated
with each other which may be viewed as further evidence in
favor of methodological difficulties in measuring
ambivalence and not in the presence of ambivalence itself,
consistent with Katz and Hass' (1988) theory that Whites
often hold both pro-Black and anti-Black feelings.
Hypothesis 4 failed to receive support; no relationship
was found between racial ambivalence and guilt. However,
the same cautions regarding the measurement of ambivalence
described previously may apply here. In addition, post-hoc
analysis revealed that a relationship did exist between
prejudice and guilt. The more prejudice students endorsed,
the lower their guilty-conscience scores.
This finding raises important issues for multicultural
training. If students with greater guilty-consciences


77
scores into intent versus nonintent may not have adequately
captured the desired information, because when intent was
kept as a continuous variable, intent to attend a
multicultural workshop was significantly and negatively
related to prejudice. This finding suggests some support
for the idea that those who voluntarily attend multicultural
workshops may least need such training. Despite support for
the idea that current multicultural training may only be
reaching those Whites already amenable to the message of
multiculturalism, most White students in the sample
acknowledged that they would be unlikely to attend a
multicultural workshop in any case.
The lack of enthusiasm shown by the current sample
towards multicultural/diversity workshops is discouraging
given that at the graduate level, several counseling
psychology doctoral programs do not require their students
to take a multicultural course (Quitana s Bernal, 1995).
The current data suggest most students would fail to take
such a course of their own volition. Anecdotal evidence
gathered from counseling and clinical psychology doctoral
students confirms this perception of the lack of interest in
multicultural training among White individuals. The
students (and faculty) that express interest in
multicultural training are often members of ethnic-minority
groups (D'Andrea & Daniels, 1995).


30
may have been rendered an almost meaningless construct as a
result of its diversity of meanings, particularly when it
can be used to refer to "whatever particular dimension is of
interest to some advocate" (Helms & Richardson, 1997, p.
71). Without general agreement as to what constitutes both
the core definition of multiculturalism and the core
components of adequate multicultural competence, educators
are free to provide multicultural training based on their
own interpretations, supported by only part of the
multicultural literature.
The lack of multicultural theoretical and definitional
consensus directly affects the quality of multicultural
counseling research as well (Ridley, Espelage, & Rubinstein,
1997). Without a sound theoretical foundation from which to
work, much of multicultural research remains anecdotal, with
little empirical data for support (Ponterotto & Casas,
1991). Research is further hampered by a lack of adequate
assessment instruments, a reliance on analogue designs, and
an overemphasis on inter-group differences at the expense of
intra-group differences (Ponterotto & Casas, 1991; Ridley,
Espelage, & Rubinstein, 1997). Theoretical confusion and
inadequate research studies keep multicultural topics
relegated to special-issue and special-section status. In
order to enter the mainstream, multicultural researchers may
need to reach consensus on key issues of controversy in


48
Blacks"); (d) Pseudoindependenceacknowledgment of racism
and ability to recognize personal responsibility (e.g., "I
feel as comfortable around Blacks as I do around Whites");
and (e) Autonomyappreciation of multiculturalism and
positive definition of Whiteness (e.g., "I value
relationships with Black friends" and "I am not embarrassed
to admit that I am White").
The overall scale consists of 50 Likert-type items,
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Each of the five subscales contains 10 items. Higher scores
indicate greater adherence to a particular subscale. Helms
(1993) indicates that scores can be interpreted both by the
single highest subscale score suggestive of the particular
stage of development, or a profile of scores indicating the
relationship of each subscale to the others. Alpha
coefficients have been found to range from .50 for the
Contact subscale (Pope-Davis, 1994) to .80 for the Pseudo-
Independence subscale (Helms, 1993). Subscale correlations
suggest that the WRIAS is measuring different constructs
(Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994). In the initial construction,
each item met a minimum item-total subscale correlation of
.30, and the interscale correlations were not suggestive of
redundancy (Helms, 1993). Criterion validity was
established by obtaining adequate scale correlations (in the
hypothesized direction according to identity theory) with


10
psychologys approach to multicultural counseling training
may be flawed. This multicultural approach fails to
differentiate between overt self-presentational strategies
and temporary attitude shifts from Whites' enduring race-
related attitudes and beliefs. Furthermore, counseling
psychologys current multicultural training models do not
openly acknowledge the possibility that Whites may overtly
endorse their own multicultural competence and the benefits
of multicultural training while harboring covert prejudicial
thoughts (see Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; Katz, Wackenhut, S
Hass, 1986).
Instead, by increasing the awareness of the discrepancy
between a persons belief in his/her nonracist identity and
his/her covert prejudicial thoughts, multicultural training
actually may be encouraging an unintended outcome: those
who undergo multicultural training may respond to
multicultural situations by engaging in hypervigilant and
avoidance behaviors, driven by defensiveness and guilt.
Hypervigilant and avoidant responses are not beneficial
because the focus remains on the White person and on how
he/she is being perceived and not on any internal processes
that can reduce racist or prejudicial responses toward
people of color. Finally, the multicultural literature has
not explored the idea that those who attend multicultural
workshops voluntarily may be the persons who least need such


CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW OF MULTICULTURALISM
Overview
This chapter covers the relevant literature concerning
multiculturalism in psychology and the current status of
multicultural training. The chapter is divided into three
sections. The first section provides a history of
multiculturalism in counseling psychology. In the second
section, the current major multicultural training models are
discussed. The final section addresses several potential
drawbacks in current multicultural thinking that may serve
to keep multiculturalism as a fringe movement.
The literature covered in this chapter was first
sampled via a computerized search using several databases
that provided information on articles and books published
from 1966 onwards. Searches were conducted on Psychlnfo,
Clinpsych, and ERIC, using the following terms:
multiculturalism, history, multicultural training, race,
ethnicity, prejudice, racism, racial ambivalence, and guilt.
Only those articles that were directly relevant to the
15


devote needed time to this project. A McLaughlin
Dissertation Fellowship provided additional funding.


33
The Role of Self-Presentation
The multicultural literature has not directly addressed
the possibility that workshop participants may engage in
self-presentational strategies to appear more culturally
aware and less racist then they are. Yet, research from
social psychology has clearly demonstrated that people often
shift their opinions when they expect to hear a persuasive
communication, particularly when the views being presented
are different from their own (Cialdini, & Petty, 1981;
Romero, Agnew, & Insko, 1996). Reasons for these conscious
or unconscious opinion shifts include the desire to protect
one's self-esteem from damage, conformity pressures, and a
motivation to appear more moderate (Cialdini, Levy, Herman,
& Evenback, 1973; McGuire & Millman, 1965; White, 1975).
Once the situation changes, people may revert back to their
original positions (Cialdini, Levy, Herman, & Evenback,
1973) .
These findings from social psychology are problematic
for multicultural training because they suggest that
students might overtly indicate their own multicultural
competence and acknowledge having benefitted from
multicultural training while covertly harboring prejudicial
thoughts. The possibility that participants engage in self-
presentational strategies is increased because of the power
differentials that are thought to influence the efficacy of


43
the rise of positions and processes among multiculturalists
that discourage countervailing viewpoints.
This chapter was designed to lay the foundation for the
empirical work in this dissertation, which explores several
potential weaknesses in the current multicultural training
literature. These weaknesses, explained in the empirical
portion of the dissertation, include the following: (a)
failure of multicultural training models to address the
existence in trainees of underlying attitudinal ambivalence
and covert prejudicial thoughts, (b) over-reliance on White
racial identity development as the key to cross-culturally
relevant counseling skills, (c) absence of a literature on
the role of White guilt, and (d) lack of research addressing
the possibility that trainees engage in self-presentational
strategies to appear multiculturally sensitive.


80
that an upcoming presenter would lecture on racial issues;
the control group would receive a lecture on stress.
Receiving a lecture on racial issues in a large
undergraduate class in which anonymity is present to a
certain degree differs from actively participating in a
small-group multicultural or diversity workshop. Perhaps, a
different result would have been obtained had the
forewarning informed of a diversity workshop that would be
held with the students as participants. Such a forewarning
message may not have been as believable given that data were
collected in a large class; however, this message would have
more closely resembled the scenario that students experience
when they take multicultural courses.
Second, data were collected from an undergraduate
psychology class consisting mainly of first-year students.
Using this population assumes both that first-year students
know what lectures on racial issues and, in a larger
context, what multicultural presentations entail and that
first-year students and fourth-year students do not differ
significantly in their self-report of prejudice. Yet,
several participants acknowledged after the study that they
were unclear as to what the term "multicultural workshops"
meant. If participants did not understand the terminology
used in this study, then the results may be suspect.


2
Heralded as the fourth force in psychology,
multiculturalism has confronted the reality that existing
psychological paradigms do not address the mental health
needs of ethnic-minority populations and that counselors
are not adequately prepared to facilitate the development of
their clients of color (Pedersen, 1990; Sue & Sue, 1990).
Evidence for these claims came from the under-utilization
and premature termination rates of clients of color (Mays S
Albee, 1992; Ponterotto & Casas, 1987; Sue & Sue, 1990).
Subsequently, psychology (especially counseling psychology)
underwent a dramatic transformation with a new emphasis on
understanding and helping diverse populations (Essandoh,
1996). The 1980s, in particular, witnessed an unprecedented
growth in the attention given to multicultural issues in
counseling literature and in counseling training programs
(Ponterotto & Casas, 1991). Journals began devoting space
to multiculturalism and training programs, mandated by APA,
began offering multicultural curricula designed to prepare
students for the ever-changing cultural makeup of
populations seeking services. This multicultural focus has
remained central in counseling psychology for good reason:
the United States continues to undergo dramatic demographic
changes, and projections now indicate that by the year 2050,
Americans of color will become the numerical majority.


31
order to achieve a more lasting impact on the larger
discipline.
Distinguishing Politics from Training Imperatives
Although the multicultural political movement was the
precursor to the multicultural counseling movement, the two
are not synonymous. It was no coincidence that the
political movement coherently organized in the era of the
civil rights and antiwar movements, which were rapidly
exposing "the linkages among racism, capitalist
exploitation, and a general lack of social justice (Outlaw,
1995, p. 45). Multiculturalism as a political movement was
based, and to some extent still is, on the politics of
identity, difference, and recognition, which challenge
sacred notions of individualism, assimilation, and
democratic liberalism. These multicultural positions are
valuable in that they serve both to secure a group's rights
and to broaden cultural and economic access.
However, these multicultural political perspectives are
not universally accepted by scholars within psychology and
across disciplines (D'Souza, 1991; Fowers & Richardson,
1996; Steele, 1990), and critics often point to the former
Yugoslavia as one example of the politics of nationalism and
ethnic differences taken to an extreme (see Schlesinger's
The Disuniting of America, 1992). Those who fear the
solidarities that multicultural politics encourage may have


I certify that I have read this study and that in ray
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of^Dbctpr of Philosophy.
Martin P. Heesacker, Chair
Professor of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
(\
'1*^1
Doroth
Professo
hilosophy.
o A
Nevill
of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor,of Philosophy.
David Suchman
Associate Professor of
Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
/u{. ^~~l
Lisa M. Brown
Assistant Professor of
Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Djpcto/ of Phiixisopiry.
Sbodroe M. EarkSr
Professor of Counselor
Education


99
Magner, D. R. (1988). Blacks and Whites on the
campuses: Behind ugly racist incidents, student isolation,
and insensitivity. Chronicle of Higher Education, 35(33),
28-33.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality.
New York: Harper.
Mays, V. M., & Albee, G. W. (1992). Psychotherapy and
ethnic minorities. In D. K. Freedheim (Ed.), History of
psychotherapy (pp. 552-570). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
McConahay, J. B. (1982) Self-interest versus racial
attitudes as correlates of anti-busing attitudes in
Louisville: Is it the buses or the Blacks? Journal of
Politics, 44, 692-720.
McConahay, 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, 551-558.
McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence,
and the modern racism scale. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L.
Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp.
91-125). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
McConahay, J. B., Hardee, B. B., & Batts, V. (1981).
Has racism declined in America? It depends upon who is
asking and what is asked. Journal of Conflict Resolution,
25, 563-579.
McConahay, J. B., & Hough, J. C. (1976). Symbolic
racism. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 23-45.
McCormack, A. S. (1995). The changing nature of
racism on college campuses: Study of discrimination at a
northeastern public university. College Student Journal,
29, 150-156.
McGuire, W. J., & Millman, S. (1965). Anticipatory
belief lowering following forewarning of a persuasive
attack. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2,
471-479.
McRae, M. B., S Johnson, S. D. (1991). Toward
training for competence in multicultural counselor
education. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 131-135.


6
The multicultural literature, however, has only
occasionally addressed the reduction of Whites prejudice
against ethnic-minority people and has focused instead on
the acquisition of cultural knowledge. Training workshops
often fail to address clearly how enduring attitude change
regarding race and culture will be achieved. Moreover,
measures of participants racial and ethnic prejudice are
rarely included in studies of multicultural training
efficacy.
In establishing multicultural training models,
counseling psychologists have largely overlooked the
information on American racism and prejudice obtained by
social psychologists. First, social psychologists have long
understood that conscious decisions to renounce prejudice do
not eliminate prejudicial behaviors (Allport, 1954; Devine,
1989; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; Rokeach, 1973), and that
overcoming racially prejudicial socialization can take a
lifetime. Second, sincere expressions of, for example, pro-
Black feelings, can and often do coexist with negative
attitudes toward Blacks, commonly referred to as attitudinal
ambivalence, as White Americans attitudes toward people of
color have become more complex and differentiated (Katz,
Wackenhut, & Hass, 1986). Third, robust findings indicate
that people who report nonprejudiced attitudes in surveys
often manifest covert prejudiced attitudes when tested via


67
small but statistically significant relationship existed
between MRS and year (r = -.20, p < .05).
Finally, to test for systematic gender differences in
response to the dependent variables, several one-way,
between-subject ANOVAs were run, with gender as the
independent variable and MRS, Pro-Black scores (from PAAQ),
Anti-Black scores (from PAAQ), racial ambivalence (full
PAAQ), and guilt (MGI) as the dependent variables. A gender
effect was found on guilt [F(l, 102) = 5.25, g = .02], with
women reporting significantly more guilt (M = 64.79, SD =
15.6) than men (M = 56.13, SD = 17.2). None of the other
gender analyses reached statistical significance.
Summary
In summary, data did not support the hypothesis that
people would engage in attitude shifts regarding their
prejudice, ambivalence, or guilt if they anticipated
receiving a lecture on racial issues. However post-hoc
analysis revealed that contrary to the expected direction,
students actually reported more anti-Black sentiment and
greater Reintegration attitudes when they expected to
receive a lecture on racial issues than when they expected a
lecture on an innocuous subject, in this case stress.
Second, White students at higher levels of racial
identity did report significantly less prejudice than those
at lower levels, which is consistent with Helm's theory


Parham, T. A. (1993). White researchers conducting
multicultural counseling research: Can their efforts be "Mo
betta"? The Counseling Psychologist, 21, 250-256.
Patterson, C. H. (1996). Multicultural counseling:
From diversity to universality. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 74, 227-231.
Pedersen, P. (1988). Handbook for developing
multicultural awareness. Alexandria, VA: American
Association for Counseling and Development.
Pedersen, P. (1990). The multicultural perspective as
a fourth force in counseling. Journal of Mental Health
Counseling, 12, 93-95.
Pedersen, P. (1991). Multiculturalism as a generic
approach to counseling. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 70, 6-12.
Pedersen, P. (1995). Culture-centered ethical
guidelines for counselors. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M.
Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of
multicultural counseling (pp. 34-49). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Pedersen, P. (1996). The importance of both
similarities and differences in multicultural counseling:
Reaction to C. H. Patterson. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 74, 236-237.
Pedersen, P., Lonner, W. J., & Draguns, J. G. (1976).
Counseling across cultures Honolulu: University of Hawaii
Press.
Ponterotto, J. G. (1988) Racial consciousness
development among White counselor trainees: A stage model.
Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 16,
146-156.
Ponterotto, J. G., Alexander, C. M., & Grieger, I.
(1995). A multicultural competency checklist for counseling
psychology programs. Journal of Multicultural Counseling
and Development, 23, 11-20.
Ponterotto, J. G., & Casas, J. M. (1987). In search
of multicultural competence within counselor education
programs. Journal of Counseling and Development, 65, 430-
434 .


40
multiculturalism in psychology (Hall et al., 1997) who
chastised Fowers and Richardson for simplifying
multiculturalism, minimizing discrimination and racism, and
engaging in blatant ethnocentrism. Despite aptly refuting
some of Fowers and Richardson's points (1996), Hall et al.
failed to address the underlying tenor of the debate, that
is that one side held significant reservations about
multiculturalism that the other side did not.
In fact, Fowers and Richardson's (1997) subsequent
response to the comments of Hall et al. (1997) confirmed
this divisiveness and made reference to "the overwhelmingly
negative tone of their reaction. ... We read Hall et al.'s
(1997) statement with great regret because they find little
of value in our article (Fowers & Richardson, 1996) or in
mainstream Euro-American culture and deny any progress in
the fight against racism. Unfortunately, this confirms our
worst fears about how difficult it will be for committed
multiculturalists to engage in dialogue" (p. 660).
Interestingly, Hall et al. were the only scholars who, in
their commentary, extended no gratitude towards Fowers and
Richardson for their scholarly contribution.
Other reactions to the Fowers and Richardson article
gave further evidence of the existing distrust on the part
of some psychologists towards multicultural messages.
Ekstrom (1997) thanked Fowers and Richardson for "their


22
Fontes, 1990; Pedersen, 1988), and the plethora of current
courses offered across the United States differ widely in
both process and content (D'Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991).
"This lack of consensus reflects both our current
understanding as to what constitutes effective multicultural
counseling training as well as the individual counselor-
educator's preference regarding the type of content to be
covered by such a course" (D'Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991,
p. 143).
Most multicultural experts fall into one of two camps.
They either favor a broad, universal definition of
multiculturalism, sometimes referred to as an etic
perspective, or prefer a more culture-specific or emic
perspective (Essandoh, 1996; Patterson, 1996; Sue & Sue,
1990). The terms "emic" and "etic" originate from
linguistic rules of phonemic and phonetic analysis, which
separate the specific and general aspects of language (Pike,
1966) Proponents of a broad approach define
multiculturalism to include societal and cultural variables
such as race, ethnicity, age, gender, social class, sexual
orientation, nationality, and disability (Fukuyama, 1990;
Pedersen, 1991). Culture-specific perspectives view
cultures as distinct, each requiring counselors to hold
specific knowledge, skills, and awareness in order to be
cross-culturally effective (Sue & Sue, 1990).



PAGE 1

7+( 52/( 2) &29(57 5$&,$/ 35(-8',&( $77,78',1$/ $0%,9$/(1&( $1' *8,/7 ,1 5(&(37,9,7< 72 08/7,&8/785$/ 75$,1,1* %\ 0$51,( 6+$1%+$* $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( 6&+22/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

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nV SURIHVVLRQDO DQG SHUVRQDO JXLGDQFH 'U 3DUNHU ZLOOLQJO\ EURXJKW D PXFKQHHGHG SHUVSHFWLYH WR P\ ZRUN )LQDOO\ ZLVK WR DFNQRZOHGJH WKH HQFRXUDJHPHQW RI P\ SDUHQWV / 9 DQG 1DQGD 6KDQEKDJ ZKRVH JHQHURXV ILQDQFLDO VXSSRUW SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ WKH 6XPPHU RI DOORZHG PH WR LL

PAGE 3

GHYRWH QHHGHG WLPH WR WKLV SURMHFW $ 0F/DXJKOLQ 'LVVHUWDWLRQ )HOORZVKLS SURYLGHG DGGLWLRQDO IXQGLQJ

PAGE 4

7$%/( 2) &217(176 $&.12:/('*(0(176 LL $%675$&7 YL &+$37(56 ,1752'8&7,21 2YHUYLHZ 3XUSRVH RI WKH 6WXG\ +\SRWKHVHV ,PSRUWDQFH RI WKH 6WXG\ /,7(5$785( 5(9,(: 2) 08/7 &8/785$/ ,60 2YHUYLHZ +LVWRU\ &XUUHQW $SSURDFKHV WR 0XOWLFXOWXUDO 7UDLQLQJ &XUUHQW 6WDWH RI 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP 6XPPDU\ 0(7+2' 3DUWLFLSDQWV 0DQLSXODWLRQ RI )RUHZDUQLQJ 0HDVXUHG 9DULDEOHV 3URFHGXUH 3ODQQHG 'DWD $QDO\VHV 5(68/76 6WDWLVWLFDO $QDO\VHV 3URFHGXUHV 'HVFULSWLYH 6WDWLVWLFV +\SRWKHVHV $QFLOODU\ $QDO\VHV 6XPPDU\ LY

PAGE 5

',6&866,21 6XPPDU\ DQG ,QWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI WKH 5HVXOWV ,PSOLFDWLRQV RI &XUUHQW )LQGLQJV /LPLWDWLRQV RI WKH &XUUHQW 6WXG\ 6XJJHVWLRQV IRU )XWXUH 5HVHDUFK &RQFOXVLRQV $33(1',&(6 $ ,1)250(' &216(17 )250 % )25(:$51,1* 0(66$*( & ,17(17 72 $77(1' $ 08/7,&8/785$/ :25.6+23 '(02*5$3+,& ,1)250$7,21 $1' 0$1,38/$7,21 &+(&. ( '(%5,(),1* )250 5()(5(1&(6 %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ Y

PAGE 6

$EVWUDFW RI 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 3UHVHQWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ 3DUWLDO )XOILOOPHQW RI WKH 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH 'HJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 7+( 52/( 2) &29(57 5$&,$/ 35(-8',&( $77,78',1$/ $0%,9$/(1&( $1' *8,/7 ,1 5(&(37,9,7< 72 08/7,&8/785$/ 75$,1,1* %\ 0DUQLH 6KDQEKDJ $XJXVW &KDLUSHUVRQ 0DUWLQ +HHVDFNHU 3K' 0DMRU 'HSDUWPHQW &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 7KLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ LGHQWLILHG VHYHUDO SRWHQWLDO ZHDNQHVVHV LQ WKH FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ OLWHUDWXUH DQG DGGUHVVHG WKHLU YLDELOLW\ HPSLULFDOO\ 7KHVH ZHDNQHVVHV FHQWHUHG DURXQG WKH SRVVLEOH H[LVWHQFH LQ :KLWHV RI XQGHUO\LQJ UDFLDO DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH DQG FRYHUW SUHMXGLFLDO WKRXJKWV GHVSLWH RYHUW HQGRUVHPHQWV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO VHQVLWLYLW\ ,W ZDV K\SRWKHVL]HG EDVHG RQ VRFLDO SV\FKRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK WKDW :KLWH VWXGHQWV ZRXOG HQJDJH LQ DQWLFLSDWRU\ RSLQLRQ VKLIWV LQ WKH LQWHUHVW RI VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQ ZKHQ WKH\ H[SHFWHG WR UHFHLYH VRPH W\SH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO HGXFDWLRQ ,W ZDV IXUWKHU K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW VWXGHQWV ZKR YL

PAGE 7

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n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

PAGE 8

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

PAGE 9

+HUDOGHG DV WKH IRXUWK IRUFH LQ SV\FKRORJ\ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP KDV FRQIURQWHG WKH UHDOLW\ WKDW H[LVWLQJ SV\FKRORJLFDO SDUDGLJPV GR QRW DGGUHVV WKH PHQWDO KHDOWK QHHGV RI HWKQLFPLQRULW\ SRSXODWLRQV DQG WKDW FRXQVHORUV DUH QRW DGHTXDWHO\ SUHSDUHG WR IDFLOLWDWH WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKHLU FOLHQWV RI FRORU 3HGHUVHQ 6XH t 6XH f (YLGHQFH IRU WKHVH FODLPV FDPH IURP WKH XQGHUXWLOL]DWLRQ DQG SUHPDWXUH WHUPLQDWLRQ UDWHV RI FOLHQWV RI FRORU 0D\V 6 $OEHH 3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV 6XH t 6XH f 6XEVHTXHQWO\ SV\FKRORJ\ HVSHFLDOO\ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\f XQGHUZHQW D GUDPDWLF WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ ZLWK D QHZ HPSKDVLV RQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ DQG KHOSLQJ GLYHUVH SRSXODWLRQV (VVDQGRK f 7KH V LQ SDUWLFXODU ZLWQHVVHG DQ XQSUHFHGHQWHG JURZWK LQ WKH DWWHQWLRQ JLYHQ WR PXOWLFXOWXUDO LVVXHV LQ FRXQVHOLQJ OLWHUDWXUH DQG LQ FRXQVHOLQJ WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV 3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV f -RXUQDOV EHJDQ GHYRWLQJ VSDFH WR PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DQG WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV PDQGDWHG E\ $3$ EHJDQ RIIHULQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FXUULFXOD GHVLJQHG WR SUHSDUH VWXGHQWV IRU WKH HYHUFKDQJLQJ FXOWXUDO PDNHXS RI SRSXODWLRQV VHHNLQJ VHUYLFHV 7KLV PXOWLFXOWXUDO IRFXV KDV UHPDLQHG FHQWUDO LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ IRU JRRG UHDVRQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV FRQWLQXHV WR XQGHUJR GUDPDWLF GHPRJUDSKLF FKDQJHV DQG SURMHFWLRQV QRZ LQGLFDWH WKDW E\ WKH \HDU $PHULFDQV RI FRORU ZLOO EHFRPH WKH QXPHULFDO PDMRULW\

PAGE 10

:LWK DQ H\H WR $PHULFDfV LQFUHDVLQJO\ SOXUDOLVWLF VRFLHW\ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV KDYH LQYHVWHG PXFK HQHUJ\ LQ GHYHORSLQJ ZD\V RI WUDLQLQJ FRXQVHORUV SDUWLFXODUO\ :KLWH FRXQVHORUVf WR ZRUN PRUH HIIHFWLYHO\ ZLWK UDFLDOO\ GLYHUVH FOLHQWV +LOOV t 6WUR]LHU /HH t 5LFKDUGVRQ f &RQFXUUHQWO\ XQLYHUVLWLHV DURXQG WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV KDYH HQFRXUDJHG FRXQVHORUV WR SURYLGH FXOWXUDO GLYHUVLW\ WUDLQLQJ ZRUNVKRSV WR VWXGHQWV DQG VWDII LQ DQ HIIRUW WR LQFUHDVH UDFLDO KDUPRQ\ DQG GHFUHDVH WKH LQFLGHQFH RI UDFLDO FRQIOLFW RQ FROOHJH FDPSXVHV 0F&RUPDFN 3RSH'DYLV t 2WWDYL f 0RVW RI WKH WUDLQLQJ PRGHOV GHVLJQHG WR LQFUHDVH FXOWXUDO VHQVLWLYLW\ DLP WR LQFUHDVH NQRZOHGJH DZDUHQHVV DQG VNLOOV ZLWK UHVSHFW WR FXOWXUDOO\ UHOHYDQW YDULDEOHV 7KH\ RSHUDWH IURP WKUHH EDVLF SUHPLVHV 5LFKDUGVRQ t 0ROLQDUR f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

PAGE 11

WLPHIUDPH LH D RQH VHVVLRQ ZRUNVKRS YHUVXV D VHPHVWHU ORQJ FRXUVH 3RSH'DYLV t 2WWDYL f 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ WKH OLQN EHWZHHQ SURYLGLQJ ZRUNVKRSV RQ FDPSXV DQG GHFUHDVLQJ :KLWHVf DQWLSDWK\ WRZDUG PHPEHUV RI RWKHU UDFLDO DQG HWKQLF JURXSV UHPDLQV XQGRFXPHQWHG )XUWKHUPRUH OLWWOH HYLGHQFH H[LVWV WR VXSSRUW WKH LGHD WKDW WUDLQLQJ FRXQVHORUV LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO HGXFDWLRQ DFWXDOO\ LQFUHDVHV WKH TXDOLW\ RU DYDLODELOLW\ RI FRXQVHOLQJ VHUYLFHV SURYLGHG WR HWKQLFDOO\ GLYHUVH SRSXODWLRQV 'DV :LHU]ELFNL t 3HNDULN f 6HYHUDO UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH UDLVHG WKH FRQFHUQ WKDW SURYLGLQJ FRXQVHORUV RQO\ ZLWK FXOWXUHVSHFLILF LQIRUPDWLRQ KDV WKH GHOHWHULRXV HIIHFW RI HQFRXUDJLQJ VWHUHRW\SLQJ $UERQD 3DWWHUVRQ 6XH t =DQH f ,QVWHDG VRPH SURIHVVLRQDOV KDYH HPSKDVL]HG WKH QHHG SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ :KLWH LQGLYLGXDOVf IRU OHDUQLQJ DERXW RQHVHOI DV D UDFLDO HWKQLF DQG FXOWXUDO EHLQJ EHIRUH OHDUQLQJ DERXW RWKHUV &DUWHU 0F5DH t -RKQVRQ 6XH $UUHGRQGR t 0F'DYLV f 2QH RI WKH PRVW ZLGHO\ HPSOR\HG PRGHOV IRU WUDLQLQJ ERWK FRXQVHORUV DQG WKH JHQHUDO SRSXODWLRQ LQYROYHV D VWDJH WKHRU\ RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW &RUYLQ t :LJJLQV +HOPV 5LGOH\ f ,Q SDUWLFXODU D PLQLPXP OHYHO RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW KDV EHHQ YLHZHG DV LQWHJUDO WR :KLWH FRXQVHORUV DFKLHYLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH +HOPV 3RQWHURWWR 6DEQDQL

PAGE 12

3RQWHURWWR t %RURGRYVN\ f $OWKRXJK QRQH RI WKHVH PRGHOV SRVLWV WKDW RQO\ FRXQVHORUV ZKR DUH LQ WKH HQG VWDJHV RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DUH DEOH WR EH FURVV FXOWXUDOO\ HIIHFWLYH PRGHOGULYHQ UHVHDUFK ILQGLQJV GR VXJJHVW WKDW WKH DGRSWLRQ RI D PRUH DGYDQFHG :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ LV UHODWHG WR :KLWHVf LQFUHDVHG VHOIUHSRUWHG PXOWLFXOWXUDO WKHUDS\ FRPSHWHQFLHV 1HYLOOH HW DO 2WWDYL 3RSH'DYLV t 'LQJV f $FFRUGLQJ WR 5LFKDUGVRQ DQG 0ROLQDUR f DV D FRXQVHORU PRYHV WKURXJK WKH YDULRXV VWDJHV RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ KHVKH LV LQFUHDVLQJO\ OLNHO\ WR DEDQGRQ UDFLVW LGHRORJ\ DQG WR GHYHORS D SRVLWLYH QRQUDFLVW :KLWH LGHQWLW\ 'HVSLWH OLWWOH HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW WKH WKHRUHWLFDO OLWHUDWXUH VXJJHVWV WKDW H[SRVXUH WR PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ VKRXOG EH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK LQFUHDVHG OHYHOV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WKHUDS\ FRPSHWHQF\ DQG :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW 'f$QGUHD 'DQLHOV t +HFN 3RSH'DYLV t 2WWDYL f ,Q WKH RQO\ VWXG\ XQFRYHUHG WKDW DVVHVVHG PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ DQG OHYHOV RI FRPSHWHQFH 1HYLOOH HW DO f IRXQG WKDW FRPSOHWLRQ RI D PXOWLFXOWXUDO GLYHUVLW\ FRXUVH ZDV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK LQFUHDVHG VHOIUHSRUWHG PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQF\ DQG ZLWK :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DQ LQFUHDVH WKDW UHPDLQHG VWDEOH RYHU D RQH \HDU SHULRG

PAGE 13

7KH PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH KRZHYHU KDV RQO\ RFFDVLRQDOO\ DGGUHVVHG WKH UHGXFWLRQ RI :KLWHVf SUHMXGLFH DJDLQVW HWKQLFPLQRULW\ SHRSOH DQG KDV IRFXVHG LQVWHDG RQ WKH DFTXLVLWLRQ RI FXOWXUDO NQRZOHGJH 7UDLQLQJ ZRUNVKRSV RIWHQ IDLO WR DGGUHVV FOHDUO\ KRZ HQGXULQJ DWWLWXGH FKDQJH UHJDUGLQJ UDFH DQG FXOWXUH ZLOO EH DFKLHYHG 0RUHRYHU PHDVXUHV RI SDUWLFLSDQWVf UDFLDO DQG HWKQLF SUHMXGLFH DUH UDUHO\ LQFOXGHG LQ VWXGLHV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ HIILFDF\ ,Q HVWDEOLVKLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ PRGHOV FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJLVWV KDYH ODUJHO\ RYHUORRNHG WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ $PHULFDQ UDFLVP DQG SUHMXGLFH REWDLQHG E\ VRFLDO SV\FKRORJLVWV )LUVW VRFLDO SV\FKRORJLVWV KDYH ORQJ XQGHUVWRRG WKDW FRQVFLRXV GHFLVLRQV WR UHQRXQFH SUHMXGLFH GR QRW HOLPLQDWH SUHMXGLFLDO EHKDYLRUV $OOSRUW 'HYLQH *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR 5RNHDFK f DQG WKDW RYHUFRPLQJ UDFLDOO\ SUHMXGLFLDO VRFLDOL]DWLRQ FDQ WDNH D OLIHWLPH 6HFRQG VLQFHUH H[SUHVVLRQV RI IRU H[DPSOH SUR %ODFN IHHOLQJV FDQ DQG RIWHQ GR FRH[LVW ZLWK QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG %ODFNV FRPPRQO\ UHIHUUHG WR DV DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH DV :KLWH $PHULFDQVf DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG SHRSOH RI FRORU KDYH EHFRPH PRUH FRPSOH[ DQG GLIIHUHQWLDWHG .DW] :DFNHQKXW t +DVV f 7KLUG UREXVW ILQGLQJV LQGLFDWH WKDW SHRSOH ZKR UHSRUW QRQSUHMXGLFHG DWWLWXGHV LQ VXUYH\V RIWHQ PDQLIHVW FRYHUW SUHMXGLFHG DWWLWXGHV ZKHQ WHVWHG YLD

PAGE 14

PHDVXUHV RI OHVV FRQVFLRXVO\ FRQWUROODEOH UHVSRQVHV &URVE\ %URPOH\ t 6D[H 'HYLQH *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR 0F&RQDKD\ f &RQVFLRXVO\ FRQWUROODEOH YHUEDO UHSRUWV DERXW UDFLDO DQG HWKQLF DWWLWXGHV PD\ SULPDULO\ UHIOHFW :KLWHVf VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQDO VWUDWHJLHV ZKLFK FDQ EH LQIOXHQFHG E\ SUHYDLOLQJ VRFLDO QRUPV ZKLFK VDQFWLRQ RYHUWO\ UDFLVW EHKDYLRU 6HOISUHVHQWDWLRQDO VWUDWHJLHV KRZHYHU DUH PRUH WKDQ FDOFXODWHG HQGRUVHPHQWV RI SDUWLFXODU DWWLWXGHV RU EHOLHIV WR DFKLHYH WKH DSSURYDO RI RWKHUV *DHUWQHU DQG 'RYLGLR f KDYH VXJJHVWHG WKDW ZKHUHDV PRVW :KLWHV KDUERU VRPH UDFLVW IHHOLQJV DQG EHOLHIV PRVW SDUWLFXODUO\ WKRVH ZKR YLHZ WKHPVHOYHV DV SROLWLFDO OLEHUDOVf DUH DOVR LQYHVWHG LQ YLHZLQJ WKHPVHOYHV DV QRQSUHMXGLFHG DQG QRQGLVFULPLQDWRU\ 7KHVH VRFDOOHG DYHUVLYH UDFLVWV GR QRW HQGRUVH WUDGLWLRQDOO\ KRVWLOH DQG DJJUHVVLYH IRUPV RI UDFLVP WKH\ ZLOOLQJO\ DFNQRZOHGJH SDVW LQMXVWLFHV VXSSRUW DIILUPDWLYH SXEOLF SROLFLHV DQG LGHQWLI\ ZLWK SROLWLFDOO\ OLEHUDO VRFLDO DJHQGDV KRZHYHU WKH\ DOVR W\SLFDOO\ SRVVHVV QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV UHJDUGLQJ PHPEHUV RI HWKQLFPLQRULW\ JURXSV *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR S f 7KHLU SUHMXGLFLDO IHHOLQJV DUH XVXDOO\ RXWVLGH RI DZDUHQHVV ZKLFK PD\ IXQFWLRQ WR SUHVHUYH WKH SRVLWLYLW\ RI WKHLU VHOI FRQFHSWV :KHQ VLWXDWLRQV EULQJ WR FRQVFLRXVQHVV WKLV LQWHUQDO FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ WKHLU HJDOLWDULDQ YDOXHV DQG WKHLU

PAGE 15

XQGHUO\LQJ QHJDWLYH EHOLHIV DERXW SHRSOH RI FRORU DYHUVLYH UDFLVWV UHVSRQG ZLWK IHHOLQJV RI GLVFRPIRUW XQHDVLQHVV DQG JXLOW 'HYLQH *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR f %HFDXVH RI WKH DIIHFWLYH GLVFRPIRUW FDXVHG E\ WKH GLVFUHSDQF\ EHWZHHQ EHOLHIV DQG DFWXDO IHHOLQJV SHRSOH RIWHQ UHVSRQG LQ RQH RI WZR ZD\V WKH\ HLWKHU EHFRPH K\SHUYLJLODQW DJDLQVW FRPPLWWLQJ SHUFHLYHG WUDQVJUHVVLRQV LQGLFDWLYH RI UDFLDO DQWLSDWK\ RU WKH\ HQJDJH LQ DYRLGDQFH EHKDYLRUV ,Q ERWK FDVHV SHRSOH DUH PRWLYDWHG WR GLVWDQFH WKHVH QHJDWLYH XQGHUO\LQJ IHHOLQJV IURP WKHLU VHOILPDJHV LQ DQ DWWHPSW WR PDLQWDLQ D QRQSUHMXGLFHG VHQVH RI VHOI ,QVWHDG RI EHLQJ DEOH WR EH DXWKHQWLF DQG VSRQWDQHRXV DYHUVLYH UDFLVWVf YLJLODQFH OHDGV WKHP WR DPSOLI\ WKHLU SRVLWLYH EHKDYLRU WRZDUG PLQRULW\ JURXS PHPEHUV VR DV WR UHDIILUP WKHLU QRQUDFLVW FRQYLFWLRQV RU WR H[SUHVV WKH XQGHUO\LQJ QHJDWLYH SRUWLRQV RI WKHLU DWWLWXGHV EXW LQ VXEWOH UDWLRQDOL]DEOH ZD\V *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR S f )LQDOO\ VHYHUDO VWXGLHV IURP VRFLDO SV\FKRORJ\ FRQILUP WKH H[LVWHQFH RI DQWLFLSDWRU\ DWWLWXGH FKDQJHV 7KHVH DUH RSLQLRQ VKLIWV WKDW RFFXU ZKHQ SHRSOH H[SHFW WR KHDU D SHUVXDVLYH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ GHVLJQHG WR LQIOXHQFH WKHLU RSLQLRQV &LDOGLQL t 3HWW\ 5RPHUR $JQHZ t ,QVNR f 7KH SURFHVV E\ ZKLFK SHRSOH DUH LQIRUPHG RI DQ XSFRPLQJ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LV UHIHUUHG WR DV IRUHZDUQLQJ DQG KDV

PAGE 16

NH\ IHDWXUHV LQ FRPPRQ ZLWK WKH SURFHVV E\ ZKLFK VWXGHQWV W\SLFDOO\ VLJQ XS WR WDNH D PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS RU FRXUVH VXFK DV D GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH SUHVHQWDWLRQ RU FRXUVH DQG WKH LQWHQGHG RXWFRPH 6HYHUDO H[SODQDWLRQV H[LVW DV WR ZK\ DQWLFLSDWRU\ RSLQLRQ HIIHFWV RFFXU LQFOXGLQJ D GHVLUH WR SURWHFW RQHfV VHOIHVWHHP IURP GDPDJH FRQIRUPLW\ SUHVVXUHV DQG D PRWLYDWLRQ WR DSSHDU PRUH PRGHUDWH &LDOGLQL /HY\ +HUPDQ t (YHQEDFN 0F*XLUH t 0LOOPDQ :KLWH f 7KHVH DQWLFLSDWRU\ RSLQLRQ VKLIWV KRZHYHU DUH QRW QHFHVVDULO\ LQGLFDWLYH RI FRQVFLRXV DWWHPSWV DW VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQ EXW PD\ DOVR UHIOHFW LQWHUQDO DWWLWXGH FKDQJH EXW RI DQ LPSHUPDQHQW QDWXUH $QWLFLSDWRU\ RSLQLRQ VKLIWV DUH LPSRUWDQW IRU PXOWLFXOWXUDO VFKRODUVKLS EHFDXVH WKH\ VXJJHVW WKDW :KLWHVn VHOIUHSRUWHG DWWLWXGH FKDQJH IROORZLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ PD\ QRW DOZD\V EH WUXVWZRUWK\ RU VWDEOH 5HVXOWV VXJJHVW WKDW DQWLFLSDWRU\ VKLIWV DUH HLWKHU VWUDWHJLF LQ QDWXUH RU UHIOHFW RQO\ WHPSRUDU\ DWWLWXGH FKDQJH $IWHU VLWXDWLRQDO SUHVVXUHV DUH HDVHG SHRSOHfV RSLQLRQV DUH OLNHO\ WR VKLIW EDFN WR WKHLU RULJLQDO SRVLWLRQV &LDOGLQL /HY\ +HUPDQ t (YHQEDFN f 7KHVH ILQGLQJV IURP VRFLDO SV\FKRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK RQ SUHMXGLFH UDFLVP DQG DQWLFLSDWRU\ DWWLWXGH FKDQJH SURFHVVHV DUH SDUWLFXODUO\ SUREOHPDWLF IRU WKH ILHOG RI FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ EHFDXVH WKH\ VXJJHVW WKDW FRXQVHOLQJ

PAGE 17

SV\FKRORJ\fV DSSURDFK WR PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ WUDLQLQJ PD\ EH IODZHG 7KLV PXOWLFXOWXUDO DSSURDFK IDLOV WR GLIIHUHQWLDWH EHWZHHQ RYHUW VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQDO VWUDWHJLHV DQG WHPSRUDU\ DWWLWXGH VKLIWV IURP :KLWHVn HQGXULQJ UDFH UHODWHG DWWLWXGHV DQG EHOLHIV )XUWKHUPRUH FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\fV FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ PRGHOV GR QRW RSHQO\ DFNQRZOHGJH WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW :KLWHV PD\ RYHUWO\ HQGRUVH WKHLU RZQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH DQG WKH EHQHILWV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ ZKLOH KDUERULQJ FRYHUW SUHMXGLFLDO WKRXJKWV VHH *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR .DW] :DFNHQKXW 6 +DVV f ,QVWHDG E\ LQFUHDVLQJ WKH DZDUHQHVV RI WKH GLVFUHSDQF\ EHWZHHQ D SHUVRQf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

PAGE 18

WUDLQLQJ ,I FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ IDLOV WR UHFRJQL]H RU DGGUHVV WKHVH SRWHQWLDO RFFXUUHQFHV DQG UHDFWLRQV WKHQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ PD\ QRW SURGXFH IXQGDPHQWDO LPSURYHPHQWV LQ DWWLWXGHV DQG EHOLHIV WRZDUG SHRSOH RI FRORU ,QVWHDG PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ PD\ EH WHDFKLQJ :KLWHV KRZ WR EHFRPH PRUH VNLOOHG DW RYHUW SURPXOWLFXOWXUDO VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQDO VWUDWHJLHV ZKLOH H[HUWLQJ OLWWOH LQIOXHQFH RQ :KLWHVn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

PAGE 19

VXIILFLHQWO\ DGGUHVVHG WKH LGHD WKDW WKH :KLWH VWXGHQWV PRVW OLNHO\ WR YROXQWHHU WR DWWHQG PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRSV RU FODVVHV PD\ EH WKRVH ZKR OHDVW QHHG VXFK WUDLQLQJ ,Q WKLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ DUJXH WKDW :KLWH VWXGHQWV HQJDJH LQ DQWLFLSDWRU\ RSLQLRQ VKLIWV LQ WKH LQWHUHVW RI VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQ ZKHQ WKH\ H[SHFW WR UHFHLYH VRPH W\SH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO HGXFDWLRQ ,Q DGGLWLRQ EHOLHYH WKDW VWXGHQWV DW PDQ\ OHYHOV RI +HOPfV :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW PD\ KDUERU VLPLODU DPRXQWV RI SUHMXGLFH ZKHQ WHVWHG E\ PRUH FRYHUW PHDVXUHV DOVR H[DPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ UDFHUHODWHG DPELYDOHQFH XQGHUO\LQJ SUHMXGLFH DQG JXLOW )LQDOO\ DVVHVV ZKHWKHU WKRVH VWXGHQWV ZKR YROXQWDULO\ DWWHQG PXOWLFXOWXUDO SUHVHQWDWLRQV PD\ EH WKH VWXGHQWV ZKR OHDVW QHHG VXFK LQIRUPDWLRQ 8OWLPDWHO\ DP LQWHUHVWHG LQ :KLWHVf XQGHUO\LQJ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG SHRSOH RI FRORU JHQHUDOO\ +RZHYHU JLYHQ WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI WKH SUHMXGLFH DQG UDFLVP OLWHUDWXUH DQG YLUWXDOO\ DOO RI WKH DYDLODEOH PHDVXUHV DGGUHVV RQO\ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG %ODFNV WKLV VWXG\ UHPDLQV VLPLODUO\ FRQILQHG +\SRWKHVHV +\SRWKHVLV )RUHZDUQLQJ :KLWH VWXGHQWV RI UDFLDOO\ UHOHYDQW PHVVDJH FRQWHQW VKRXOG OHDG WR DQWLFLSDWRU\ UDFH EDVHG DWWLWXGH VKLIWV LQ WKH OHVVSUHMXGLFHG GLUHFWLRQ

PAGE 20

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f DQG IRU WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ DV LW LV FXUUHQWO\ SUDFWLFHG LQ FRXQVHOLQJ

PAGE 21

SV\FKRORJ\ 7KH XOWLPDWH JRDO RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP LV QRW XQGHU GLVSXWH LQ WKLV VWXG\ ,QFUHDVLQJ WKH TXDOLW\ RI VHUYLFHV RIIHUHG WR HWKQLFPLQRULW\ FOLHQWV DQG GHFUHDVLQJ UDFLDO PDMRULW\ PHPEHUVf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

PAGE 22

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

PAGE 23

VWDWXV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ RU WR WKH PRYHPHQW RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP LQ SV\FKRORJ\ ZHUH UHWDLQHG IRU UHYLHZ 7KH UHOHYDQW WHUPV ZHUH XVHG LQ YDULRXV FRPELQDWLRQV DQG DORQH XQWLO WKH VHDUFKHV EHJDQ SURGXFLQJ RYHUODSSLQJ FLWDWLRQV ,Q DGGLWLRQ D VFDQ WKURXJK WKH UHIHUHQFH OLVWV RI UHOHYDQW DUWLFOHV SURGXFHG DGGLWLRQDO VRXUFHV 7KXV D UHDVRQDEO\ FRPSOHWH DQG FRPSUHKHQVLYH OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZ ZDV DVVXUHG )RU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ SUHMXGLFH LV GHILQHG DV QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV RU VHQWLPHQWV WRZDUGV DQRWKHU SHUVRQ EDVHG RQ VWHUHRW\SLF DWWLWXGHV KHOG DERXW WKDW SHUVRQnV SDUWLFXODU HWKQLFUDFLDO JURXS -RQHV f &RYHUW SUHMXGLFH LV VLPSO\ SUHMXGLFH WKDW LV RQO\ DFNQRZOHGJHG WKURXJK WKH XVH RI OHVV FRQVFLRXVO\ FRQWUROODEOH PHDVXUHV &URVE\ %URPOH\ t 6D[H 'HYLQH *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR 0F&RQDKD\ f $WWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH UHIHUV WR WKH FRH[LVWHQFH LQ :KLWHV RI ERWK SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV WRZDUG %ODFNV .DW] :DFNHQKXW t +DVV f *XLOW LV GHILQHG DV WKH IHHOLQJ WKDW DULVHV ZKHQ D YLRODWLRQ RI RQHnV LQWHUQDOL]HG PRUDO VWDQGDUGV RFFXUV RU LV DQWLFLSDWHG 'UDNH 0RVKHU f :KLWH JXLOW UHIHUV WR WKH JXLOW WKDW PD\ DULVH LQ :KLWHV LQ UHVSRQVH WR YLRODWLRQV RI WKHLU UDFHUHODWHG LQWHUQDOL]HG PRUDO VWDQGDUGV

PAGE 24

'HVSLWH VRPH \HDUV RI D PXOWLFXOWXUDO SUHVHQFH LQ SV\FKRORJ\ PXFK ZRUN UHPDLQV WR EH GRQH (WKQLFPLQRULW\ SV\FKRORJLVWV VWLOO RQO\ PDNH XS b RI $3$nV WRWDO URVWHU HWKQLFPLQRULW\ FOLHQWV FRQWLQXH WR XQGHUXWLOL]H PHQWDO KHDOWK VHUYLFHV DQG WKH FDOO WR LQFUHDVH PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFLHV UHPDLQV VRPHZKDW XQKHHGHG E\ WKH PDMRULW\ RI GRFWRUDO WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV 'n$QGUHD t 'DQLHOV 'DV f 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DSSHDUV WR KDYH VWDOOHG RQ WKH EULQN RI DFKLHYLQJ D ODVWLQJ OHJLWLPDF\ LQ SV\FKRORJ\ DQG UHFHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO GLDORJXHV KDYH EHHQ IUDXJKW ZLWK GLVVHQVLRQ DQG WHQVLRQ (FNVWURP )RZHUV t 5LFKDUGVRQ 0LR t ,ZDPDVD f +LVWRU\ ,W LV FRPPRQ WR GDWH WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO PRYHPHQW WR WKH PLG V DQG V LQ WKH LPPHGLDWH DIWHUPDWK RI WKH FLYLO ULJKWnV PRYHPHQW &DVDV -DFNVRQ :HKUO\ f ,Q IDFW WKH ILUVW VWLUULQJV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP LQ SV\FKRORJ\ GDWH EDFN HYHQ IXUWKHU :HKUO\ f $EUDKDP 0DVORZ LQ GHYRWHG PXFK VSDFH LQ KLV FODVVLF WH[W 0RWLYDWLRQ DQG 3HUVRQDOLW\ WR WKH UROH RI FXOWXUH LQ PDLQWDLQLQJ SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG LQ WKH VDPH \HDU *RUGRQ $OOSRUW f SXEOLVKHG KLV VHPLQDO ZRUN 7KH 1DWXUH RI 3UHMXGLFH 6RRQ DIWHU *HRUJH .HOO\ f HQFRXUDJHG FOLQLFLDQV WR DVVHVV FXOWXUDO YDULDWLRQV LQ FOLHQWV ZKLOH DOVR DGPRQLVKLQJ FOLQLFLDQV QRW WR IDOO LQWR WKH WUDS RI

PAGE 25

YLHZLQJ FOLHQWV WKURXJK D FXOWXUDOO\VWHUHRW\SHG OHQV 2WKHU SV\FKRORJLVWV LQFOXGLQJ 7KHRGRUD $EHO f DQG *LOEHUW :UHQQ f XUJHG FRXQVHORUV WR DYRLG EHLQJ FXOWXUDOO\HQFDSVXODWHG ZKHQ ZRUNLQJ ZLWK FOLHQWV IURP GLIIHUHQW FXOWXUHV 'HVSLWH WKH EHJLQQLQJV RI FXOWXUDO DZDUHQHVV PXFK RI WKH HWKQLFPLQRULW\ UHVHDUFK FRQGXFWHG XVXDOO\ RQ %ODFNV GXULQJ WKLV WLPH SHULRG IRFXVHG RQ WKH GHILFLW PRGHO 8VLQJ WKLV PRGHO VFLHQWLVWV VWXGLHG JURXSV RI %ODFNV DQG :KLWHV DQG IRFXVHG RQ KRZ WKHVH JURXSV GLIIHUHG )RU H[DPSOH UHVHDUFK IRFXVHG RQ WKH VWXG\ RI LQWHOOHFWXDO DQG SHUVRQDOLW\ GLIIHUHQFHV 'DYLGVRQ *LEE\ 0F1HLO 6HJDO t 6LOYHUPDQ 6SHUUD]]R t :LONLQV f 3V\FKRORJ\nV PRVW LQIOXHQWLDO FRQWULEXWLRQ WR UDFH UHODWHG SXEOLF SROLF\ IHOO XQGHU WKH UXEULF RI WKH GHILFLW PRGHO .HQQHWK &ODUNnV 'ROO 6WXGLHV f ZKLFK HYHQWXDOO\ IRUPHG WKH EDVLV ERWK IRU 7KXUJRRG 0DUVKDOOnV FDVH DUJXPHQWV LQ IDYRU RI VFKRRO GHVHJUHJDWLRQ DQG IRU WKH 6XSUHPH &RXUWnV HQVXLQJ GHFLVLRQ LQ %URZQ Y %RDUG RI (GXFDWLRQ RI 7RSHND .DQVDV f ZHUH XVHG H[WHQVLYHO\ WR GRFXPHQW WKH GHWULPHQWDO HIIHFWV RI PDQGDWRU\ VHJUHJDWLRQ RQ %ODFN FKLOGUHQ &RRN f $OWKRXJK &ODUNnV VWXGLHV ZHUH IUDXJKW ZLWK PHWKRGRORJLFDO DQG LQWHUSUHWDWLRQDO SUREOHPV )DUUHOO t 2OVRQ 6HPDM 6SHQFHU f KLV ZRUN ZDV SDUW RI WKH LQLWLDO VWLUULQJV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO

PAGE 26

SV\FKRORJ\ DQG GHVHUYHV UHFRJQLWLRQ LQ DQ\ KLVWRU\ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO SV\FKRORJ\ 0RUHRYHU QR RWKHU SV\FKRORJLFDO VWXG\ WR GDWH KDV LQIOXHQFHG QDWLRQDO SXEOLF SROLF\ WR VXFK DQ H[WHQW &ODUNnV ZRUN LV DOVR LPSRUWDQW LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO KLVWRU\ EHFDXVH KLV ZRUN UHPLQGV SV\FKRORJLVWV WKDW GHILFLW UHVHDUFK RI HWKQLFPLQRULWLHV ZDV QRW RQO\ WKH GRPDLQ RI :KLWH UHVHDUFKHUV EXW RI $IULFDQ$PHULFDQ UHVHDUFKHUV DV ZHOO LQIOXHQFHG E\ WKH SUHYDLOLQJ LQWHOOHFWXDO IRUFHV RI WKHLU WLPH D SRLQW WKDW LV VRPHWLPHV RYHUORRNHG E\ FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO UKHWRULF 7KH DGYHQW RI WKH nV DQG n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f ,Q VKRUW VXFFHVVLRQ VHYHUDO HDUO\ SLRQHHUV LQFOXGLQJ 9RQWUHVV f DQG $WWQHDYH f FKDOOHQJHG WKH HWKQRFHQWULVP RI SV\FKRORJ\ DQG RI FRXQVHOLQJ LQ SDUWLFXODU VHH :HKUO\ IRU D GHWDLOHG GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKHVH HDUO\ ZRUNVf ,QVWHDG RI YLHZLQJ HWKQLFPLQRULW\ JURXSV DV FXOWXUDOO\ GHSULYHG D

PAGE 27

PXOWLFXOWXUDO RU SOXUDOLVWLF PRGHO HPHUJHG ZKLFK GLG QRW YLHZ GLIIHUHQFH DV HYLGHQFH RI SDWKRORJ\ RU LQIHULRULW\ 6XH $UUHGRQGR t 0F'DYLV f %\ WKH nV WKH VWDJH ZDV VHW IRU PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFK WR IORXULVK *XWKULH 3HGHUVHQ /RQQHU t 'UDJXQV 6XH t 6XH f 3V\FKRORJLVWV DW WKH RUJDQL]DWLRQDO OHYHO IROORZHG DW WKH 9DLO &RQIHUHQFH DQG VXJJHVWHG WKDW LW ZDV XQHWKLFDO WR WUHDW FXOWXUDOO\ GLIIHUHQW FOLHQWV ZLWKRXW DGHTXDWH WUDLQLQJ .RUPDQ f ,Q DGGLWLRQ 6XH DQG 6XH f HQFRXUDJHG SV\FKRORJLVWV WR WKLQN PXOWLFXOWXUDOO\ LQ PRUH WKDQ %ODFN RU :KLWH WHUPV VR WKDW E\ WKH HQG RI WKH nV PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP FRXOG EH FOHDUO\ GHILQHG DV D EXUJHRQLQJ GLVWLQFW PRYHPHQW ZLWKLQ SV\FKRORJ\ 7RGD\ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP LV VRPHWLPHV UHIHUUHG WR DV WKH IRXUWK IRUFH LQ SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ 3HGHUVHQ 3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV f EXLOGLQJ XSRQ WKH WKUHH SUHYLRXV WKHRUHWLFDO PRYHPHQWV RI SV\FKRG\QDPLVP EHKDYLRULVP DQG KXPDQLVP $OWKRXJK LW LV VWLOO DUJXDEOH ZKHWKHU PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP KDV PHW DOO WKH HSLVWHPRORJLFDO UHTXLUHPHQWV WR ZDUUDQW IRXUWKIRUFH VWDWXV (VVDQGRK f WKHUH LV OLWWOH GRXEW WKDW IRU D PDMRULW\ RI FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJLVWV D PXOWLFXOWXUDO SHUVSHFWLYH KDV FKDQJHG WKH ZD\ ZH ORRN DW FRXQVHOLQJ DFURVV ILHOGV DQG WKHRULHV 3HGHUVHQ S f

PAGE 28

:LWK WKLV JURZLQJ UHFRJQLWLRQ WKDW FXOWXUH KHOSV WR H[SODLQ KXPDQ EHKDYLRU KDV FRPH WKH QHHG WR JLYH FRXQVHORUV D JUHDWHU YDULHW\ RI FRXQVHOLQJ WRROV DQG WHFKQLTXHV WR XVH ZLWK FOLHQWV IURP GLIIHUHQW FXOWXUHV DQG WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO PRYHPHQWnV IRFXV KDV VKLIWHG IURP GHPDQGLQJ WKDW SV\FKRORJLVWV WKLQN FULWLFDOO\ DERXW UDFLDO DQG HWKQLF LVVXHV WR H[SORULQJ WKH PDNHXS RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFLHV +LOOV t 6WUR]LHU 6XH $UUHGRQGR t 0F'DYLV f $W WKH QDWLRQDO OHYHO SURIHVVLRQDO JURXSV LQFOXGLQJ WKH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ $3$f DQG WKH $PHULFDQ 3HUVRQQHO DQG *XLGDQFH $VVRFLDWLRQ $3*$f KDYH FDOOHG RQ DFDGHPLF SURJUDPV WR SURYLGH WKHLU VWXGHQWV ZLWK PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ VNLOOV $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ &DVDV &DUWHU t 4XUHVKL f 0DQ\ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ DQG FRXQVHORU HGXFDWLRQ SURJUDPV KDYH EHJXQ RIIHULQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXUVHV LQ WKHLU FXUULFXOD WR DGGUHVV WKHVH FRQFHUQV +HDWK 1HLPH\HU V 3HGHUVHQ 3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV f 7KLV IRFXV RQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ DQG FRPSHWHQF\ KDV RFFXSLHG PXFK RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO VFKRODUVKLSnV SULRULW\ LQ WKH nV &XUUHQW $SSURDFKHV WR 0XOWLFXOWXUDO 7UDLQLQJ 7RGD\ PRVW SURIHVVLRQDO SURJUDPV LQ SV\FKRORJ\ RIIHU VRPH W\SH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ IRU WKHLU VWXGHQWV +LOOV t 6WUR]LHU f 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ WKH ILHOG VWLOO ODFNV FRQVHQVXV FRQFHUQLQJ WUDLQLQJ PRGHOV &DUH\ 5HLQDW t

PAGE 29

)RQWHV 3HGHUVHQ f DQG WKH SOHWKRUD RI FXUUHQW FRXUVHV RIIHUHG DFURVV WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV GLIIHU ZLGHO\ LQ ERWK SURFHVV DQG FRQWHQW 'n$QGUHD 'DQLHOV t +HFN f 7KLV ODFN RI FRQVHQVXV UHIOHFWV ERWK RXU FXUUHQW XQGHUVWDQGLQJ DV WR ZKDW FRQVWLWXWHV HIIHFWLYH PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ WUDLQLQJ DV ZHOO DV WKH LQGLYLGXDO FRXQVHORU HGXFDWRUnV SUHIHUHQFH UHJDUGLQJ WKH W\SH RI FRQWHQW WR EH FRYHUHG E\ VXFK D FRXUVH 'n$QGUHD 'DQLHOV t +HFN S f 0RVW PXOWLFXOWXUDO H[SHUWV IDOO LQWR RQH RI WZR FDPSV 7KH\ HLWKHU IDYRU D EURDG XQLYHUVDO GHILQLWLRQ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP VRPHWLPHV UHIHUUHG WR DV DQ HWLF SHUVSHFWLYH RU SUHIHU D PRUH FXOWXUHVSHFLILF RU HPLF SHUVSHFWLYH (VVDQGRK 3DWWHUVRQ 6XH t 6XH f 7KH WHUPV HPLF DQG HWLF RULJLQDWH IURP OLQJXLVWLF UXOHV RI SKRQHPLF DQG SKRQHWLF DQDO\VLV ZKLFK VHSDUDWH WKH VSHFLILF DQG JHQHUDO DVSHFWV RI ODQJXDJH 3LNH f 3URSRQHQWV RI D EURDG DSSURDFK GHILQH PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP WR LQFOXGH VRFLHWDO DQG FXOWXUDO YDULDEOHV VXFK DV UDFH HWKQLFLW\ DJH JHQGHU VRFLDO FODVV VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ QDWLRQDOLW\ DQG GLVDELOLW\ )XNX\DPD 3HGHUVHQ f &XOWXUHVSHFLILF SHUVSHFWLYHV YLHZ FXOWXUHV DV GLVWLQFW HDFK UHTXLULQJ FRXQVHORUV WR KROG VSHFLILF NQRZOHGJH VNLOOV DQG DZDUHQHVV LQ RUGHU WR EH FURVVFXOWXUDOO\ HIIHFWLYH 6XH t 6XH f

PAGE 30

7KH XQLYHUVDO RU HWLF DSSURDFK LV WKH PRVW VLPLODU WR WUDGLWLRQDO FRXQVHOLQJ WKHRULHV LQ WKDW LWV IRFXV LV RQ WKH LQGLYLGXDO &DUWHU t 4XUHVKL 6XH f DQG DOO FRXQVHOLQJ FDQ EH UHIHUUHG WR DV PXOWLFXOWXUDO LQ QDWXUH 6SHLJKW 0\HUV &R[ t +LJKOHQ f :KLOH HWLF DSSURDFKHV DFNQRZOHGJH WKH H[LVWHQFH RI FXOWXUDO DQG VRFLHWDO RSSUHVVLYH SUDFWLFHV WKH\ UHO\ RQ WKH XQLYHUVDO YDOXH RI VKDUHG KXPDQ H[SHULHQFHV )XNX\DPD f 6HYHUDO DGYDQWDJHV H[LVW LQ KDYLQJ D XQLYHUVDO SHUVSHFWLYH WRZDUG FRXQVHOLQJ )LUVW WKLV DSSURDFK DFNQRZOHGJHV WKH XQLTXHQHVV RI HDFK LQGLYLGXDO ,Q GRLQJ VR LW DYRLGV VWHUHRW\SLQJ SHRSOH E\ H[SHFWLQJ WKDW DOO LQGLYLGXDOV EHORQJLQJ WR D FXOWXUDO JURXS H[SHULHQFH UHDOLW\ LQ WKH VDPH ZD\ 6HFRQG E\ DYRLGLQJ QDUURZ FXOWXUHVSHFLILF WHFKQLTXHV DQG VNLOOV D XQLYHUVDO GHILQLWLRQ DOLJQV PRUH FORVHO\ ZLWK D WKHRUHWLFDO DSSURDFK WR FRXQVHOLQJ WKDQ D PHWKRGRORJLFDO RQH 3HGHUVHQ f 7KLUG HWLF SHUVSHFWLYHV DFNQRZOHGJH WKH FRPSOH[LW\ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DQG UHFRJQL]H WKDW GLYHUVLW\ LV QRW VXEVXPHG E\ DQ\ RQH HWKQRJUDSKLF GHPRJUDSKLF RU DIILOLDWLYH YDULDEOH 6HYHUDO PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVWV GLVDJUHH ZLWK WKLV DSSURDFK /HH /RFNH 7ULDQGLV %RQWHPSR /HXQJ t +XL f )RU H[DPSOH /HH f KDV DUJXHG WKDW DQ HWLF GHILQLWLRQ UHQGHUV WKH WHUP PXOWLFXOWXUDO DOPRVW PHDQLQJOHVV EHFDXVH LW LV GHILQHG VR LQFOXVLYHO\ 7KHUH LV

PAGE 31

VRPH PHULW WR WKLV DUJXPHQW EHFDXVH FRQVWUXFWV VXFK DV UDFH JHQGHU DQG VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ PD\ EH YLHZHG DV KROGLQJ HTXLYDOHQW LQIOXHQFH RQ GDLO\ OLIH XQGHU DQ HWLF DSSURDFK 7ULDQGLV %RQWHPSR /HXQJ DQG +XL f VXJJHVWHG WKDW FXOWXUDO FRQVWUXFWV VXFK DV GLDOHFWV QRUPV UROHV DQG YDOXHV RYHUVKDGRZ YLUWXDOO\ DOO RWKHU GHPRJUDSKLF YDULDEOHV VXFK DV DJH RU JHQGHU 0RUHRYHU PRVW PHPEHUV RI PLQRULW\ JURXSV VWLOO GHILQH UDFH DV WKH FUXFLDO IDFWRU LQ WKHLU VRFLHWDO LQWHUDFWLRQV DQG DQ HWLF RU XQLYHUVDO SHUVSHFWLYH RQO\ VHUYHV WR GLOXWH WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI UDFH LQ WKH HYHU\GD\ OLYHV RI HWKQLFPLQRULWLHV /RFNH f )LQDOO\ D XQLYHUVDO DSSURDFK PD\ EH XVHG WR RYHUHPSKDVL]H VLPLODULWLHV ZKLFK FDQ VHUYH WR IXUWKHU WULYLDOL]H FXOWXUDO GLIIHUHQFH 3HGHUVHQ f 3URSRQHQWV RI WKH FXOWXUHVSHFLILF RU HPLF SHUVSHFWLYH DUJXH WKDW GLIIHUHQW FXOWXUDO JURXSV DUH EHVW VHUYHG E\ GLIIHUHQW FRXQVHOLQJ DSSURDFKHV 6XH 6 6XH f DQG DFNQRZOHGJH WKH YDOXH LQ YLHZLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ DV EHLQJ ILUVW DQG IRUHPRVW DERXW YLVLEOH UDFLDO DQG HWKQLF PLQRULWLHV RU 95(*6 +HOPV t 5LFKDUGVRQ /HH /RFNH f 7KLV DSSURDFK IRFXVHV RQ FXOWXUHVSHFLILF HGXFDWLRQ DQG UHTXLUHV WKDW DOO EHKDYLRUDO DQDO\VLV RFFXU ZLWKLQ WKH UHDOP RI LQWHUQDO JURXS FULWHULD 3HGHUVHQ f $OWKRXJK VRPH DWWHQWLRQ KDV EHHQ JLYHQ WR FXOWXUDO JURXSV UHVLGLQJ RXWVLGH WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 3HGHUVHQ

PAGE 32

'UDJXQV /RQQHU t 7ULPEOH f PRVW RI WKH IRFXV UHPDLQV RQ WKH IRXU PDMRU HWKQLFPLQRULW\ JURXSV ZLWKLQ WKH 86 $IULFDQ $PHULFDQ $VLDQ $PHULFDQ +LVSDQLF/DWLQR DQG 1DWLYH $PHULFDQ,QGLDQ 6WRQH f 7UDLQLQJ SURJUDPV DUH VWUXFWXUHG WRZDUG LQFUHDVLQJ WUDLQHHVn DZDUHQHVV VNLOOV DQG NQRZOHGJH DQG EURDGHQLQJ WKHRUHWLFDO LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG DVVHVVPHQW DSSURDFKHV ZLWK UHVSHFW WR HDFK RI WKH IRXU HWKQLFPLQRULW\ JURXSV 'f$QGUHD 'DQLHOV f $OWKRXJK RQH FDQ LQIHU WKDW FXOWXUDOO\VSHFLILF NQRZOHGJH LV VXIILFLHQW IRU D PRUH EHQHILFLDO RXWFRPH LW LV PRUH OLNHO\ WKDW FXOWXUDO LQIRUPDWLRQ LV QHFHVVDU\ EXW QRW VXIILFLHQW IRU HIIHFWLYH WUHDWPHQW 6XH t =DQH f 7KH ELJJHVW DGYDQWDJH WR WKH HPLF DSSURDFK LV LWV DWWHQWLRQ WR WKH VRFLRSROLWLFDO KLVWRULHV RI HDFK RI WKH IRXU PDMRU HWKQLFJURXSV 6XH t 6XH f DQG LWV LQFOXVLRQ RI WKH LGHD WKDW WUDLQHHV QHHG WR XQGHUVWDQG WKH YDULHG FXOWXUDO YDOXHV EHKDYLRUV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV RI GLIIHUHQW FOLHQWV 7KH HPLF SHUVSHFWLYH LV DOVR ODUJHO\ UHVSRQVLEOH IRU WKH RYHUDOO FRQVFLRXVQHVV UDLVLQJ WKDW KDV RFFXUUHG LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR FXOWXUDO KHJHPRQ\ LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 6WRQH f 7KH HPLF DSSURDFK KDV VHYHUDO GLVDGYDQWDJHV DV ZHOO )LUVW WKH RYHUHPSKDVLV RQ FXOWXUDO GLIIHUHQFHV FDQ RIWHQ OHDG WR VWHUHRW\SLQJ $UERQD f DQG GLVUHJDUGV WKH QHHG IRU FRPPRQ JURXQG DQG XQLYHUVDO KXPDQLW\ 3DWWHUVRQ

PAGE 33

3HGHUVHQ f 7KLV RYHUHPSKDVLV RQ FXOWXUDO GLYHUVLW\ LQ FRQMXQFWLRQ ZLWK FXOWXUHVSHFLILF FRXQVHOLQJ WHFKQLTXHV DOVR KDV WKH SRWHQWLDO RI OHDGLQJ WR FKDPHOHRQOLNH FRXQVHORUV ZKR FKDQJH IURP FOLHQW WR FOLHQW 3DWWHUVRQ f ZKLFK PD\ EH LQFRQVLVWHQW ZLWK 5RJHUVn QRWLRQV RI DXWKHQWLFLW\ DQG JHQXLQHQHVV LQ FRXQVHOLQJ 5RJHUV f 0RUHRYHU 3DWWHUVRQ f KDV DUJXHG WKDW DQ HPLF SHUVSHFWLYH LJQRUHV WKH UHDOLW\ RI WKH JOREDO YLOODJH SKHQRPHQRQ LQ ZKLFK FXOWXUDO SUDFWLFHV DUH LQFUHDVLQJO\ EHFRPLQJ XQLILHG DFURVV ERXQGDULHV DQG PLJUDWRU\ SDWWHUQV +H ZDUQV WKDW WKH HPLF SHUVSHFWLYHnV SUHFRQFHLYHG QRWLRQV RI FOLHQW EHKDYLRU FRXOG OHDG WR D VHOIIXOILOOLQJ SURSKHF\ LQ ZKLFK FOLHQWV EHKDYH LQ WKH ZD\ WKDW WKH FRXQVHORU H[SHFWV VLPSO\ EHFDXVH WKH FRXQVHORU H[SHFWV LW )LQDOO\ WKHUH LV D OLPLW WR WKH GHJUHH WR ZKLFK WKH IXQGDPHQWDO SV\FKRORJLFDOWKHUDSHXWLF RULHQWDWLRQ FDQ EH FRPSURPLVHG +R S f JLYHQ WKDW FRXQVHOLQJ DV FXUUHQWO\ HQYLVLRQHG LQ WKH :HVW UHOLHV RQ VXFK TXDOLWLHV DV YHUEDO IDFLOLW\ DERXW SHUVRQDO SUREOHPV IRU VXFFHVV ,W LV SRWHQWLDOO\ XQZLVH WR DEDQGRQ WKRVH DVSHFWV WKDW DUH FUXFLDO WR WKHUDSHXWLF SURJUHVV VXFK DV WKH FHQWUDOLW\ RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FRXQVHORU DQG FOLHQW *LYHQ WKH ODFN RI FRQVHQVXV UHJDUGLQJ DSSURSULDWH PXOWLFXOWXUDO HGXFDWLRQ PRVW FRXQVHOLQJ HGXFDWRUV WU\ WR RIIHU WUDLQLQJ WKDW FRPELQHV DQ HWLF DQG HPLF IRFXV WR KHOS

PAGE 34

WKHLU VWXGHQWV H[SDQG WKHLU DZDUHQHVV VNLOOV DQG NQRZOHGJH DERXW FXOWXUDOO\ GLYHUVH SRSXODWLRQV 'n$QGUHD t 'DQLHOV +ROOLV t :DQW] f 0XFK RI WKLV PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ LV SURYLGHG WKURXJK D VLQJOH FRXUVH DV RSSRVHG WR DQ LQWHJUDWLYH FXUULFXOXP DSSURDFK 'n$QGUHD 6 'DQLHOV f 7KH RQHFRXUVH DSSURDFK PD\ EH PRUH SRSXODU EHFDXVH RI EXGJHW FRQVWUDLQWV D ORZ QXPEHU RI IDFXOW\ ZKR EHOLHYH LQ WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO HGXFDWLRQ D ORZ QXPEHU RI IDFXOW\ FDSDEOH RI SURYLGLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ DQG WKH GHVLUH WR DYRLG UHYDPSLQJ FXUULFXOD 5H\QROGV 5LGOH\ 0HQGR]D t .DQLW] f &XUUHQWO\ b RI FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ SURJUDPV RIIHU D PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXUVH EXW IHZHU WKDQ b PDNH WKH FRXUVH D UHTXLUHPHQW 4XLQWDQD t %HUQDO f 'HVSLWH KRQRUDEOH LQWHQWLRQV KRZHYHU PXFK RI WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO LQIRUPDWLRQ SURYLGHG E\ SURJUDPV LV VXSHUILFLDO DQG VWHUHRW\SLF &RUH\ 'n$QGUHD t 'DQLHOV 3HGHUVHQ f )HZ JUDGXDWLQJ VWXGHQWV IHHO FRPSHWHQW WR ZRUN ZLWK FXOWXUDOO\GLYHUVH SRSXODWLRQV $OOLVRQ &UDZIRUG (FKHPHQGLD 5RELQVRQ t .QHSS f ,W DSSHDUV WKDW PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ HIIRUWV WR GDWH KDYH \HW WR DFKLHYH WKHLU GHVLUHG RXWFRPHV DQG WKDW PXFK SURJUHVV UHPDLQV WR EH PDGH EHIRUH SURJUDPV V\VWHPDWLFDOO\ SURYLGH WKHLU VWXGHQWV WKH QHFHVVDU\ WUDLQLQJ IRU PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH 'n$QGUHD t 'DQLHOV

PAGE 35

5H\QROGV f $W SUHVHQW SV\FKRORJLVWV KDYH QRW \HW DUULYHG DW D FRQVHQVXV UHJDUGLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ $OWKRXJK PRVW DJUHH WKDW SV\FKRORJLVWV QHHG WR UHFHLYH VRPH WUDLQLQJ WR ZRUN HIIHFWLYHO\ ZLWK SHRSOH IURP D YDULHW\ RI EDFNJURXQGV OLWWOH DJUHHPHQW H[LVWV DV WR KRZ EHVW WR LQVWDQWLDWH WKLV WUDLQLQJ 6XH $UUHGRQGR DQG 0F'DYLV f SXEOLVKHG ZKDW KDV DUJXDEO\ EHFRPH WKH VWDQGDUG IRU PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH KRZHYHU $3$ KDV \HW WR LQFRUSRUDWH WKHLU VXJJHVWLRQV LQWR QDWLRQDO DFFUHGLWDWLRQ UHTXLUHPHQWV &XUUHQW 6WDWH RI 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP 'HVSLWH \HDUV RI D PXOWLFXOWXUDO SUHVHQFH LQ SV\FKRORJ\ WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO PRYHPHQW VWLOO DSSHDUV WR EH VWUXJJOLQJ IRU OHJLWLPDF\ 'DV (VVDQGRK f ,Q WKH SURFHVV RI H[DPLQLQJ FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH SRWHQWLDO GUDZEDFNV KDYH VXUIDFHG WKDW PD\ LQ SDUW VKHG VRPH OLJKW RQ WKH FXUUHQW VWUXJJOH IRU OHJLWLPDF\ )LUVW WKH YROXPLQRXV QDWXUH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZULWLQJ PD\ OHDYH DOO EXW WKH PRVW FRPPLWWHG DFDGHPLF VFKRODUV FRQIXVHG DV WR WKH GLUHFWLRQ LQ ZKLFK WR SURFHHG 6HFRQG PXFK RI WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH RIWHQ FRQIXVHV WKH QHHG IRU WUDLQLQJ LPSHUDWLYHV ZLWK PXOWLFXOWXUDO SROLWLFV ZKLFK SRWHQWLDOO\ DOLHQDWHV WKRVH ZKR GLVDJUHH ZLWK WKH SROLWLFV EXW DFNQRZOHGJH WKH QHHG IRU FXOWXUDOO\UHOHYDQW VNLOOV 7KLUG PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH KDV DYRLGHG RSHQO\

PAGE 36

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f DQG PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVWV KDYH \HW WR DJUHH RQ D GLUHFWLRQ LQ ZKLFK WR SURFHHG ZLWK WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO WKHRUHWLFDO PRYHPHQW 0XOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ PD\ FRQVLVW RI XQLYHUVDO SHUVSHFWLYHV 3DWWHUVRQ f D YDULHW\ RI WHFKQLTXH VSHFLILF DSSURDFKHV 3RQWHURWWR &DVDV 6X]XNL t $OH[DQGHU f DQG D KRVW RI FRQFHSWXDO FRPSHWHQF\ PRGHOV 3RSH'DYLV t &ROHPDQ f DOO RI WKHVH PRGHOV FRQWDLQ VRPH FRPPRQDOLWLHV EXW DOVR PDQ\ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKHLU DSSURDFK ZKLFK FRQWULEXWHV WR WKH ILHOGnV LPDJH DV ODFNLQJ LQ WKHRUHWLFDO FRQVHQVXV /HDFK t &DUOWRQ 3RQWHURWWR $OH[DQGHU t *ULHJHU f 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP

PAGE 37

PD\ KDYH EHHQ UHQGHUHG DQ DOPRVW PHDQLQJOHVV FRQVWUXFW DV D UHVXOW RI LWV GLYHUVLW\ RI PHDQLQJV SDUWLFXODUO\ ZKHQ LW FDQ EH XVHG WR UHIHU WR ZKDWHYHU SDUWLFXODU GLPHQVLRQ LV RI LQWHUHVW WR VRPH DGYRFDWH +HOPV t 5LFKDUGVRQ S f :LWKRXW JHQHUDO DJUHHPHQW DV WR ZKDW FRQVWLWXWHV ERWK WKH FRUH GHILQLWLRQ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DQG WKH FRUH FRPSRQHQWV RI DGHTXDWH PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH HGXFDWRUV DUH IUHH WR SURYLGH PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ EDVHG RQ WKHLU RZQ LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV VXSSRUWHG E\ RQO\ SDUW RI WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH 7KH ODFN RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WKHRUHWLFDO DQG GHILQLWLRQDO FRQVHQVXV GLUHFWO\ DIIHFWV WKH TXDOLW\ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ UHVHDUFK DV ZHOO 5LGOH\ (VSHODJH t 5XELQVWHLQ f :LWKRXW D VRXQG WKHRUHWLFDO IRXQGDWLRQ IURP ZKLFK WR ZRUN PXFK RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFK UHPDLQV DQHFGRWDO ZLWK OLWWOH HPSLULFDO GDWD IRU VXSSRUW 3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV f 5HVHDUFK LV IXUWKHU KDPSHUHG E\ D ODFN RI DGHTXDWH DVVHVVPHQW LQVWUXPHQWV D UHOLDQFH RQ DQDORJXH GHVLJQV DQG DQ RYHUHPSKDVLV RQ LQWHUJURXS GLIIHUHQFHV DW WKH H[SHQVH RI LQWUDJURXS GLIIHUHQFHV 3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV 5LGOH\ (VSHODJH t 5XELQVWHLQ f 7KHRUHWLFDO FRQIXVLRQ DQG LQDGHTXDWH UHVHDUFK VWXGLHV NHHS PXOWLFXOWXUDO WRSLFV UHOHJDWHG WR VSHFLDOLVVXH DQG VSHFLDOVHFWLRQ VWDWXV ,Q RUGHU WR HQWHU WKH PDLQVWUHDP PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFKHUV PD\ QHHG WR UHDFK FRQVHQVXV RQ NH\ LVVXHV RI FRQWURYHUV\ LQ

PAGE 38

RUGHU WR DFKLHYH D PRUH ODVWLQJ LPSDFW RQ WKH ODUJHU GLVFLSOLQH 'LVWLQJXLVKLQJ 3ROLWLFV IURP 7UDLQLQJ ,PSHUDWLYHV $OWKRXJK WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO SROLWLFDO PRYHPHQW ZDV WKH SUHFXUVRU WR WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ PRYHPHQW WKH WZR DUH QRW V\QRQ\PRXV ,W ZDV QR FRLQFLGHQFH WKDW WKH SROLWLFDO PRYHPHQW FRKHUHQWO\ RUJDQL]HG LQ WKH HUD RI WKH FLYLO ULJKWV DQG DQWLZDU PRYHPHQWV ZKLFK ZHUH UDSLGO\ H[SRVLQJ WKH OLQNDJHV DPRQJ UDFLVP FDSLWDOLVW H[SORLWDWLRQ DQG D JHQHUDO ODFN RI VRFLDO MXVWLFH 2XWODZ S f 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DV D SROLWLFDO PRYHPHQW ZDV EDVHG DQG WR VRPH H[WHQW VWLOO LV RQ WKH SROLWLFV RI LGHQWLW\ GLIIHUHQFH DQG UHFRJQLWLRQ ZKLFK FKDOOHQJH VDFUHG QRWLRQV RI LQGLYLGXDOLVP DVVLPLODWLRQ DQG GHPRFUDWLF OLEHUDOLVP 7KHVH PXOWLFXOWXUDO SRVLWLRQV DUH YDOXDEOH LQ WKDW WKH\ VHUYH ERWK WR VHFXUH D JURXSnV ULJKWV DQG WR EURDGHQ FXOWXUDO DQG HFRQRPLF DFFHVV +RZHYHU WKHVH PXOWLFXOWXUDO SROLWLFDO SHUVSHFWLYHV DUH QRW XQLYHUVDOO\ DFFHSWHG E\ VFKRODUV ZLWKLQ SV\FKRORJ\ DQG DFURVV GLVFLSOLQHV 'n6RX]D )RZHUV t 5LFKDUGVRQ 6WHHOH f DQG FULWLFV RIWHQ SRLQW WR WKH IRUPHU
PAGE 39

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nV GLVOLNH RI WKH DLUOLQH SLORWVn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t &DUOWRQ f

PAGE 40

7KH 5ROH RI 6HOI3UHVHQWDWLRQ 7KH PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH KDV QRW GLUHFWO\ DGGUHVVHG WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW ZRUNVKRS SDUWLFLSDQWV PD\ HQJDJH LQ VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQDO VWUDWHJLHV WR DSSHDU PRUH FXOWXUDOO\ DZDUH DQG OHVV UDFLVW WKHQ WKH\ DUH
PAGE 41

PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ 6WRQH f )UHTXHQWO\ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXUVHV DUH WDXJKW E\ XQLYHUVLW\ IDFXOW\ RU RWKHUV LQ SRVLWLRQV RI SRZHU WR GLUHFWO\ DIIHFW D WUDLQHHn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

PAGE 42

GLVFRXUDJHPHQW 7KH ILUVW H[DPSOH FRPHV IURP D V\PSRVLXP KHOG DW WKH $3$ FRQYHQWLRQ WKDW VXEVHTXHQWO\ PDGH D &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW VSHFLDO LVVXH WRSLF 0LR t ,ZDPDVD f WKH VHFRQG FRPHV IURP D DUWLFOH E\ )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ LQ WKH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW 7KH $3$ FRQYHQWLRQ V\PSRVLXP H[DPLQHG WKH UROH RI :KLWH UHVHDUFKHUV LQ DGGUHVVLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO LVVXHV DQG DGGUHVVHG VHYHUDO WRSLFV LQFOXGLQJ WKH KLVWRULFDO UROH RI :KLWH UHVHDUFKHUV LQ FURVVFXOWXUDO SV\FKRORJ\ WKH ZD\V LQ ZKLFK VFLHQFH KDV UHLQIRUFHG VWHUHRW\SLF YLHZV RI PLQRULW\ LQGLYLGXDOV WKH UROH RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DQG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ :KLWH DQG HWKQLFPLQRULW\ UHVHDUFKHUV 0LR t ,ZDPDVD f ,Q SDUWLFXODU 7KRPDV 3DUKDP GLVFXVVHG WKH IHHOLQJV RI UHVHQWPHQW RQ WKH SDUW RI VRPH HWKQLFPLQRULW\ UHVHDUFKHUV DW WKH UHDOLW\ WKDW LW ZDV QRW XQWLO :KLWH UHVHDUFKHUV EHJDQ VWXG\LQJ SHRSOH RI FRORU WKDW PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFK JDLQHG DQ LQWHOOHFWXDO OHJLWLPDF\ LQ WKH GRPLQDQW FXOWXUH $V D UHVXOW KH GHVFULEHG WKH FRQWLQXHG GLVHQIUDQFKLVHPHQW LQ SV\FKRORJ\ RI PDQ\ PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFKHUV IURP HWKQLFPLQRULW\ EDFNJURXQGV DQG DVNHG WKH TXHVWLRQ :KR WUXO\ VSRNH IRU PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ" 0LR t ,ZDPDVD 3DUKDP f $OWKRXJK 3DUKDPnV IUDQNQHVV ZDV YDOXDEOH LQ KRQHVWO\ GHVFULELQJ WKH LQWHUDFWLRQDO VXEWOHWLHV RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS

PAGE 43

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f 6HFRQG GLVFRXUDJLQJ :KLWH UHVHDUFKHUV IURP SXUVXLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFK XOWLPDWHO\ GHFUHDVHV WKH QXPEHU RI VWXGLHV RQ D PXFK QHHGHG WRSLF 7KLUG WKH TXHVWLRQ DV WR ZKDW GULYHV SV\FKRORJLVWV WR VSHQG WKHLU OLYHV VWXG\LQJ D SDUWLFXODU LVVXH PD\ EH DSSOLHG WR DOPRVW DOO SV\FKRORJLVWV DQG WKHLU UHVSHFWLYH DUHDV RI LQWHUHVW DOWKRXJK VXFK D TXHVWLRQ LV VHOGRP SRVHG )LQDOO\ PDQ\ SV\FKRORJLVWV VWXG\ LVVXHV ZLWK OLWWOH RXWZDUG UHOHYDQFH WR WKHLU RZQ OLYHV \HW WKHLU

PAGE 44

PRWLYDWLRQV DUH UDUHO\ VFUXWLQL]HG )RU H[DPSOH LW VHHPV XQGRXEWHGO\ SUREDEOH WKDW WKRVH SV\FKRORJLVWV ZKR VWXG\ WKH LVVXHV RI SRYHUW\ DQG KRPHOHVVQHVV EHORQJ FRPIRUWDEO\ WR WKH PLGGOH FODVV WKHPVHOYHV 7R TXHVWLRQ WKH PRWLYHV RI :KLWH PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFKHUV RQO\ VHUYHV WR GLVFRXUDJH PRUH :KLWHV IURP SXUVXLQJ WKLV LQWHUHVW DUHD 7KHVH PXOWLFXOWXUDO SUDFWLFHV DUH LQ PDQ\ ZD\V WKH UHVXOW RI GRXEOH VWDQGDUGV DOUHDG\ LQ SODFH LQ SV\FKRORJ\ 3DUKDP f GHVFULEHG PDQ\ RI WKHVH XQIDLU SUDFWLFHV LQFOXGLQJ WKH LURQ\ WKDW PDQ\ HWKQLFPLQRULW\ UHVHDUFKHUV DUH GHQLHG WHQXUH IRU VWXG\LQJ FRPPXQLWLHV RI FRORU ZKLOH :KLWH PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFKHUV UHFHLYH SURPRWLRQ IRU GRLQJ WKH VDPH ,Q DGGLWLRQ MRXUQDO HGLWRUV RIWHQ DSSHDU PRUH ZLOOLQJ WR SXEOLVK WKH HWKQLF UHVHDUFK RI :KLWH FROOHDJXHV \HW UHMHFW VLPLODU DUWLFOHV IURP SV\FKRORJLVWV RI FRORU 3DUKDP f 3DUKDPnV f RSHQ H[DPLQDWLRQ RI WKHVH LQHTXLWLHV DQG KRQHVW H[SORUDWLRQ RI WKH UHVHQWPHQW DPRQJ PLQRULW\ UHVHDUFKHUV WRZDUG WKHLU PDMRULW\ FROOHDJXHV ZDV DQ LPSRUWDQW VWHS LQ WKH H[DPLQDWLRQ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO VFKRODUVKLS +RZHYHU PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH IRXJKW ORQJ WR KDYH DFFHVV WR VFKRODUO\ SURGXFWLYLW\ DQG WKHLU DLP KDV QHYHU EHHQ WR FUHDWH XQIDLU SUDFWLFHV RI WKHLU RZQ 7R WXUQ DURXQG DQG TXHVWLRQ WKH ULJKWV RI RWKHUV WR HQJDJH LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFK XOWLPDWHO\ OLPLWV VFKRODUO\

PAGE 45

FRPSHWLWLRQ DQG WKH VHDUFK IRU FURVVFXOWXUDOO\ HIIHFWLYH WUHDWPHQWV $W D WLPH ZKHQ PRUH PXOWLFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFK LV VRUHO\ QHHGHG WXUQLQJ DZD\ ZLOOLQJ KDQGV ZKLFK 0LR DQG ,ZDPDVD f GLVFRXUDJHG ZRXOG QRW RQO\ EH D WUDYHVW\ EXW DOVR QDUURZ WKH GLYHUVLW\ RI VFKRODVWLF YRLFHV IURP ZKLFK PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP GHYHORSV DQG PDWXUHV 7KH VHFRQG PRUH UHFHQW H[DPSOH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO GLVVHQVLRQ DQG GLDORJXH RFFXUUHG LQ WKH SDJHV RI WKH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW 7ZR :KLWH PDOH SV\FKRORJLVWV )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ f ZURWH D OHQJWK\ DUWLFOH RQ WKH SLWIDOOV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP ODEHOHG :K\ ,V 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP *RRG" $OWKRXJK WKH\ EULHIO\ DFNQRZOHGJHG WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO YDOXH RI SURPRWLQJ DOO KXPDQ ZHOIDUH WKH\ WRRN XPEUDJH DW WKH DQWL(XURSHDQ DQWL:KLWH QDWXUH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DQG GHPDQGHG WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ FXOWXUH GHVHUYHV WKH VDPH SUHVXPSWLRQ RI PRUDO OHJLWLPDF\ DV DQ\ RWKHU JURXS S f 7KLV DUWLFOH LOOXPLQDWHV WKH FXUUHQW VWDWXV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP LQ WKUHH ZD\V )LUVW WKH DUWLFOH GHVFULEHG VHYHUDO SHUFHLYHG LQFRQVLVWHQFLHV LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVPnV PHVVDJH WKDW PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVWV KDYH \HW WR DGGUHVV 6HFRQG WKH DUWLFOH HOLFLWHG WKH UHDFWLRQV RI D YDULHW\ RI SV\FKRORJLVWV DQG VKRZHG WKH WHQVLRQV WKDW FXUUHQWO\ H[LVW LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO SV\FKRWKHUDSHXWLF WUDLQLQJ )LQDOO\ WKH DXWKRUV DQG WKRVH ZKR UHVSRQGHG LQ SULQW WR

PAGE 46

WKHLU DUWLFOH VKRZHG KRZ IDU PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP LQ SV\FKRORJ\ KDV \HW WR WUDYHO WR DFKLHYH D ODVWLQJ FRQVHQVXV )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ f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f 7KH SXEOLVKHG UHDFWLRQV WR )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ FDPH IURP WKRVH ZKR DJUHHG DQG GLVDJUHHG ZLWK WKH RULJLQDO DXWKRUV 7KH ILUVW UHDFWLRQ FDPH IURP SURSRQHQWV RI

PAGE 47

PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP LQ SV\FKRORJ\ +DOO HW DO f ZKR FKDVWLVHG )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ IRU VLPSOLI\LQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP PLQLPL]LQJ GLVFULPLQDWLRQ DQG UDFLVP DQG HQJDJLQJ LQ EODWDQW HWKQRFHQWULVP 'HVSLWH DSWO\ UHIXWLQJ VRPH RI )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQnV SRLQWV f +DOO HW DO IDLOHG WR DGGUHVV WKH XQGHUO\LQJ WHQRU RI WKH GHEDWH WKDW LV WKDW RQH VLGH KHOG VLJQLILFDQW UHVHUYDWLRQV DERXW PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP WKDW WKH RWKHU VLGH GLG QRW ,Q IDFW )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQnV f VXEVHTXHQW UHVSRQVH WR WKH FRPPHQWV RI +DOO HW DO f FRQILUPHG WKLV GLYLVLYHQHVV DQG PDGH UHIHUHQFH WR WKH RYHUZKHOPLQJO\ QHJDWLYH WRQH RI WKHLU UHDFWLRQ :H UHDG +DOO HW DOnV f VWDWHPHQW ZLWK JUHDW UHJUHW EHFDXVH WKH\ ILQG OLWWOH RI YDOXH LQ RXU DUWLFOH )RZHUV t 5LFKDUGVRQ f RU LQ PDLQVWUHDP (XUR$PHULFDQ FXOWXUH DQG GHQ\ DQ\ SURJUHVV LQ WKH ILJKW DJDLQVW UDFLVP 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ WKLV FRQILUPV RXU ZRUVW IHDUV DERXW KRZ GLIILFXOW LW ZLOO EH IRU FRPPLWWHG PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVWV WR HQJDJH LQ GLDORJXH S f ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ +DOO HW DO ZHUH WKH RQO\ VFKRODUV ZKR LQ WKHLU FRPPHQWDU\ H[WHQGHG QR JUDWLWXGH WRZDUGV )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ IRU WKHLU VFKRODUO\ FRQWULEXWLRQ 2WKHU UHDFWLRQV WR WKH )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ DUWLFOH JDYH IXUWKHU HYLGHQFH RI WKH H[LVWLQJ GLVWUXVW RQ WKH SDUW RI VRPH SV\FKRORJLVWV WRZDUGV PXOWLFXOWXUDO PHVVDJHV (NVWURP f WKDQNHG )RZHUV DQG 5LFKDUGVRQ IRU WKHLU

PAGE 48

OXFLG DQG H[WUHPHO\ EDODQFHG GLVFXVVLRQ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP (YHU\WKLQJ KDYH UHDG RQ WKLV WRSLF XQWLO QRZ KDV EHHQ WHQGHQWLRXV DQG SROHPLFDO GULYLQJ PH WR YLHZ VXFK ZULWLQJ ZLWK D MDXQGLFHG H\H Sf ,W DSSHDUV WKDW GHVSLWH VHYHUDO QRWDWLRQV RI IRXUWK IRUFH VWDWXV (VVDQGRK f VHYHUDO SV\FKRORJLVWV KDYH VHULRXV UHVHUYDWLRQV DERXW WKH GLUHFWLRQ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP KDV WDNHQ LQ SV\FKRORJ\ (FNVWURP )RZHUV t 5LFKDUGVRQ .DUS t 6XWWRQ f \HW WKH FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH KDV GRQH OLWWOH WR DGGUHVV WKHLU FRQFHUQV ,Q WKH HQG LW PD\ EH IDU HDVLHU WR GLVPLVV WKH FULWLFV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DV PLVJXLGHG RU SHUKDSV HWKQRFHQWULFf WKDQ WR HQJDJH LQ IUDQN VRPHWLPHV SDLQIXO GLDORJXH WKURXJK ZKLFK D PHDQLQJIXO DQG ODVWLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP PLJKW EH DFKLHYHG 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP KDV PDGH D YDOXDEOH FRQWULEXWLRQ WR ERWK WKH WKHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH RI SV\FKRORJ\ +DOO 3RSH'DYLV 6 &ROHPDQ 6XH t 6XH f +RZHYHU WKH ILHOGVn LQDELOLW\ WR DFNQRZOHGJH UDGLFDO FRXQWHUYDLOLQJ YLHZV LQ D FRQVWUXFWLYH PDQQHU NHHSV PXOWLFXOWXUDO VFKRODUVKLS DV D IULQJH HQGHDYRU DQG WKH VWDWXV TXR UHPDLQV XQFKDQJHG &RPPLWWHG PXOWLFXOWXUDO VFKRODUV PD\ QRW KDYH WKH OX[XU\ WKDW VD\ FRQVWUXFWLYLVW WKHRULVWV GR LQ ZULWLQJ IRU D VHOHFW JURXS RI LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR DJUHH RQ WKH SDUDPHWHUV RI WKH WKHRU\ RU GLVFXVVLRQ ,Q RUGHU IRU

PAGE 49

PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVWV WR DFFRPSOLVK WKHLU DLP DOO SV\FKRORJLVWV QHHG WR EH HTXDOO\ UHVSRQVLYH WR WKH XWLOLW\ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP 0RUHRYHU JLYHQ WKH FRQWLQXHG GLYHUVLILFDWLRQ RI WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV SRSXODWLRQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO HIIRUWV PD\ EH RQH RI WKH EHVW YHKLFOHV E\ ZKLFK WR HQVXUH WKH HFRQRPLF VXUYLYDO DQG VRFLDO UHOHYDQFH RI SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ +DOO f 6XPPDU\ 7KLV FKDSWHU SUHVHQWHG DQ RYHUYLHZ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO SHUVSHFWLYHV LQ SV\FKRORJ\ 7KH ILUVW VHFWLRQ UHYLHZHG WKH KLVWRULFDO DQWHFHGHQWV WR FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO VFKRODUVKLS LQFOXGLQJ WKH LQIOXHQFH RI HDUO\ WKLQNHUV VXFK DV $EHO f $OOSRUW f &ODUN f DQG :UHQQ f DQG RI WKH &LYLO 5LJKWV 0RYHPHQW 7KH QH[W VHFWLRQ GLVFXVVHG WKUHH WRSLFV UHODWHG WR PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ LVVXHV Df WKH PDMRU DSSURDFKHV WR PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ LQFOXGLQJ ERWK XQLYHUVDO RU HWLF SHUVSHFWLYHV DQG WKH PRUH FXOWXUH VSHFLILF RU HPLF PRGHOV Ef WKH DGYDQWDJHV DQG GLVDGYDQWDJHV RI HDFK DSSURDFK DQG Ff WKH SUDFWLFHV LQYROYHG LQ RIIHULQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ 7KH ILQDO VHFWLRQ H[SORUHG SRWHQWLDO GUDZEDFNV LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO SUDFWLFHV VXFK DV WKH XQIRFXVHG QDWXUH RI PXFK RI WKH PXOWLFXOWXUDO VFKRODUVKLS WKH LQIXVLRQ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO SROLWLFV LQWR PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ WKH ODFN RI IRFXV RQ WKH UROH RI VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQDO SURFHVVHV E\ WUDLQHHV DQG

PAGE 50

WKH ULVH RI SRVLWLRQV DQG SURFHVVHV DPRQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVWV WKDW GLVFRXUDJH FRXQWHUYDLOLQJ YLHZSRLQWV 7KLV FKDSWHU ZDV GHVLJQHG WR OD\ WKH IRXQGDWLRQ IRU WKH HPSLULFDO ZRUN LQ WKLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ ZKLFK H[SORUHV VHYHUDO SRWHQWLDO ZHDNQHVVHV LQ WKH FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ OLWHUDWXUH 7KHVH ZHDNQHVVHV H[SODLQHG LQ WKH HPSLULFDO SRUWLRQ RI WKH GLVVHUWDWLRQ LQFOXGH WKH IROORZLQJ Df IDLOXUH RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ PRGHOV WR DGGUHVV WKH H[LVWHQFH LQ WUDLQHHV RI XQGHUO\LQJ DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH DQG FRYHUW SUHMXGLFLDO WKRXJKWV Ef RYHUUHOLDQFH RQ :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DV WKH NH\ WR FURVVFXOWXUDOO\ UHOHYDQW FRXQVHOLQJ VNLOOV Ff DEVHQFH RI D OLWHUDWXUH RQ WKH UROH RI :KLWH JXLOW DQG Gf ODFN RI UHVHDUFK DGGUHVVLQJ WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW WUDLQHHV HQJDJH LQ VHOISUHVHQWDWLRQDO VWUDWHJLHV WR DSSHDU PXOWLFXOWXUDOO\ VHQVLWLYH

PAGE 51

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b RI WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHW 2I WKH UHPDLQGHU SDUWLFLSDQWV LGHQWLILHG WKHPVHOYHV DV :KLWH RU $QJOR $PHULFDQ ,Q RUGHU WR HQVXUH WKDW DOO RI WKH :KLWH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZKRVH UHVSRQVHV ZHUH WR EH DQDO\]HG KDG DGHTXDWHO\ XQGHUVWRRG WKH FRQGLWLRQV RI WKH H[SHULPHQW SDUWLFLSDQWV

PAGE 52

ZHUH DVNHG WR UHVSRQG WR D PDQLSXODWLRQ FKHFN LQFOXGHG DW WKH HQG RI WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHW $OO ZKR IDLOHG WR DQVZHU WKH PDQLSXODWLRQ FKHFN LWHP RU UHVSRQGHG ZLWK DQ LPSRVVLEOH YDOXH ZHUH GURSSHG OHDYLQJ :KLWH VWXGHQWV ZKRVH UHVSRQVHV FRPSULVHG WKH DFWXDO GDWD VHW IRU DQDO\VLV 6WXGHQWV UDQJHG LQ DJH IURP WR \HDUV ROG ZLWK D PHDQ RI \HDUV 6' f )LIW\VHYHQ SHUFHQW RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH ILUVW \HDU VWXGHQWV b ZHUH XSSHUFODVV VWXGHQWV )HPDOHV FRPSULVHG b RI WKH VDPSOH Q f ZKHUHDV PHQ FRPSULVHG b Q f 7KLUW\ILYH SHUFHQW RI SDUWLFLSDQWV LGHQWLILHG WKHPVHOYHV DV SV\FKRORJ\ PDMRUV 7KH PDMRULW\ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOV bf ZHUH IURP WKH VWDWH RI )ORULGD 0DQLSXODWLRQ RI )RUHZDUQLQJ :KHWKHU RU QRW SDUWLFLSDQWV UHFHLYHG D IRUHZDUQLQJ FRQVWLWXWHG WKH PDQLSXODWHG YDULDEOH 7KH FRQWURO JURXS UHFHLYHG DQ LQIRUPDWLRQ VKHHW DW WKH IURQW RI WKHLU SDFNHW RI PDWHULDOV VWDWLQJ WKDW D SUHVHQWHU ZRXOG EH FRPLQJ ODWHU LQ WKH ZHHN WR JLYH D OHFWXUH RQ VWUHVV DQG ZDV LQWHUHVWHG LQ VROLFLWLQJ WKHLU RSLQLRQV RQ D ZLGH YDULHW\ RI WRSLFV 7KH IRUHZDUQHG JURXS UHFHLYHG WKH LGHQWLFDO SDFNHW H[FHSW WKDW WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ VKHHW VWDWHG WKDW D SUHVHQWHU ZRXOG EH FRPLQJ ODWHU LQ WKH ZHHN WR JLYH D OHFWXUH RQ UDFLDO LVVXHV DQG ZDV LQWHUHVWHG LQ JHWWLQJ DQ LGHD RI SDUWLFLSDQWVf RSLQLRQV RQ D YDULHW\ RI WRSLFV LQFOXGLQJ DWWLWXGHV RQ UDFH

PAGE 53

VHH $SSHQGL[ % IRU FRSLHV RI WKH WZR LQIRUPDWLRQ VKHHWVf 0HDVXUHG 9DULDEOHV 3UHMXGLFLDO EHOLHIV $V D PHDVXUH RI UDFLDO SUHMXGLFH WKH 0RGHUQ 5DFLVP 6FDOH 056 0F&RQDKD\ +DUGHH t %DWWV f LV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH SUHMXGLFLDO EHOLHIV WRZDUG %ODFNV LQ D QRQUHDFWLYH IDVKLRQ 7KH 056 FRQVLVWV RI LWHPV VHYHQ RI ZKLFK DUH XVHG WR FDOFXODWH WKH UDFLVP VFRUH )RU H[DPSOH ,WHP UHDGV 2YHU WKH SDVW IHZ \HDUV EODFNV KDYH JRWWHQ PRUH HFRQRPLFDOO\ WKDQ WKH\ GHVHUYH ,WHPV DUH VFRUHG RQ D /LNHUWW\SH VFDOH IURP VWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR VWURQJO\ DJUHHf ZLWK D SRVVLEOH UDQJH RI ORZ SUHMXGLFHf WR KLJK SUHMXGLFHf 7KH 056nV &URQEDFKfV DOSKDV KDYH UDQJHG IURP WR 0F&RQDKD\ +DUGHH t %DWWV 0RQWHLWK f $OWKRXJK DQG SHUKDSV EHFDXVHf WKH VFDOH LV QRW IDFH YDOLG WKH 056 KDV VKRZQ VRXQG FRQVWUXFW YDOLGLW\ 7KH 056 LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK DQWLEODFN IHHOLQJ DV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH )HHOLQJ 7KHUPRPHWHU &DPSEHOO f DQG WKH 2OG )DVKLRQHG 5DFLVP 6FDOH 0F&RQDKD\ f DQG LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ QHJDWLYHO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK WKH VFDOH RI 6\PSDWKHWLF ,GHQWLILFDWLRQ ZLWK WKH 8QGHUGRJ 0F&RQDKD\ t +RXJK f )LQDOO\ 0F&RQDKD\fV H[SHULPHQWDO VWXG\ RI VLPXODWHG KLULQJ GHFLVLRQV f VKRZHG WKDW KLJK VFRUHUV RQ WKH 056 ZHUH OHVV ZLOOLQJ WR KLUH D %ODFN FDQGLGDWH WKDQ D :KLWH FDQGLGDWH ZLWK LGHQWLFDO FUHGHQWLDOV VXJJHVWLQJ

PAGE 54

WKDW WKH 056 LV D YDOLG PHDVXUH RI UDFLVP 'LVFULPLQDQW YDOLGLW\ LV HYLGHQFHG E\ 3ROLQ f ZKR VKRZHG WKDW EHOLHIV LQ D MXVW ZRUOG FDQQRW EH XVHG WR H[SODLQ SUHMXGLFHG UHVSRQVHV WR WKH 056 LQ WZR GLIIHUHQW VDPSOHV WKH FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH 056 DQG WKH %HOLHI LQ D -XVW :RUOG 6FDOH 5XELQ t 3HSODX f ZHUH QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH ODFN RI VLJQLILFDQW HIIHFWV LQ VHYHUDO VWXGLHV IRU UDFH RI WKH H[SHULPHQWHU VXSSRUWV WKH QRWLRQ RI WKH QRQUHDFWLYHQHVV RI WKH 056 0F&RQDKD\ f :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW 7KH :KLWH 5DFLDO ,GHQWLW\ $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH +HOPV t &DUWHU f ZDV XVHG WR DVVHVV OHYHO RI UDFLDO GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KH :5,$6 LV EDVHG RQ +HOPfV f ILYH VWDJHV RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW LQ ZKLFK :KLWHV LQFUHDVLQJO\ DEDQGRQ UDFLVP DQG GHILQH D SRVLWLYH :KLWH LGHQWLW\ 7KH VWDJHV FRQVLVW RI WKH IROORZLQJ Df &RQWDFWf§OLPLWHG XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI UDFLDO DQG FXOWXUDO LVVXHV 6DPSOH LWHPV LQFOXGH KDUGO\ WKLQN DERXW ZKDW UDFH DP DQG ILQG P\VHOI ZDWFKLQJ %ODFN SHRSOH WR VHH ZKDW WKH\ DUH OLNH Ef 'LVLQWHJUDWLRQf§DZDUHQHVV RI UDFH DV D VRFLDO FRQVWUXFW HJ 6RFLHW\ PD\ KDYH EHHQ XQMXVW WR %ODFNV EXW LW KDV DOVR EHHQ XQMXVW WR :KLWHV DQG GR QRW XQGHUVWDQG ZKDW %ODFNV ZDQW IURP :KLWHVf Ff 5HLQWHJUDWLRQf§LGHDOL]DWLRQ RI :KLWHQHVV DQG GHQLJUDWLRQ RI %ODFNQHVV HJ JHW DQJU\ ZKHQ WKLQN DERXW KRZ :KLWHV KDYH EHHQ WUHDWHG E\

PAGE 55

%ODFNVf Gf 3VHXGRLQGHSHQGHQFHf§DFNQRZOHGJPHQW RI UDFLVP DQG DELOLW\ WR UHFRJQL]H SHUVRQDO UHVSRQVLELOLW\ HJ IHHO DV FRPIRUWDEOH DURXQG %ODFNV DV GR DURXQG :KLWHVf DQG Hf $XWRQRP\f§DSSUHFLDWLRQ RI PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DQG SRVLWLYH GHILQLWLRQ RI :KLWHQHVV HJ YDOXH UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK %ODFN IULHQGV DQG DP QRW HPEDUUDVVHG WR DGPLW WKDW DP :KLWHf 7KH RYHUDOO VFDOH FRQVLVWV RI /LNHUWW\SH LWHPV UDQJLQJ IURP VWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR VWURQJO\ DJUHHf (DFK RI WKH ILYH VXEVFDOHV FRQWDLQV LWHPV +LJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWH JUHDWHU DGKHUHQFH WR D SDUWLFXODU VXEVFDOH +HOPV f LQGLFDWHV WKDW VFRUHV FDQ EH LQWHUSUHWHG ERWK E\ WKH VLQJOH KLJKHVW VXEVFDOH VFRUH VXJJHVWLYH RI WKH SDUWLFXODU VWDJH RI GHYHORSPHQW RU D SURILOH RI VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS RI HDFK VXEVFDOH WR WKH RWKHUV $OSKD FRHIILFLHQWV KDYH EHHQ IRXQG WR UDQJH IURP IRU WKH &RQWDFW VXEVFDOH 3RSH'DYLV f WR IRU WKH 3VHXGR ,QGHSHQGHQFH VXEVFDOH +HOPV f 6XEVFDOH FRUUHODWLRQV VXJJHVW WKDW WKH :5,$6 LV PHDVXULQJ GLIIHUHQW FRQVWUXFWV 3RSH'DYLV t 2WWDYL f ,Q WKH LQLWLDO FRQVWUXFWLRQ HDFK LWHP PHW D PLQLPXP LWHPWRWDO VXEVFDOH FRUUHODWLRQ RI DQG WKH LQWHUVFDOH FRUUHODWLRQV ZHUH QRW VXJJHVWLYH RI UHGXQGDQF\ +HOPV f &ULWHULRQ YDOLGLW\ ZDV HVWDEOLVKHG E\ REWDLQLQJ DGHTXDWH VFDOH FRUUHODWLRQV LQ WKH K\SRWKHVL]HG GLUHFWLRQ DFFRUGLQJ WR LGHQWLW\ WKHRU\f ZLWK

PAGE 56

RWKHU PHDVXUHV RI SHUVRQDOLW\ FRQVWUXFWV VXFK DV WKH )XQGDPHQWDO ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HODWLRQVKLS 2ULHQWDWLRQ VFDOH 0F&DLQH f $ SULQFLSDO FRPSRQHQWV IDFWRU DQDO\VLV FRQILUPHG WKDW LWHPV IURP WKH VDPH VXEVFDOHV KDG IDFWRU ORDGLQJV LQ WKH VDPH GLUHFWLRQ KRZHYHU VRPH LWHPV GLG ORDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ DFURVV PRUH WKDQ RQH IDFWRU +HOPV f 1RQH RI WKH LWHPV FRUUHODWHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ ZLWK WKH &URZQH DQG 0DUORZH 6RFLDO 'HVLUDELOLW\ VFDOH 5DFLDO DPELYDOHQFH 7KH 3UR%ODFN DQG $QWL%ODFN $WWLWXGH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 3$$4 .DW] t +DVV f LV GHVLJQHG WR DVVHVV UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH WRZDUG %ODFNV 7KH SUR%ODFN LWHPV LQGLFDWH OHYHO RI SRVLWLYH IHHOLQJV WRZDUG %ODFNV DV D GLVDGYDQWDJHG JURXS ZKLOH DQWL%ODFN LWHPV PHDVXUH WKH GHJUHH WR ZKLFK SHRSOH DUH FULWLFDO RI %ODFNV 7KH WZR VFDOHV RQH SUR%ODFN DQG RQH DQWL%ODFNf KDYH LWHPV HDFK ZLWK LWHPV XVLQJ D /LNHUWW\SH VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP VWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR VWURQJO\ DJUHHf 2QH H[DPSOH RI D SUR%ODFN LWHP VWDWHV 0DQ\ :KLWHV VKRZ D UHDO ODFN RI XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH SUREOHPV WKDW %ODFNV IDFH DQ DQWL%ODFN LWHP UHDGV %ODFNV GRQfW VHHP WR XVH RSSRUWXQLWLHV WR RZQ DQG RSHUDWH OLWWOH VKRSV DQG EXVLQHVVHV $PELYDOHQFH VFRUHV DUH FRPSXWHG IURP WKH SURGXFW RI ERWK 3UR%ODFN DQG $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV ,Q WKH LQLWLDO FRQVWUXFWLRQ RI WKH 3$$4 D SULQFLSDO FRPSRQHQWV IDFWRU DQDO\VLV FRQILUPHG WKDW WKH WZR VFDOHV

PAGE 57

FRQVWLWXWHG WZR HVVHQWLDOO\ XQUHODWHG GLPHQVLRQV DQG D ORZ QRQVLJQLILFDQW FRUUHODWLRQ U f DWWHVWHG WR WKH LQGHSHQGHQFH RI WKH WZR VFDOHV .DW] t +DVV f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t &RRN :RRGPDQVHH t &RRN f 1HLWKHU WKH 3UR%ODFN QRU WKH $QWL%ODFN VFDOH FRUUHODWHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ ZLWK WKH &URZQH DQG 0DUORZH 6RFLDO 'HVLUDELOLW\ 6FDOH 6HYHUDO DGGLWLRQDO VWXGLHV KDYH DWWHVWHG WR WKH 3$$4fV YDOLGLW\ +DVV .DW] 5L]]R %DLOH\ t (LVHQVWDGW +DVV .DW] 5L]]R %DLOH\ t 0RRUH .DW] t +DVV f 5HSRUWHG &URQEDFKfV FRHIILFLHQW DOSKDV HTXDO IRU WKH 3UR%ODFN VFDOH DQG IRU WKH $QWL%ODFN VFDOH *XLOW 2QH RI WKH PRVW ZLGHO\ XVHG PHDVXUHV WKH 0RVKHU *XLOW ,QYHQWRU\ 0*, 0RVKHU f ZDV XVHG WR PHDVXUH JXLOW 7KH 0*, PHDVXUHV WKUHH DVSHFWV RI JXLOW VH[JXLOW KRVWLOLW\JXLOW DQG JXLOW\FRQVFLHQFH )RU WKH

PAGE 58

SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ RQO\ WKH JXLOW\FRQVFLHQFH VXEVFDOH ZDV XVHG ZKLFK 0RVKHU GHILQHV DV WKH JHQHUDOL]HG H[SHFWDQF\ IRU VHOIPHGLDWHG SXQLVKPHQW IRU YLRODWLQJ LQWHUQDOL]HG VWDQGDUGV RI PRUDO EHKDYLRU RU DQWLFLSDWLQJ WKH YLRODWLRQ RI VXFK VWDQGDUGV 7KH LQYHQWRU\ KDV EHHQ GHVFULEHG IDYRUDEO\ ZLWK UHJDUG WR FRQYHUJHQW GLVFULPLQDQW DQG SUHGLFWLYH YDOLGLW\ )HKU t 6WDPSV *UHHQ t 0RVKHU .HOOH\ 0RVKHU t 9RQGHUKHLGH f &ULWHULRQ YDOLGLW\ LV HYLGHQFHG E\ WKH 0*,fV DELOLW\ WR GLVFULPLQDWH ILUVW RIIHQGHUV IURP UHFLGLYLVWV DW WKH 2KLR 3HQLWHQWLDU\ 0RVKHU t 0RVKHU f DQG GHOLQTXHQW ER\V IURP PDWFKHG FRQWUROV 5XPD f ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH 0*, KDV FRUUHODWHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ ZLWK VHYHUDO RWKHU SHUVRQDOLW\ LQYHQWRULHV LQFOXGLQJ WKH (GZDUGV 3HUVRQDOLW\ 3URILOH ,QYHQWRU\ $EUDPVRQ 0RVKHU $EUDPVRQ t :RFKRZVL f DQG ZLWK JOREDO FOLQLFDO UDWLQJV RI JXLOW )HKU t 6WDPSV f )LQDOO\ WKH 0*, KDV VKRZQ SUHGLFWLYH YDOLGLW\ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR DXWKRULWDULDQLVP PRUDO MXGJPHQW 0DFKLDYHOOLDQLVP DQG D KRVW RI VH[XDOLW\UHODWHG DWWLWXGHV LQFOXGLQJ FRQWUDFHSWLYH DWWLWXGHV 'UDNH 0RVKHU t 9RQGHUKHLGH 5XPD t 0RVKHU f 6SOLW KDOI UHOLDELOLW\ FRHIILFLHQWV KDYH DYHUDJHG DSSUR[LPDWHO\ 0RVKHU 6 9RQGHUKHLGH 0RVKHU f 7KH JXLOW\FRQVFLHQFH VXEVFDOH FRQVLVWV RI LWHPV ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ PRUH JXLOW )RU H[DPSOH ,WHP

PAGE 59

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t )LVKEHLQ VHH $SSHQGL[ & IRU D FRS\ RI WKLV TXHVWLRQQDLUHf $ SULQFLSOH FRPSRQHQWV IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH WKUHH LWHPV UHYHDOHG RQO\ D VLQJOH IDFWRU ZLWK DQ HLJHQYDOXH JUHDWHU WKDQ ,WHP WRWDO FRUUHODWLRQV UDQJHG IURP WR &URQEDFKnV DOSKD IRU WKH PHDVXUH ZDV VXJJHVWLQJ DGHTXDWH LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ UHOLDELOLW\ ,QWHQWLRQ ZDV DOVR GLFKRWRPL]HG LQWR FOHDU LQWHQW YHUVXV QRQLQWHQW &OHDU LQWHQW ZDV RSHUDWLRQDOO\ GHILQHG DV DJUHHLQJ RU VWURQJO\ DJUHHLQJ WR DWWHQG DW OHDVW RQH GLYHUVLW\PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS DW WKH XQLYHUVLW\ LQ WKH QH[W PRQWK RU \HDU

PAGE 60

'HPRJUDSKLFV‘ $ 'HPRJUDSKLF 4XHVWLRQQDLUH ZDV XVHG WR JDWKHU LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ SDUWLFLSDQWV LQFOXGLQJ DJH JHQGHU UDFH DQG \HDU LQ FROOHJH VHH $SSHQGL[ IRU D FRS\ RI WKH LWHPVf 3URFHGXUH )LUVW LQWHUHVWHG SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH VROLFLWHG IURP RQH RI WKH SV\FKRORJ\ GHSDUWPHQWVf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

PAGE 61

DQ LQIRUPDWLRQ VKHHW VWDWLQJ WKDW D SUHVHQWHU ZRXOG EH FRPLQJ ODWHU LQ WKH ZHHN WR JLYH D OHFWXUH RQ UDFLDO LVVXHV DQG ZDV LQWHUHVWHG LQ JHWWLQJ DQ LGHD RI SDUWLFLSDQWVf RSLQLRQV RQ D YDULHW\ RI WRSLFV LQFOXGLQJ WKHLU DWWLWXGHV RQ UDFH $W WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH GDWD FROOHFWLRQ SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH WROG WKDW DOO PDWHULDOV ZRXOG EH WUHDWHG DQRQ\PRXVO\ DQG FRGHG RQO\ E\ QXPEHU WR SURWHFW SDUWLFLSDQWVf LGHQWLWLHV $GGLWLRQDOO\ WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH WROG WKDW WKH\ ZHUH IUHH WR OHDYH DW DQ\ WLPH GXULQJ WKH DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ $OO SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH WKHQ DVNHG WR UHDG DQG VLJQ WKH KXPDQ VXEMHFWV FRQVHQW IRUP VHH $SSHQGL[ $f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f ([WUDFUHGLW ZDV DZDUGHG E\ REWDLQLQJ VWXGHQWVn QDPHV IURP WKH ,QIRUPHG &RQVHQW )RUPV

PAGE 62

3ODQQHG 'DWD $QDO\VHV +\SRWKHVLV 7KH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW IRUHZDUQLQJ ZRXOG OHDG WR DQWLFLSDWRU\ UDFHEDVHG DWWLWXGH VKLIWV LQFUHDVHG IHHOLQJV RI JXLOW DQG LQFUHDVHG DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH ZDV WHVWHG E\ WKUHH RQHZD\ EHWZHHQ VXEMHFWV DQDO\VHV RI YDULDQFH $129$f *URXS IRUHZDUQLQJ YV FRQWUROf VHUYHG DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f UDFLDO DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f DQG JXLOW VFRUHV 0*,f VHUYHG DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV +\SRWKHVLV 7KH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW WKHUH ZRXOG EH QR VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ OHYHO DQG SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV ZDV WHVWHG ZLWK D RQHZD\ EHWZHHQ VXEMHFWV $129$ :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ VWDJH OHYHO :5,$6f VHUYHG DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f VHUYHG DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH +\SRWKHVLV 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV VWDWHG WKDW :KLWH VWXGHQWV ZKR HQGRUVHG KLJKHU OHYHOV RI DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH UHJDUGLQJ PHPEHUV RI HWKQLFPLQRULW\ JURXSV ZRXOG VKRZ VLJQLILFDQWO\ ORZHU OHYHOV RI SUHMXGLFH $ 3HDUVRQ SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQ ZDV SHUIRUPHG ZLWK DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f DQG SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f VHUYLQJ DV WKH FRUUHODWHG YDULDEOHV +\SRWKHVLV 7KH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW D VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS ZRXOG H[LVW EHWZHHQ UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH DQG JXLOW ZDV WHVWHG ZLWK D 3HDUVRQ SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQ

PAGE 63

ZLWK JXLOW VFRUHV *XLOW ,QYHQWRU\f DQG DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH VFRUHV 3$$4f VHUYLQJ DV WKH FRUUHODWHG YDULDEOHV +\SRWKHVLV 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV VWDWHG WKDW VWXGHQWV ZKR H[SUHVVHG WKH VWURQJHVW LQWHQWLRQ WR DWWHQG PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ ZRUNVKRSV ZRXOG DOVR VFRUH WKH ORZHVW RQ PHDVXUHV RI SUHMXGLFH 7R WHVW WKLV K\SRWKHVLV D RQHZD\ EHWZHHQ VXEMHFWV $129$ ZDV XVHG ZLWK WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH EHLQJ FOHDU LQWHQWLRQ WR DWWHQG D ZRUNVKRS YHUVXV QR LQWHQWLRQ WR DWWHQG 7KH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZDV SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f

PAGE 64

&+$37(5 5(68/76 6WDWLVWLFDO $QDO\VHV 3URFHGXUHV 7KLV FKDSWHU SUHVHQWV WKH UHVXOWV RI VWDWLVWLFDO DQDO\VHV GHVLJQHG WR WHVW WKH K\SRWKHVHV XQGHU VWXG\ )LUVW GHVFULSWLYH GDWD DUH SUHVHQWHG 7KHQ WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH DQDO\VHV WR WHVW WKH K\SRWKHVHV IROORZ )LQDOO\ SRVW KRF DQDO\VHV DUH SUHVHQWHG 7KH GDWD FROOHFWHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ ZHUH DQDO\]HG XVLQJ 6$6 VRIWZDUH 6$6 ,QVWLWXWH ,QF f ,Q RUGHU WR FRPSHQVDWH IRU XQHTXDO FHOO VL]HV WKH JHQHUDO OLQHDU PRGHO SURFHGXUH DQG WKH 7\SH ,,, 6XP RI 6TXDUHV ZHUH XVHG LQ DOO DQDO\VHV RI YDULDQFH 'HVFULSWLYH 6WDWLVWLFV 3UHMXGLFH ZDV PHDVXUHG XVLQJ 0F&RQDKD\nV 0RGHUQ 5DFLVP 6FDOH 056 0F&RQDKD\ +DUGHH t %DWWV f HPSOR\LQJ D /LNHUWW\SH VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP VWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR VWURQJO\ DJUHHf 2EWDLQDEOH VFRUHV UDQJH IURP WR ZLWK WKH KLJKHU VFRUHV UHSUHVHQWLQJ PRUH SUHMXGLFH 7KH

PAGE 65

PHDQ 056 ZDV ZLWK D VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI 6WXGHQWV VFRUHV UDQJHG IURP D ORZ RI WR D KLJK RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ ZDV PHDVXUHG XVLQJ +HOPV :KLWH 5DFLDO ,GHQWLW\ $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH +HOPV t &DUWHU f 7KH ILYH VXEVFDOHV &RQWDFW 'LVLQWHJUDWLRQ 5HLQWHJUDWLRQ 3VHXGRLQGHSHQGHQFH DQG $XWRQRP\f FRQVLVW RI LWHPV HDFK UDQJLQJ IURP VWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR VWURQJO\ DJUHHf +LJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWH JUHDWHU DGKHUHQFH WR D SDUWLFXODU VXEVFDOH 2QO\ WKUHH VWXGHQWV IHOO LQ WKH ILUVW VWDJH &RQWDFWf RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DQG ZHUH HOLPLQDWHG EHFDXVH RI WKH VPDOO VDPSOH VL]H 1LQH LQGLYLGXDOV IHOO LQ 6WDJHV DQG ZKLFK ZHUH FRPELQHG EHFDXVH RI FRQFHSWXDO VLPLODULWLHV 7KH PDMRULW\ RI LQGLYLGXDOV IHOO LQ 6WDJH Q RU bf RU Q RU bf 5DFLDO DPELYDOHQFH ZDV PHDVXUHG XVLQJ WKH 3UR%ODFN $QWL%ODFN $WWLWXGH 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 3$$4 .DW] t +DVV f 7KH WZR VFDOHV KDYH LWHPV HDFK ZLWK LWHPV XVLQJ D /LNHUWW\SH VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP VWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR VWURQJO\ DJUHHf 6FRUHV PD\ UDQJH IURP WR RQ HDFK VFDOH 6WXGHQWV VFRUHV RQ WKH 3UR%ODFN VFDOH UDQJHG IURP WR ZLWK D PHDQ RI 6' f $QWL%ODFN VFDOH UDQJHG IURP WR ZLWK D PHDQ RI 6' f 6FRUHV RQ WKH WZR VFDOHV ZHUH PRGHUDWHO\ DQG LQYHUVHO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK HDFK RWKHU U cR f $PELYDOHQFH VFRUHV

PAGE 66

ZKLFK ZHUH FRPSXWHG E\ PXOWLSO\LQJ 3UR DQG $QWL VFRUHV UDQJHG IURP WR RXW RI D SRVVLEOH WR f ZLWK D PHDQ RI *XLOW ZDV PHDVXUHG XVLQJ WKH *XLOW\&RQVFLHQFH 6XEVFDOH RI WKH 0RVKHU *XLOW ,QYHQWRU\ 0*, 0RVKHU f 7KH 0*, FRQVLVWV RI LWHPV HDFK XVLQJ D /LNHUWW\SH UDWLQJ VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP WR 3RVVLEOH VFRUHV PD\ UDQJH IURP WR 7KH 0*, PHDQ ZDV 6' f ZLWK D UDQJH RI WR ,QWHQW WR DWWHQG D PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS ZDV PHDVXUHG E\ VXPPLQJ D WKUHHLWHP TXHVWLRQQDLUH XVLQJ D /LNHUWW\SH VFDOH IURP VWURQJO\ GLVDJUHHf WR VWURQJO\ DJUHHf 6FRUHV FRXOG UDQJH IURP WR 6WXGHQWVn UHVSRQVHV UDQJHG IURP WR 0 6' f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

PAGE 67

EHWZHHQVXEMHFWV $129$V ,Q RUGHU WR HQVXUH WKDW RQO\ WKRVH VWXGHQWV ZKR IXOO\ XQGHUVWRRG WKH PDQLSXODWLRQ ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKLV DQDO\VLV VWXGHQWVnV LQLWLDO IRUHZDUQLQJ JURXS LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH FRGHG QXPEHU RQ WKH IURQW RI HDFK TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHW UHIHUULQJ WR IRUHZDUQLQJ RU FRQWUROf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f DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH 5HVXOWV VKRZHG WKDW SUHMXGLFH GLG QRW GLIIHU VLJQLILFDQWO\ E\ JURXS >)O f S @ 7KH VHFRQG RQHZD\ EHWZHHQVXEMHFWV $129$ XVHG IRUHZDUQLQJ DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG DPELYDOHQFH VFRUHV IURP WKH 3UR%ODFN $QWL%ODFN $WWLWXGHV 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 3$$4f DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH 1R VXSSRUW ZDV IRXQG WR VXJJHVW WKDW DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH GLIIHUHG E\ IRUHZDUQLQJ JURXS >)O f S @ 7KH WKLUG RQHZD\ EHWZHHQVXEMHFWV $129$ XVHG IRUHZDUQLQJ DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG JXLOW\

PAGE 68

FRQVFLHQFH VFRUHV IURP WKH 0RVKHU *XLOW ,QYHQWRU\ 0*,f DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH $JDLQ UHVXOWV VKRZHG WKDW JXLOW GLG QRW GLIIHU VLJQLILFDQWO\ E\ JURXS >)O f S @ $ FRPSDULVRQ RI WKH PHDQV IRU SUHMXGLFH 056f DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f DQG JXLOW 0*,f IRU IRUHZDUQLQJ YHUVXV FRQWURO FDQ EH IRXQG LQ 7DEOH 7DEOH 3UHMXGLFH 056f $PELYDOHQFH 3$$4f DQG *XLOW 0*,f 0HDQV E\ )RUHZDUQLQJ *URXS &RQWURO )RUHZDUQLQJ Q Q 056 0 6' 3$$4 0 6' 0*, 0 6' 7KH VHFRQG K\SRWKHVLV SRVLWHG WKDW VWXGHQWV DW DOO OHYHOV RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ ZRXOG VKRZ VLPLODU OHYHOV RI SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f 7KLV K\SRWKHVLV ZDV WHVWHG E\ D RQHZD\ EHWZHHQVXEMHFWV $129$ ZLWK :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ VWDJH OHYHO :5,$6f DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH 7KH RULJLQDO SODQQHG DQDO\VLV ZDV PRGLILHG VOLJKWO\ EHFDXVH RQO\ WKUHH VWXGHQWV IHOO LQ WKH ILUVW RU &RQWDFWf VWDJH RI :5,$6 WKHUHIRUH 6WDJH ZDV HOLPLQDWHG IRU WKH SXUSRVHV RI

PAGE 69

WKLV DQDO\VLV 6WDJH 'LVLQWHJUDWLRQf DQG 6WDJH 5HLQWHJUDWLRQf ZHUH FRPELQHG EHFDXVH RI WKHLU VPDOO VDPSOH VL]HV DQG FRQFHSWXDO DQG QXPHULFDO VLPLODULWLHV :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ OHYHO QRZ FRQVLVWHG RI WKUHH VWDJHV IRU WKH SXUSRVH RI WKLV DQDO\VLV 5HVXOWV GLG QRW VXSSRUW WKH QXOO K\SRWKHVLV WKDW QR GLIIHUHQFHV ZRXOG H[LVW LQ SUHMXGLFH E\ LGHQWLW\ VWDJHV >) f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f 7DEOH 0HDQ 3UHMXGLFH 6FRUHV E\ /HYHO RI :KLWH 5DFLDO ,GHQWLW\ :5,f :5, 6WDJH Q 0HDQ 056 6' 7KH WKLUG K\SRWKHVLV VWDWHG WKDW :KLWH VWXGHQWV ZKR HQGRUVHG KLJKHU OHYHOV RI DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH UHJDUGLQJ UDFH ZRXOG VKRZ ORZHU OHYHOV RI SUHMXGLFH $ 3HDUVRQ

PAGE 70

SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQ ZDV SHUIRUPHG ZLWK DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f DQG SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f VHUYLQJ DV WKH FRUUHODWHG YDULDEOHV 7KH FRUUHODWLRQ IDLOHG WR UHDFK VWDWLVWLFDO VLJQLILFDQFH U S f VXJJHVWLQJ WKDW QR UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ DPELYDOHQFH DQG SUHMXGLFH +RZHYHU :KLWH VWXGHQWVnV SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV GLG FRUUHODWH VLJQLILFDQWO\ ZLWK WKHLU VFRUHV IURP WKH $QWL%ODFN VFDOH IURP WKH 3$$4 U S f DQG FRUUHODWHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ LQ D QHJDWLYH GLUHFWLRQ ZLWK WKHLU 3UR%ODFN VFRUHV IURP WKH 3$$4 U S f 7KHVH UHVXOWV VXJJHVW WKDW LQGHSHQGHQWO\ 3UR%ODFN DQG $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV GR FRUUHODWH ZLWK SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV EXW WKDW ZKHQ 3UR%ODFN DQG $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV DUH PXOWLSOLHG WR LQGLFDWH DPELYDOHQFHf WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ DPELYDOHQFH DQG SUHMXGLFH UHPDLQV XQFOHDU 7KH IRXUWK K\SRWKHVLV SUHGLFWHG WKDW D VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS ZRXOG H[LVW EHWZHHQ UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f DQG JXLOW 0*,f 7R WHVW WKLV K\SRWKHVLV D 3HDUVRQ SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQ ZDV XVHG ZLWK JXLOW VFRUHV DQG DWWLWXGLQDO DPELYDOHQFH VFRUHV VHUYLQJ DV WKH FRUUHODWHG YDULDEOHV 7KLV FRUUHODWLRQ DOVR IDLOHG WR UHDFK VLJQLILFDQFH U S f LQGLFDWLQJ QR UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH DQG JXLOW 7KH ILIWK DQG ILQDO K\SRWKHVLV VWDWHG WKDW VWXGHQWV ZKR H[SUHVVHG WKH VWURQJHVW LQWHQWLRQ WR DWWHQG PXOWLFXOWXUDO

PAGE 71

WUDLQLQJ ZRUNVKRSV ZRXOG VFRUH WKH ORZHVW RQ PHDVXUHV RI SUHMXGLFH $ RQHZD\ EHWZHHQVXEMHFWV $129$ ZDV XVHG ZLWK WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH EHLQJ FOHDU LQWHQWLRQ WR DWWHQG D ZRUNVKRS YHUVXV QR LQWHQWLRQ WR DWWHQG 7KH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZDV SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV 056f 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH $129$ ZKHQ LQWHQWLRQ ZDV JURXSHG LQ WZR FDWHJRULHV FOHDU H[SUHVVHG LQWHQW YV QR LQWHQWf IDLOHG WR DWWDLQ VLJQLILFDQFH >)O f J @ ,Q ORRNLQJ DW PHDQ GDWD VWXGHQWV H[SUHVVHG XQFHUWDLQW\ DV WR WKH OLNHOLKRRG RI WKHLU DWWHQGLQJ DQ\ PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS LQ WKH QH[W \HDUV 0 6' f 7KLV XQFHUWDLQW\ PRYHG FORVHU WR GLVDJUHHPHQW ZKHQ VWXGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG WKH OLNHOLKRRG RI WKHLU DWWHQGLQJ D PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS LQ WKH QH[W PRQWK 0 6' f +RZHYHU DQ LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS GLG H[LVW EHWZHHQ LQWHQWLRQ WR DWWHQG D ZRUNVKRS DQG SUHMXGLFH ZLWK WKRVH ZKR H[SUHVVHG PRUH LQWHQW HQGRUVLQJ VLJQLILFDQWO\ OHVV SUHMXGLFH U S f $QFLOODU\ $QDO\VHV $OO K\SRWKHVHV WKDW LQYROYHG UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f ZHUH DQDO\]HG ZLWK DPELYDOHQFH VHSDUDWHG LQWR LWV WZR FRPSRQHQWV 3UR%ODFN DQG $QWL%ODFN VFDOHV WKXV +\SRWKHVHV DQG ZHUH UHDQDO\]HG 7KH ILUVW K\SRWKHVLV ZKLFK VWDWHG LQ SDUW WKDW DPELYDOHQFH ZRXOG GLIIHU E\ IRUHZDUQLQJ ZDV WHVWHG E\ WZR RQHZD\ EHWZHHQ VXEMHFWV $129$V 7KH ILUVW $129$ XVHG JURXS IRUHZDUQLQJ

PAGE 72

YV FRQWUROf DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG 3UR%ODFN VFRUHV DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH 1R VLJQLILFDQW UHVXOWV ZHUH IRXQG WR VXJJHVW WKDW 3UR%ODFN VFRUHV GLIIHUHG E\ IRUHZDUQLQJ >)O f S @ 7KH VHFRQG $129$ XVHG JURXS IRUHZDUQLQJ YV FRQWUROf DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ,Q WKLV FDVH UHVXOWV GLG GLIIHU VLJQLILFDQWO\ >)O f J @ ZLWK WKRVH ZKR UHFHLYHG IRUHZDUQLQJ DFWXDOO\ UHSRUWLQJ PRUH DQWL%ODFN VHQWLPHQW 0 6' f WKDQ WKRVH ZKR UHFHLYHG QR IRUHZDUQLQJ 0 6' f 7KH WKLUG K\SRWKHVLV ZKLFK KDG SUHGLFWHG D VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ DPELYDOHQFH DQG SUHMXGLFH ZDV WHVWHG E\ WZR 3HDUVRQ SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQV ORRNLQJ DW WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SUHMXGLFH DQG SUR%ODFN RU DQWL%ODFN IHHOLQJV ,Q WKH ILUVW FRUUHODWLRQ 3UR%ODFN DQG SUHMXGLFH 056f VFRUHV VHUYHG DV WKH FRUUHODWHG YDULDEOHV $ VLJQLILFDQW LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ 056 DQG 3UR%ODFN VFRUHV U S f ,Q WKH VHFRQG FRUUHODWLRQ $QWL%ODFN DQG SUHMXGLFH 056f VFRUHV VHUYHG DV WKH FRUUHODWHG YDULDEOHV $ VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ 056 DQG $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV U S f 7KH IRXUWK K\SRWKHVLV ZKLFK KDG SUHGLFWHG D VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ DPELYDOHQFH DQG JXLOW\ FRQVFLHQFH 0*,f ZDV UHDQDO\]HG XVLQJ WZR 3HDUVRQ SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQV WR DVVHVV WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ JXLOW

PAGE 73

DQG 3UR%ODFN RU $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV 1HLWKHU FRUUHODWLRQ DWWDLQHG VLJQLILFDQFH >0*, DQG 3UR%ODFN VFRUHV U J 0*, DQG $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV U J @ ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ D VLJQLILFDQW LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ SUHMXGLFH DV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH 056 DQG JXLOW WKH PRUH SUHMXGLFH VWXGHQWV HQGRUVHG WKH ORZHU WKHLU JXLOW\ FRQVFLHQFH VFRUHV U J f 7R VHH LI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GLIIHUHG E\ IRUHZDUQLQJ ILYH RQHZD\ EHWZHHQVXEMHFWV $129$V ZHUH UXQ ZLWK JURXS IRUHZDUQLQJ YV FRQWUROf VHUYLQJ DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH LQ DOO $129$V DQG WKH VFRUH RQ HDFK VXEVFDOH RI :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ VHUYLQJ DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH 7KH RQO\ UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ OHYHO VFRUH WKDW GLIIHUHG DV D IXQFWLRQ RI IRUHZDUQLQJ ZDV 5HLQWHJUDWLRQ ZKLFK UHIHUV WR DQ LGHDOL]DWLRQ RI :KLWHQHVV DQG D GHQLJUDWLRQ RI %ODFNQHVV >)O f J @ 7KRVH ZKR UHFHLYHG D IRUHZDUQLQJ DFWXDOO\ H[SUHVVHG KLJKHU 5HLQWHJUDWLRQ DWWLWXGHV 0 6' f WKDQ WKRVH ZKR UHFHLYHG QR IRUHZDUQLQJ 0 6' f VXJJHVWLQJ WKDW VFRUHV RQ WKH 5HLQWHJUDWLRQ VXEVFDOH PD\ EH VXVFHSWLEOH WR IRUHZDUQLQJ HIIHFWV ,Q RUGHU WR H[SORUH ZKHWKHU VWXGHQWV LQ GLIIHUHQW FODVVHV H[SUHVVHG GLIIHUHQW DPRXQWV RI SUHMXGLFH D 3HDUVRQ SURGXFW PRPHQW FRUUHODWLRQ ZDV FRQGXFWHG ZLWK \HDULQVFKRRO DQG SUHMXGLFH 056f VFRUHV VHUYLQJ DV WKH WZR YDULDEOHV $

PAGE 74

VPDOO EXW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ 056 DQG \HDU U S f )LQDOO\ WR WHVW IRU V\VWHPDWLF JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ UHVSRQVH WR WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV VHYHUDO RQHZD\ EHWZHHQVXEMHFW $129$V ZHUH UXQ ZLWK JHQGHU DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG 056 3UR%ODFN VFRUHV IURP 3$$4f $QWL%ODFN VFRUHV IURP 3$$4f UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH IXOO 3$$4f DQG JXLOW 0*,f DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV $ JHQGHU HIIHFW ZDV IRXQG RQ JXLOW >)O f J @ ZLWK ZRPHQ UHSRUWLQJ VLJQLILFDQWO\ PRUH JXLOW 0 6' f WKDQ PHQ 0 6' f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nV WKHRU\

PAGE 75

f EXW FRQWUDU\ WR +\SRWKHVLV ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ b RI WKH VDPSOH IHOO LQ WKH WZR PRVW DGYDQFHG VWDJHV RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW 7KLUG QR UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ SUHMXGLFH 056f DQG UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f RU UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH 3$$4f DQG JXLOW 0*,f WKHUHIRUH +\SRWKHVHV DQG ZHUH QRW VXSSRUWHG $ SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ SUHMXGLFH DQG DQWL%ODFN VHQWLPHQW IURP WKH 3$$4f ZKHUHDV D QHJDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ SUHMXGLFH DQG SUR %ODFN VHQWLPHQW IURP WKH 3$$4f 7KLV SDLU RI UHVXOWV VXSSRUWV WKH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 056 $OWKRXJK QRW K\SRWKHVL]HG DQ LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV DOVR IRXQG EHWZHHQ SUHMXGLFH 056f DQG JXLOW 056f )LQDOO\ DOWKRXJK WKHUH ZDV D VLJQLILFDQW LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ LQWHQW WR DWWHQG D PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS DQG H[SUHVVHG SUHMXGLFH WKHUH ZDV QR VLJQLILFDQW SUHMXGLFH OHYHO GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKRVH ZKR H[SUHVVHG FOHDU LQWHQW DQG WKRVH ZKR GLG QRW H[SUHVV FOHDU LQWHQW WR DWWHQG D PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS 7KXV +\SRWKHVLV ZDV RQO\ SDUWLDOO\ VXSSRUWHG

PAGE 76

&+$37(5 ',6&866,21 2YHUYLHZ ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU WKH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\nV K\SRWKHVHV DUH GLVFXVVHG DORQJ ZLWK SRVVLEOH H[SODQDWLRQV WR DFFRXQW IRU WKH ILQGLQJV )LUVW EULHIO\ UHYLHZ WKH SXUSRVH RI WKH VWXG\ 7KHQ GHVFULEH WKH VWXG\nV ILQGLQJV LQ OLJKW RI SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK DQG H[SORUH WKH OLPLWDWLRQV LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ )LQDOO\ RIIHU VXJJHVWLRQV IRU IXWXUH UHVHDUFK 7KLV VWXG\nV SXUSRVH ZDV WR DVVHVV WKH YLDELOLW\ RI VHYHUDO SRWHQWLDO ZHDNQHVVHV LGHQWLILHG LQ FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO OLWHUDWXUH EDVHG RQ SUHYLRXV ILQGLQJV IURP VRFLDO SV\FKRORJ\ 7KHVH ILQGLQJV IURP VRFLDO SV\FKRORJ\ FRQILUP WKDW :KLWHV KDUERU PRUH SUHMXGLFH WRZDUG %ODFNV WKDQ WKH\ ZLOOLQJO\ DGPLW &URVE\ %URPOH\ t 6D[H *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR 0F&RQDKD\ f WKDW :KLWHV DUH DPELYDOHQW DERXW WKHLU UDFLDO DWWLWXGHV .DW] :DFNHQKXW t +DVV f DQG WKDW :KLWHV RIWHQ VHOHFWLYHO\ FKDQJH WKHLU

PAGE 77

DWWLWXGHV WR DSSHDU PRUH PRGHUDWH &LDOGLQL t 3HWW\ *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR f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

PAGE 78

WKH :KLWH 5DFLDO ,GHQWLW\ 6FDOH 7KDW LV IRUHZDUQHG VWXGHQWV ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR GHQLJUDWH %ODFNV DQG RYHUn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t ,QVNR &LDOGLQL t 3HWW\ f 7KH VWXGHQWV LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ DSSHDU WR KDYH DPSOLILHG WKHLU DQWL%ODFN YLHZV LQ UHVSRQVH WR WKH H[SHFWDWLRQ RI DQ XSFRPLQJ OHFWXUH RQ UDFH 7KH LQFUHDVH LQ DQWL%ODFN VHQWLPHQW DQG LQ 5HLQWHJUDWLRQ DWWLWXGHV IROORZLQJ IRUHZDUQLQJ PD\ DOVR EH WKH UHVXOW RI VHPDQWLF SULPLQJ /HSRUH t %URZQ f 5HVHDUFK KDV VKRZQ WKDW ERWK KLJK DQG ORZ SUHMXGLFHG :KLWH VWXGHQWV H[KLELW PRUH QHJDWLYH FRJQLWLRQV WRZDUG %ODFNV DIWHU EHLQJ SULPHG WR HLWKHU WKH FDWHJRU\ RI %ODFNV RU WKH QHJDWLYH VWHUHRW\SLF DWWULEXWHV DERXW %ODFNV 'HYLQH :LWWHQEULQN -XGG DQG 3DUN f ,Q WKLV VWXG\ WKH VLPSOH DFW RI LQIRUPLQJ VWXGHQWV RI DQ XSFRPLQJ UDFLDO LVVXHV OHFWXUH PD\ KDYH DFWLYDWHG ERWK WKH FDWHJRU\ RI

PAGE 79

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nV f UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQWDO WKHRU\ LQ WKDW :KLWHV LQ WKH 'LVLQWHJUDWLRQ DQG 5HLQWHJUDWLRQ VWDJHV H[SHULHQFH DQ[LHW\ DERXW UDFLDO LVVXHV DQG PD\ GHQLJUDWH %ODFNV XVLQJ SDWHUQDOLVWLF DQG VWHUHRW\SLFDO WKLQNLQJ ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ b RI WKH VDPSOH IHOO LQWR WKH WZR KLJKHVW VWDJHV RI +HOPnV f UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW $OWKRXJK SXEOLVKHG QRUPDWLYH GDWD IURP FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DUH QRW DYDLODEOH IRU WKH :KLWH 5DFLDO ,GHQWLW\ 'HYHORSPHQW 6FDOH LW VHHPV XQOLNHO\ WKDW PRVW RI D FROOHJLDWH VDPSOH ZRXOG UHDOO\ EH VR DGYDQFHG LQ WKHLU UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW 7KLV ILQGLQJ KRZHYHU LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK

PAGE 80

SUHYLRXV VWXGLHV ZKLFK KDYH IRXQG WKDW FROOHJH VWXGHQWV WHQG WR IDOO LQWR WKH ODWWHU VWDJHV RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW ZKHQ D GLVFUHWH VWDJH PRGHO LV XWLOL]HG &DUWHU 3RSH'DYLV t 2WWDYL f 7KH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW PRVW FROOHJH LQGLYLGXDOV FRQVLVWHQWO\ DSSHDU WR IDOO LQWR RQO\ FHUWDLQ VWDJHV RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW UDLVHV TXHVWLRQV DERXW WKH YDOLGLW\ RI +HOPnV PRGHO f RU WKH PHWKRG E\ ZKLFK :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW LV PHDVXUHG 7RNDU t 6ZDQVRQ f ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKRVH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VDPSOH ZKR IHOO LQ WKH ODWWHU WZR VWDJHV RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW 3VHXGRLQGHSHQGHQFH DQG $XWRQRP\f VWLOO HQGRUVHG D GHJUHH RI SUHMXGLFH 7KLV UHVXOW VXJJHVWV WKDW DGYDQFHV DW WKH ODWWHU VWDJHV RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW PD\ QRW QHFHVVDULO\ EH DGHTXDWH LQGLFDWRUV RI WKH DEVHQFH RI SUHMXGLFH 6XFK D ILQGLQJ PD\ EH LPSRUWDQW JLYHQ WKDW :KLWH WUDLQHHVn UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW KDV IUHTXHQWO\ EHHQ FLWHG DV D NH\ WR PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH 1HYLOOH HW DO 2WWDYL 3RSH'DYLV t 'LQJV 3RQWHURWWR 6DEQDQL 3RQWHURWWR t %RURGRYVN\ f )RU H[DPSOH 1HYLOOH HW DO IRXQG WKDW WKHLU PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXUVH FRYHULQJ KRXUV RI WUDLQLQJf HQFRXUDJHG WUDLQHHV WR DGRSW D PRUH SRVLWLYH :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ DQG LQFUHDVHG VWXGHQWVn PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFLHV +RZHYHU 1HYLOOH HW DOnV FRXUVH KDG QR VLJQLILFDQW LPSDFW RQ WUDLQHHVn &RQWDFW 'LVLQWHJUDWLRQ RU

PAGE 81

5HLQWHJUDWLRQ DWWLWXGHV VXJJHVWLQJ IXUWKHU WKDW WKH DGRSWLRQ RI D SRVLWLYH :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ PD\ QRW EH OLQNHG WR WKH DEDQGRQPHQW RI UDFLVP DQG SUHMXGLFH :KLWH f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n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

PAGE 82

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n f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

PAGE 83

HQGRUVHG OHVV SUHMXGLFH LV LW EHFDXVH WKH\ LQGHHG KDUERU OHVV SUHMXGLFH LQ FRQMXQFWLRQ ZLWK D KLJKHU PRUDO VWDQGLQJ RU LV LW WKDW WKHLU JXLOW PRWLYDWHV WKHP WR DGRSW RQO\ WKH SDWLQD RI JUHDWHU PXOWLFXOWXUDO VHQVLWLYLW\" $W ILUVW JODQFH D PRWLYDWLRQ EDVHG RQ JXLOW PD\ VHHP XVHIXO LQ WKH UHGXFWLRQ RI SUHMXGLFHG UHVSRQVHV WRZDUG FOLHQWV +RZHYHU :KLWH JXLOW PD\ FRQVWLWXWH DQ HTXDOO\KDUPIXO UHDFWLRQ WR %ODFN FOLHQWV DQG DOO FOLHQWV RI FRORUf EHFDXVH WKH H[SHULHQFH RI JXLOW PD\ JHQHUDWH VHOISUHRFFXSDWLRQ DW WKH H[SHQVH RI JHQXLQH FRQFHUQ IRU DQG RSHQQHVV WR RWKHUV 1LHGHQWKDO 7DQJQH\ *DYDQVNL 6WHHOH f :LWK UHVSHFW WR JXLOW\FRQVFLHQFH ZRPHQ LQ WKLV VDPSOH UHSRUWHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ PRUH JXLOW WKDQ PHQ 2QH H[SODQDWLRQ IRU WKH GLIIHUHQFH LQ JXLOW VFRUHV PD\ EH GXH LQ SDUW WR JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO RULHQWDWLRQ DQG PRUDO GHYHORSPHQW *LOOLJDQ f +RZHYHU QR JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV H[LVWHG LQ SUHMXGLFH :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ VFRUHV RU UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH )LQDOO\ FRQWUDU\ WR +\SRWKHVLV WKRVH VWXGHQWV ZKR H[SUHVVHG FOHDU LQWHQW WR DWWHQG D ZRUNVKRS GLG QRW GLIIHU LQ WKHLU H[SUHVVHG SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV IURP WKRVH ZKR GLG QRW H[SUHVV WKDW LQWHQW &OHDU LQWHQW ZDV PHDVXUHG DV DJUHHLQJ RU VWURQJO\ DJUHHLQJ WR DWWHQG DW OHDVW RQH GLYHUVLW\PXOWLFXOWXUDO ZRUNVKRS DW WKH XQLYHUVLW\ LQ WKH QH[W PRQWK RU \HDU 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG GLFKRWRPL]LQJ LQWHQW

PAGE 84

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f 7KH FXUUHQW GDWD VXJJHVW PRVW VWXGHQWV ZRXOG IDLO WR WDNH VXFK D FRXUVH RI WKHLU RZQ YROLWLRQ $QHFGRWDO HYLGHQFH JDWKHUHG IURP FRXQVHOLQJ DQG FOLQLFDO SV\FKRORJ\ GRFWRUDO VWXGHQWV FRQILUPV WKLV SHUFHSWLRQ RI WKH ODFN RI LQWHUHVW LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ DPRQJ :KLWH LQGLYLGXDOV 7KH VWXGHQWV DQG IDFXOW\f WKDW H[SUHVV LQWHUHVW LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ DUH RIWHQ PHPEHUV RI HWKQLFPLQRULW\ JURXSV 'n$QGUHD t 'DQLHOV f

PAGE 85

,PSOLFDWLRQV RI &XUUHQW )LQGLQJV 7KH ODFN RI ILQGLQJV VXSSRUWLQJ WKLV VWXG\nV K\SRWKHVHV VXJJHVWV HLWKHU WKDW WKH RULJLQDO LGHDV DUH IODZHG RU WKDW IODZV H[LVW LQ WKH UHVHDUFK GHVLJQ )RU H[DPSOH WKLV VWXG\n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nV H[SOLFLW DQG LPSOLFLW PDQLIHVWDWLRQV RI SUHMXGLFH &URVE\ %URPOH\ t 6D[H 'RYLGLR 6 )D]LR *DHUWQHU t 'RYLGLR 0F&RQDKD\ 3HWWLJUHZ t 0HHUWHQV f $ PRUH OLNHO\ H[SODQDWLRQ LV WKDW WKH IRUHZDUQLQJ PHVVDJH LQ WKLV VWXG\ GLG QRW HYRNH WKH LQWHQGHG UHDFWLRQ 7KLV H[SODQDWLRQ LV GHVFULEHG LQ GHWDLO LQ WKH IROORZLQJ OLPLWDWLRQV VHFWLRQ 6HFRQG DOWKRXJK QR K\SRWKHVLV ZDV XSKHOG E\ WKH GDWD SRVWKRF DQDO\VHV GLG SURYLGH HYLGHQFH WR VXJJHVW VRPH

PAGE 86

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f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nV PHDVXUHV )LUVW WKH IRUHZDUQLQJ PHVVDJH PD\ KDYH EHHQ WRR ZHDN WR HYRNH VWXGHQWnV DZDUHQHVV 7KH PHVVDJH LQIRUPHG VWXGHQWV

PAGE 87

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
PAGE 88

7KH QXPEHU RI IRXUWK\HDU VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VDPSOH ZHUH WRR IHZ WR WHVW ZKHWKHU WKHLU SUHMXGLFH VFRUHV GLIIHUHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ IURP ILUVW \HDU VWXGHQWV +RZHYHU RQH PD\ DUJXH WKDW WKH XQLYHUVLW\ H[SHULHQFH GRHV RIIHU D SDUWLFXODU VRFLDOL]DWLRQ UHJDUGLQJ WKH DFFHSWDELOLW\ RI SUHMXGLFH DQG WKH RSHQQHVV ZLWK ZKLFK UDFLDO LVVXHV PD\ EH GLVFXVVHG 7KH UDFLDO FOLPDWH RQ XQLYHUVLW\ FDPSXVHV RIWHQ GLIIHU PDUNHGO\ IURP VWXGHQWVn SUHYLRXV H[SHULHQFHV DQG DV RQH PRYHV WKURXJK D XQLYHUVLW\ D SROLWLFDOO\ FRUUHFW VRFLDOL]DWLRQ RFFXUV LQIOXHQFHG E\ FDPSXV OLIH DGPLQLVWUDWLYH DFWLRQV DQG WKH DIWHUPDWK RI UDFHUHODWHG LQFLGHQWV 'n6RX]D 0DJQHU f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nV :KLWH 5DFLDO ,GHQWLW\ $WWLWXGHV 6FDOH LV TXHVWLRQDEOH JLYHQ

PAGE 89

WKDW LWV SURSHUWLHV GR QRW DSSHDU WR VXSSRUW D VWDJHPRGHO RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW %HKUHQV f 5HFHQWO\ ( +HOPV SHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ -XO\ f KDV EHHQ HQFRXUDJLQJ D PRYH DZD\ IURP XVLQJ KHU VFDOH WR PHDVXUH GLVFUHWH VWDJHV RI LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DQG LQVWHDG UHFRPPHQGLQJ WKDW UHVHDUFKHUV IRFXV RQ WKH ZD\ HDFK RI WKH ILYH VXEVFDOHV FRPSDUH WR WKH RWKHUV +RZHYHU +HOPVn PRGHO f LV GHVFULEHG DV D OLQHDU VWDJHPRGHO RI UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DQG LV WDXJKW DV VXFK LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV $GYDQFLQJ OHYHOV LV LQWHUSUHWHG DV D VLJQ RI LQFUHDVLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH 2WWDYL 3RSH'DYLV t 'LQJV 3RQWHURWWR 6DEQDQL 3RQWHURWWR t %RURGRYVN\ f ,I WKH :5,$6 LV QR ORQJHU D VWDJHEDVHG PHDVXUH WKHQ WR FRQWLQXH XVLQJ LW DV D YDOLG LQGLFDWRU RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH IROORZLQJ WUDLQLQJ DV VKRZQ E\ SURJUHVVLQJ WR PRUH DGYDQFHG VWDJHVf LV QRW MXVWLILHG 7KH 0RVKHU JXLOW\FRQVFLHQFH VFDOH XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ PHDVXUHV JXLOW JHQHUDOO\ 0RVKHU f QRW VSHFLILFDOO\ :KLWH JXLOW UHJDUGLQJ UDFLDO LVVXHV 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ XQFRYHUHG QR VXFK PHDVXUH %HIRUH WKH OLQN EHWZHHQ SUHMXGLFH DPELYDOHQFH DQG :KLWH JXLOW FDQ WUXO\ EH HVWDEOLVKHG RU GLVFRXQWHG D PHDVXUH RI :KLWH JXLOW PXVW EH FRQVWUXFWHG DQG YDOLGDWHG

PAGE 90

/DVWO\ WKLV VWXG\ GHVLJQ UHOLHG RQ VHOIUHSRUW PHDVXUHV RI VHQVLWLYH SHUVRQDO LQIRUPDWLRQ VXFK DV SUHMXGLFH 5HVHDUFK KDV DOUHDG\ GRFXPHQWHG WKDW VXUYH\ GDWD RQ SUHMXGLFH RIWHQ XQGHUHVWLPDWH WKH DPRXQW RI SUHMXGLFH SUHVHQW &URVE\ %URPOH\ DQG 6D[H 'RYLGLR t )D]LR 3HWWLJUHZ t 0HHUWHQV f 'HVSLWH DOO DWWHPSWV WR HQVXUH DQRQ\PLW\ RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV WLPH FRQVWUDLQWV OHG WR WKH QH[W FODVVnV VWXGHQWV FRPLQJ LQ DQG WR SDUWLFLSDQWV EHLQJ UXVKHG WR ILQLVK WKHLU TXHVWLRQQDLUHV ZKLFK PD\ KDYH FRPSURPLVHG WKH UHVXOWV )LQDOO\ WKH TXHVWLRQ VWLOO UHPDLQV DV WR WKH OLQN EHWZHHQ H[SOLFLW DQG LPSOLFLW OHYHOV RI SUHMXGLFH DQG DFWXDO SUHMXGLFHG EHKDYLRU WRZDUGV RWKHUV :LWWHQEULQN -XGG t 3DUN f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nV +RVWLOLW\JXLOW VFDOH LQ DGGLWLRQ WR WKH *XLOW\ FRQVFLHQFH VFDOH WR GLIIHUHQWLDWH EHWZHHQ WKHVH WZR DVSHFWV

PAGE 91

RI JXLOW &RQFHLYDEO\ :KLWH VWXGHQWV PD\ KDYH KRVWLOH JXLOW LQ UHVSRQVH WR SUHMXGLFH UDWKHU WKDQ JXLOW UHVXOWLQJ IURP FRQVFLHQFH )LQDOO\ D PHDVXUH RI :KLWH JXLOW QHHGV WR EH GHYHORSHG /RQJ WHUP LW ZRXOG EH LQWHUHVWLQJ WR LQFOXGH SUH DQG SRVW PHDVXUHV RI SUHMXGLFH VXFK DV WKH 0RGHUQ 5DFLVP 6FDOH 0F&RQDKD\ +DUGHH t %DWWV f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

PAGE 92

LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DV D FRQVWUXFW PD\ QRW EH V\QRQ\PRXV ZLWK SUHMXGLFH $OWKRXJK WKH ODFN RI DQWLFLSDWHG ILQGLQJV LQ WKLV VWXG\ LV GLVDSSRLQWLQJ WKH HYLGHQFH JDWKHUHG VXJJHVWV WKDW WKH RULJLQDO LGHDV DERXW WKH SRWHQWLDO ZHDNQHVVHV LQ FXUUHQW PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ SUDFWLFHV DUH VWLOO YLDEOH 7KH GHVLJQ RI WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ PD\ QRW KDYH EHHQ WKH LGHDO YHKLFOH WR WHVW VXFK LGHDV

PAGE 93

$33(1',; $ ,1)250(' &216(17 )250
PAGE 94

, KDYH EHHQ IXOO\ LQIRUPHG RI WKH SURFHGXUH LQ WKLV VWXG\ DP IUHH WR ZLWKGUDZ P\ FRQVHQW DQG WR GLVFRQWLQXH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKLV VWXG\ DW DQ\ WLPH ZLWKRXW FRQVHTXHQFH ZLOO UHFHLYH QR FRPSHQVDWLRQ RWKHU WKDQ H[WUDFUHGLW IRU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKLV VWXG\ DW DQ\ WLPH DJUHH WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH SURFHGXUH DQG KDYH UHFHLYHG D FRS\ RI WKLV GHVFULSWLRQ 3DUWLFLSDQWnV 1DPH >3ULQW@ 'DWH 3DUWLFLSDQWnV 6LJQDWXUH 0 6KDQEKDJ 06

PAGE 95

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

PAGE 96

$33(1',; & ,17(17 72 $77(1' $ 08/7,&8/785$/ :25.6+23 3OHDVH XVH WKH IROORZLQJ VFDOH WR LQGLFDWH \RXU GHJUHH RI DJUHHPHQW ZLWK HDFK LWHP 6WURQJO\ 'LVDJUHH 8QFHUWDLQ $JUHH 6WURQJO\ 'LVDJUHH $JUHH SODQ WR DWWHQG YROXQWDULO\ DW OHDVW RQH PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ ZRUNVKRS VRPHWLPH LQ WKH QH[W \HDUV ,I D PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ ZRUNVKRS LV RIIHUHG RQH HYHQLQJ ZLWKLQ WKH QH[W \HDU DW 8) ZRXOG YROXQWHHU WR DWWHQG ,I D PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ ZRUNVKRS LV RIIHUHG RQH HYHQLQJ ZRXOG YROXQWHHU WR DWWHQG

PAGE 97

'(02*5$3+,& $JH *HQGHU 0 B (WKQLFLW\ &ODVV +RPH 6WDWH $33(1',; ,1)250$7,21 $1' 0$1,38/$7,21 &+(&. ) $IULFDQ $PHULFDQ $VLDQ $PHULFDQ +LVSDQLF $PHULFDQ DQG /DWLQR :KLWH RU $QJOR $PHULFDQ $PHULFDQ ,QGLDQ 1DWLYH $PHULFDQ ,QWHUQDWLRQDO SOHDVH VSHFLI\f %LUDFLDO SOHDVH VSHFLI\f 2WKHU SOHDVH VSHFLI\f n nO )LUVW \HDU 6RSKRPRUH -XQLRU 6HQLRU *UDGXDWH 6WXGHQW 3RVW%DF 2WKHU SOHDVH VSHFLI\f 6RXWK )ORULGD 'DGH DQG %URZDUGf )ORULGD 6RXWKHDVW *$$/1&6&.<71 /$06$5f 0LGDWODQWLF 0''&'(1-9$:9f 1RUWKHDVW 3$ 1<0$ &71+0(975,f 0LGHDVW 2+ 2. ,/ ,1 .60,0102 ,$ 1(f 0LGZHVW ,'071' 6':
PAGE 98

0DMRU 3V\FKRORJ\ 6RFLDO 6FLHQFH 6RFLRORJ\ HWFf (QJLQHHULQJ 1DWXUDO 6FLHQFHV %LRORJ\0DWK +XPDQLWLHV (QJOLVK +LVWRU\ %XVLQHVV (GXFDWLRQ 2WKHU 8QGHFLGHG XQGHUVWDQG WKDW ODWHU WKLV ZHHN D JXHVW VSHDNHU ZLOO OHFWXUH RQ f WLPH PDQDJHPHQW f VWUHVV f UDFLDO LVVXHV f VH[XDOO\ WUDQVPLWWHG GLVHDVHV f QRQH RI WKH DERYH

PAGE 99

$33(1',; ( '(%5,(),1* )250 7KDQN \RX IRU \RXU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKLV H[SHULPHQW
PAGE 100

5()(5(1&(6 $EHO 7 0 f &XOWXUDO SDWWHUQV DV WKH\ DIIHFW SV\FKRWKHUDSHXWLF SURFHGXUHV $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ $EUDPVRQ 3 5 0RVKHU / $EUDPVRQ / 0 t :R\FKRZVNL % f 3HUVRQDOLW\ FRUUHODWHV RI WKH 0RVKHU TXLOW VFDOHV -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ $VVHVVPHQW $M]HQ t )LVKEHLQ 0 f 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ DWWLWXGHV DQG SUHGLFWLQJ VRFLDO EHKDYLRU (QJOHZRRG &OLIIV 13UHQWLFH+DOO $OOLVRQ : &UDZIRUG (FKHPHQGLD 5 5RELQVRQ / t .QHSS f +XPDQ GLYHUVLW\ DQG SURIHVVLRQDO FRPSHWHQFH 7UDLQLQJ LQ FOLQLFDO DQG FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ UHYLVLWHG $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW $OOSRUW : f 7KH QDWXUH RI SUHMXGLFH 5HDGLQJ 0$ $GGLVRQ:HVOH\ $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ f &ULWHULD IRU DFFUHGLWDWLRQ RI GRFWRUDO WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV DQG LQWHUQVKLSV LQ SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ :DVKLQJWRQ '& $XWKRU $UERQD & f &XOWXUH HWKQLFLW\ DQG UDFH $ UHDFWLRQ &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW $WWQHDYH & / f 7KHUDS\ LQ WULEDO VHWWLQJV DQG XUEDQ QHWZRUN LQWHUYHQWLRQ )DPLO\ 3URFHVV %ULJKDP & :RRGPDQVHH t &RRN 6 : f 'LPHQVLRQV RI YHUEDO UDFLDO DWWLWXGHV ,QWHUUDFLDO PDUULDJH DQG DSSURDFKHV WR UDFLDO HTXDOLW\ -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO ,VVXHV %URZQ Y %RDUG RI (GXFDWLRQ RI 7RSHND 86 f

PAGE 101

&DPSEHOO $ f :KLWH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG EODFN SHRSOH $QQ $UERU 0, ,QVWLWXWH IRU 6RFLDO 5HVHDUFK &DUH\ & 5HLQDW 0 t )RQWHV / f 6FKRRO FRXQVHORUVn SHUFHSWLRQV RI WUDLQLQJ QHHGV LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ DQG 6XSHUYLVLRQ &DUWHU 5 7 f 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ UDFLVP DQG UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ DPRQJ :KLWH $PHULFDQV $Q H[SORUDWRU\ LQYHVWLJDWLRQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW &DUWHU 5 7 f &XOWXUDO YDOXHV $ UHYLHZ RI HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK DQG LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU FRXQVHOLQJ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW &DUWHU 5 7 t 4XUHVKL $ f $ W\SRORJ\ RI SKLORVRSKLFDO DVVXPSWLRQV LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ DQG WUDLQLQJ ,Q 3RQWHURWWR 0 &DVDV / $ 6X]XNL t & 0 $OH[DQGHU (GVf +DQGERRN RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ SS f 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 6DJH &DVDV 0 f 3ROLF\ WUDLQLQJ DQG UHVHDUFK LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ 7KH UDFLDOHWKQLF PLQRULW\ SHUVSHFWLYH ,Q 6 %URZQ t 5 : /HQW (GVf +DQGERRN RI FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ SS f 1HZ
PAGE 102

&RUH\ f 7KHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH RI FRXQVHOLQJ DQG SV\FKRWKHUDS\ WK HGf 3DFLILF *URYH &$ %URRNV&ROH &RUYLQ 6 $ t :LJJLQV ) f $Q DQWLUDFLVP WUDLQLQJ PRGHO IRU ZKLWH SURIHVVLRQDOV -RXUQDO RI 0XOWLFXOWXUDO &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW &URVE\ ) %URPOH\ 6 V 6D[H / f 5HFHQW XQREWUXVLYH VWXGLHV RI EODFN DQG ZKLWH GLVFULPLQDWLRQ DQG SUHMXGLFH $ OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZ 3V\FKRORJLFDO %XOOHWLQ 'f$QGUHD 0 t 'DQLHOV f ([SORULQJ WKH GLIIHUHQW OHYHOV RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ WUDLQLQJ LQ FRXQVHORU HGXFDWLRQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 'f$QGUHD 0 t 'DQLHOV f 3URPRWLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DQG RUJDQL]DWLRQDO FKDQJH LQ WKH FRXQVHOLQJ SURIHVVLRQ $ FDVH VWXG\ ,Q 3RQWHURWWR 0 &DVDV / $ 6X]XNL t & 0 $OH[DQGHU (GVf +DQGERRN RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ SS f 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 6DJH 'f$QGUHD 0 'DQLHOV t +HFN 5 f (YDOXDWLQJ WKH LPSDFW RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ WUDLQLQJ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 'DV $ f 5HWKLQNLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ ,PSOLFDWLRQV IRU FRXQVHORU HGXFDWLRQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 'DYLGVRQ 6 *LEE\ 5 0F1HLO ( % 6HJDO 6 t 6LOYHUPDQ + f $ SUHOLPLQDU\ VWXG\ RI 1HJUR DQG :KLWH GLIIHUHQFHV RQ )RUP RI WKH :HFKVOHU%HOOHYXH 6FDOH -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 'UDNH 6 f $VVHVVLQJ PDFKLDYHOOLDQLVP DQG PRUDOLW\FRQVFLHQFH JXLOW 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV 'n6RX]D f ,OOLEHUDO HGXFDWLRQ 7KH SROLWLFV RI UDFH DQG VH[ RQ FDPSXV 1HZ
PAGE 103

(VVDQGRK 3 f 0XOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ DV WKH IRXUWK IRUFH $ FDOO WR DUPV &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW )DUUHOO : t 2OVRQ f .HQQHWK DQG 0DPLH &ODUN UHYLVLWHG 5DFLDO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG UDFLDO SUHIHUHQFH LQ GDUNVNLQQHG DQG OLJKWVNLQQHG %ODFN FKLOGUHQ 8UEDQ (GXFDWLRQ )HKU / $ t 6WDPSV / ( f 7KH 0RVKHU JXLOW VFDOHV $ FRQVWUXFW YDOLGLW\ H[WHQVLRQ -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ $VVHVVPHQW )RZHUV % t 5LFKDUGVRQ ) & f :K\ LV PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP JRRG" $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW )XNX\DPD 0 $ f 7DNLQJ DQ XQLYHUVDO DSSURDFK WR PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ DQG 6XSHUYLVLRQ *DHUWQHU 6 / t 'RYLGLR ) f 5DFLVP DPRQJ WKH ZHOOLQWHQWLRQHG ,Q ( &ODXVHQ t %HUPLQJKDQ (GVf 3OXUDOLVP UDFLVP DQG SXEOLF SROLF\ 7KH VHDUFK IRU HTXDOLW\ SS f %RVWRQ +DOO *DHUWQHU 6 / t 'RYLGLR ) f 7KH DYHUVLYH IRUP RI UDFLVP ,Q ) 'RYLGLR t 6 / *DHUWQHU (GVf 3UHMXGLFH GLVFULPLQDWLRQ DQG UDFLVP SS f 6DQ 'LHJR &$ $FDGHPLF 3UHVV *UHHQ 6 ( t 0RVKHU / f $ FDXVDO PRGHO RI VH[XDO DURXVDO WR HURWLF IDQWDVLHV -RXUQDO RI 6H[ 5HVHDUFK *XWKULH 5 f (YHQ WKH UDW ZDV ZKLWH $ KLVWRULFDO YLHZ RI SV\FKRORJ\ 1HZ
PAGE 104

+DVV 5 .DW] 5L]]R 1 %DLOH\ V 0RRUH / f :KHQ UDFLDO DPELYDOHQFH HYRNHV QHJDWLYH DIIHFW XVLQJ D GLVJXLVHG PHDVXUH RI PRRG 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ %XOOHWLQ +HDWK $ ( 1HLPH\HU t 3HGHUVHQ 3 % f 7KH IXWXUH RI FURVVFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ $ 'HOSKL SROO -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW +HOPV ( f 7RZDUG D WKHRUHWLFDO H[SODQDWLRQ RI WKH HIIHFWV RI UDFH RQ FRXQVHOLQJ $ %ODFN DQG :KLWH PRGHO &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW +HOPV ( (Gf f %ODFN DQG :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ 7KHRU\ UHVHDUFK DQG SUDFWLFH :HVWSRUW &7 *UHHQZRRG +HOPV ( t &DUWHU 5 7 f 'HYHORSPHQW RI WKH :KLWH 5DFLDO ,GHQWLW\ $WWLWXGH 6FDOH ,Q ( +HOPV (Gf %ODFN DQG :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ 7KHRU\ UHVHDUFK DQG SUDFWLFH SS f :HVWSRUW &7 *UHHQZRRG +HOPV ( t 5LFKDUGVRQ 7 4 f +RZ PXOWLFXOWXUDOLVP REVFXUHV UDFH DQG FXOWXUH DV GLIIHUHQWLDO DVSHFWV RI FRXQVHOLQJ FRPSHWHQF\ ,Q % 3RSH'DYLV DQG + / &ROHPDQ (GVf 0XOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ FRPSHWHQFLHV $VVHVVPHQW HGXFDWLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ SS f 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 6DJH +LOOV + t 6WUR]LHU $ / f 0XOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ LQ $3$DSSURYHG FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ SURJUDPV $ VXUYH\ 3URIHVVLRQDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH +R < f &XOWXUDO YDOXHV DQG SURIHVVLRQDO LVVXHV LQ FOLQLFDO SV\FKRORJ\ 7KH +RQJ .RQJ H[SHULHQFH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW +ROOLV : V :DQW] 5 $ f &RXQVHORU SUHSDUDWLRQ 9RO 6WDWXV WUHQGV DQG LPSOLFDWLRQV WK HGf 0XQFLH ,1 $FFHOHUDWHG 'HYHORSPHQW -DFNVRQ 0 / f 0XOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ +LVWRULFDO SHUVSHFWLYHV ,Q 3RQWHURWWR 0 &DVDV / $ 6X]XNL t & 0 $OH[DQGHU (GVf +DQGERRN RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ SS f 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 6DJH

PAGE 105

-RQHV 0 f 3UHMXGLFH DQG UDFLVP QG HGf 1HZ
PAGE 106

0DJQHU 5 f %ODFNV DQG :KLWHV RQ WKH FDPSXVHV %HKLQG XJO\ UDFLVW LQFLGHQWV VWXGHQW LVRODWLRQ DQG LQVHQVLWLYLW\ &KURQLFOH RI +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ f 0DVORZ $ + f 0RWLYDWLRQ DQG SHUVRQDOLW\ 1HZ
PAGE 107

0L 6 t ,ZDPDVD f 7R GR RU QRW WR GR 7KDW LV WKH TXHVWLRQ IRU :KLWH FURVVFXOWXUDO UHVHDUFKHUV 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW 0RQWHLWK 0 f &RQWHPSRUDU\ IRUPV RI SUHMXGLFHUHODWHG FRQIOLFW ,Q VHDUFK RI D QXWVKHOO 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ %XOOHWLQ 0RVKHU / f 0HDVXUHPHQW RI JXLOW LQ IHPDOHV E\ VHOIUHSRUW LQYHQWRULHV -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ DQG &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 0RVKHU / f 5HYLVHG 0RVKHU *XLOW ,QYHQWRU\ ,Q & 0 'DYLV : / &RPPHQW@ $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW 1HYLOOH + $ +HSSQHU 0 /RXLH & ( 7KRPSVRQ & ( %URRNV / %DNHU & ( f 7KH LPSDFW RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ RQ :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ DWWLWXGHV DQG WKHUDS\ FRPSHWHQFLHV 3URIHVVLRQDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH 2WWDYL 7 0 3RSH'DYLV % V 'LQJV f 5HODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ DWWLWXGHV DQG VHOIUHSRUWHG PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ FRPSHWHQFLHV -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 2XWODZ / 7 f 5DFLDO DQG HWKQLF FRPSOH[LWLHV LQ $PHULFDQ OLIH ,PSOLFDWLRQV IRU $IULFDQ $PHULFDQV ,Q $ +DUULV (Gf 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP IURP WKH PDUJLQV 1RQn GRPLQDQW YRLFHV RQ GLIIHUHQFH DQG GLYHUVLW\ SS f :HVWSRUW &7 %HUJLQ DQG *DUYH\

PAGE 108

3DUKDP 7 $ f :KLWH UHVHDUFKHUV FRQGXFWLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ UHVHDUFK &DQ WKHLU HIIRUWV EH 0R EHWWD" 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW 3DWWHUVRQ & + f 0XOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ )URP GLYHUVLW\ WR XQLYHUVDOLW\ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 3HGHUVHQ 3 f +DQGERRN IRU GHYHORSLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO DZDUHQHVV $OH[DQGULD 9$ $PHULFDQ $VVRFLDWLRQ IRU &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 3HGHUVHQ 3 f 7KH PXOWLFXOWXUDO SHUVSHFWLYH DV D IRXUWK IRUFH LQ FRXQVHOLQJ -RXUQDO RI 0HQWDO +HDOWK &RXQVHOLQJ 3HGHUVHQ 3 f 0XOWLFXOWXUDOLVP DV D JHQHULF DSSURDFK WR FRXQVHOLQJ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 3HGHUVHQ 3 f &XOWXUHFHQWHUHG HWKLFDO JXLGHOLQHV IRU FRXQVHORUV ,Q 3RQWHURWWR 0 &DVDV / $ 6X]XNL t & 0 $OH[DQGHU (GVf +DQGERRN RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ SS f 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 6DJH 3HGHUVHQ 3 f 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI ERWK VLPLODULWLHV DQG GLIIHUHQFHV LQ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ 5HDFWLRQ WR & + 3DWWHUVRQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 3HGHUVHQ 3 /RQQHU : t 'UDJXQV f &RXQVHOLQJ DFURVV FXOWXUHV‘ +RQROXOX 8QLYHUVLW\ RI +DZDLL 3UHVV 3RQWHURWWR f 5DFLDO FRQVFLRXVQHVV GHYHORSPHQW DPRQJ :KLWH FRXQVHORU WUDLQHHV $ VWDJH PRGHO -RXUQDO RI 0XOWLFXOWXUDO &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 3RQWHURWWR $OH[DQGHU & 0 t *ULHJHU f $ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQF\ FKHFNOLVW IRU FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ SURJUDPV -RXUQDO RI 0XOWLFXOWXUDO &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV 0 f ,Q VHDUFK RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRPSHWHQFH ZLWKLQ FRXQVHORU HGXFDWLRQ SURJUDPV -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW

PAGE 109

3RQWHURWWR t &DVDV 0 f +DQGERRN RI UDFLDOHWKQLF PLQRULW\ FRXQVHOLQJ UHVHDUFK 6SULQJILHOG ,/ &KDUOHV & 7KRPDV 3RSH'DYLV % t &ROHPDQ + / (GVf f 0XOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ FRPSHWHQFLHV $VVHVVPHQW HGXFDWLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 6DJH 3RSH'DYLV % t 2WWDYL 7 0 f 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ UDFLVP DQG UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ DPRQJ :KLWH $PHULFDQV -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 4XLWDQD 6 0 t %HUQDO 0 ( f (WKQLF PLQRULW\ WUDLQLQJ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ &RPSDULVRQV ZLWK FOLQLFDO SV\FKRORJ\ DQG SURSRVHG VWDQGDUGV 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW 5H\QROGV $ / f &KDOOHQJHV DQG VWUDWHJLHV IRU WHDFKLQJ PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ FRXUVHV ,Q 3RQWHURWWR 0 &DVDV / $ 6X]XNL t & 0 $OH[DQGHU (GVf +DQGERRN RI PXOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ SS f 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 6DJH 5LGOH\ & 5 0HQGR]D : t .DQLW] % ( f 0XOWLFXOWXUDO WUDLQLQJ 5HH[DPLQDWLRQ RSHUDWLRQDOL]DWLRQ DQG LQWHJUDWLRQ 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW 5RJHUV & f $ QRWH RQ 7KH QDWXUH RI PDQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 5RNHDFK 0 f 7KH QDWXUH RI KXPDQ YDOXHV 1HZ
PAGE 110

5LGOH\ & 5 f 5DFLVP LQ FRXQVHOLQJ DV DQ DYHUVLYH EHKDYLRUDO SURFHVV ,Q 3 % 3HGHUVHQ 'UDJXQV : /RQQHU t ( 7ULPEOH (GVf &RXQVHOLQJ DFURVV FXOWXUHV UG HG SS f +RQROXOX 8QLYHUVLW\ RI +DZDLL 3UHVV 5XPD ( + t 0RVKHU / f 5HODWLRQVKLSV EHWZHHQ PRUDO MXGJPHQW DQG JXLOW LQ GHOLQTXHQW ER\V -RXUQDO RI $EQRUPDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 6DEQDQL + % 3RQWHURWWR t %RURGRYVN\ / f :KLWH UDFLDO LGHQWLW\ GHYHORSPHQW DQG FURVV FXOWXUDO FRXQVHORU WUDLQLQJ $ VWDJH PRGHO &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW 6$6 ,QVWLWXWH ,QF f 6$6 ODQJXDJH DQG SURFHGXUHV &DU\ 1& 6$6 ,QVWLWXWH ,QF 6FKOHVLQJHU -U $ f 7KH GLVXQLWLQJ RI $PHULFD 5HIOHFWLRQV RQ D PXOWLFXOWXUDO VRFLHW\ 1HZ
PAGE 111

6XH : f &XOWXUH VSHFLILF WHFKQLTXHV LQ FRXQVHOLQJ $ FRQFHSWXDO IUDPHZRUN 3URIHVVLRQDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 6XH : $UUHGRQGR 3 t 0F'DYLV 5 f 0XOWLFXOWXUDO FRXQVHOLQJ FRPSHWHQFLHV DQG VWDQGDUGV $ FDOO WR WKH SURIHVVLRQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 6XH 6 6 6XH : f &KLQHVH$PHULFDQ SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG PHQWDO KHDOWK $PHUDVLD -RXUQDO 6XH : t 6XH f &RXQVHOLQJ WKH FXOWXUDOO\ GLIIHUHQW 7KHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH QG HGf 1HZ
PAGE 112

:KLWH 0 f &RQWH[WXDO GHWHUPLQDQWV RI RSLQLRQ MXGJPHQWV )LHOG H[SHULPHQWDO SUREHV RI MXGJPHQWDO UHODWLYLW\ ERXQGDU\ FRQGLWLRQV -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ :LHU]ELFNL 0 V 3HNDULN f $ PHWDDQDO\VLV RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ GURSRXW 3URIHVVLRQDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH :RRGPDQVHH t &RRN 6 : f 'LPHQVLRQV RI YHUEDO UDFLDO DWWLWXGHV 7KHLU LGHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG PHDVXUHPHQW -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ -MB :UHQQ & f 7KH FXOWXUDOO\ HQFDSVXODWHG FRXQVHORU +DUYDUG (GXFDWLRQDO 5HYLHZ =XZHULQN 5 'HYLQH 3 0RQWHLWK 0 t &RRN $ f 3UHMXGLFH WRZDUG EODFNV :LWK DQG ZLWKRXW FRPSXQFWLRQ" %DVLF DQG $SSOLHG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\

PAGE 113

%,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ 0DUQLH 6KDQEKDJ JUDGXDWHG PDJQD FXP ODXGH IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 3HQQV\OYDQLD LQ ZLWK D %DFKHORU RI $UWV LQ SV\FKRORJ\ 6KH LV FXUUHQWO\ HQUROOHG LQ WKH GRFWRUDO SURJUDP LQ &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG LV FRPSOHWLQJ KHU LQWHUQVKLS DW WKH 6RXWK 7H[DV 9HWHUDQV +HDOWK &DUH 6\VWHP LQ 6DQ $QWRQLR 7H[DV

PAGE 114

, FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ UD\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RIA'EFWSU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 0DUWLQ 3 +HHVDFNHU &KDLU 3URIHVVRU RI 3V\FKRORJ\ FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ f§ ? nr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f§ X^ AaaO /LVD 0 %URZQ $VVLVWDQW 3URIHVVRU RI 3V\FKRORJ\ FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'MSFWR RI 3KLL[LVRSLU\ 6ERGURH 0 (DUN6U 3URIHVVRU RI &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ

PAGE 115

7KLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ ZDV VXEPLWWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH )DFXOW\ RI WKH 'HSDUWPHQW RI 3V\FKRORJ\ LQ WKH &ROOHJH RI /LEHUDO $UWV DQG 6FLHQFHV DQG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO DQG ZDV DFFHSWHG DV SDUWLDO IXOILOOPHQW RI WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ $XJXVW 'HDQ *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO

PAGE 116

/' r 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$


62
this analysis. Stage 2 (Disintegration) and Stage 3
(Reintegration) were combined because of their small sample
sizes and conceptual and numerical similarities. White
racial identity level now consisted of three stages for the
purpose of this analysis. Results did not support the null
hypothesis that no differences would exist in prejudice by
identity stages [F(2, 87) = 6.84, p = .002],
Follow-up Tukey comparisons showed that students in
Stages 4 and 5 endorsed significantly less prejudice than
students in Stage 2/3 [p < .05]. However, students in
Stages 4 and 5 did not significantly differ from each other
in their amount of prejudice [jo > .05]. In both these
latter stages, a degree of prejudice was present, suggesting
that individuals in higher stages of White racial identity
development may not necessarily be prejudice free. Means
for each stage are presented in Table 2 (MRS obtained range
7 to 29, possible range 7 to 35).
Table 2
Mean Prejudice Scores by Level of White Racial Identity
(WRI)
WRI Stage
n
Mean MRS
SD
2/3
9
22.1
4.0
4
24
17.7
5.0
5
56
16.5
3.8
The third hypothesis stated that White students who
endorsed higher levels of attitudinal ambivalence regarding
race would show lower levels of prejudice. A Pearson


16
status of multicultural training or to the movement of
multiculturalism in psychology were retained for review.
The relevant terms were used in various combinations and
alone until the searches began producing overlapping
citations. In addition, a scan through the reference lists
of relevant articles produced additional sources. Thus, a
reasonably complete and comprehensive literature review was
assured.
For the purposes of this dissertation, prejudice is
defined as negative attitudes or sentiments towards another
person based on stereotypic attitudes held about that
person's particular ethnic/racial group (Jones, 1997).
Covert prejudice is simply prejudice that is only
acknowledged through the use of less consciously
controllable measures (Crosby, Bromley, & Saxe, 1980;
Devine, 1989; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; McConahay, 1986).
Attitudinal ambivalence refers to the co-existence in Whites
of both positive and negative feelings toward Blacks (Katz,
Wackenhut, & Hass, 1986). Guilt is defined as the feeling
that arises when a violation of one's internalized moral
standards occurs or is anticipated (Drake, 1995; Mosher,
1979; 1988). White guilt refers to the guilt that may arise
in Whites in response to violations of their race-related
internalized moral standards.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish first to express deep appreciation to my
chairperson, Dr. Martin Heesacker. Despite difficult
initial circumstances, he agreed to supervise my
dissertation work and has handled the process with amazing
equanimity. My only regret is that our scholarly
association did not begin sooner. Special acknowledgement
also goes to Dr. Dave Suchman, who since the beginning of my
clinical training, has remained a profound mentor and
personal friend.
Next, I would like to thank the other members of my
committee, Drs. Dorothy Nevill, Lisa Brown, and Max Parker,
for their time, effort, and support. Throughout my graduate
training, Dr. Nevill handled my many questions and
bureaucratic crises with humor and grace. I also would not
have survived graduate school without Dr. Brown's
professional and personal guidance. Dr. Parker willingly
brought a much-needed perspective to my work.
Finally, I wish to acknowledge the encouragement of my
parents, L. V. and Nanda Shanbhag, whose generous financial
support particularly in the Summer of 1997, allowed me to
ii


102
Ponterotto, J. G., & Casas, J. M. (1991). Handbook of
racial/ethnic minority counseling research. Springfield,
IL: Charles C Thomas.
Pope-Davis, D. B., & Coleman, H. L. (Eds.). (1997).
Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment,
education and training, and supervision. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Pope-Davis, D. B., & Ottavi, T. M. (1994). The
relationship between racism and racial identity among White
Americans. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72, 293-
297.
Quitana, S. M., & Bernal, M. E. (1995). Ethnic
minority training in counseling psychology: Comparisons
with clinical psychology and proposed standards. The
Counseling Psychologist, 23, 102-121.
Reynolds, A. L. (1995). Challenges and strategies for
teaching multicultural counseling courses. In J. G.
Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander
(Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 312-330).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ridley, C. R., Mendoza, D. W., & Kanitz, B. E. (1994).
Multicultural training: Reexamination, operationalization,
and integration. The Counseling Psychologist, 22, 227-289.
Rogers, C. (1957). A note on "The nature of man."
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 4, 1199-203.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New
York: Free Press.
Romero, A. A., Agnew, C. R., Insko, C. A. (1996). The
cognitive mediation hypothesis revisited: An empirical
response to methodological and theoretical criticism.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 651-665.
Richardson, T. Q., & Molinaro, K. L. (1996). White
counselor self-awareness: A prerequisite for developing
multicultural competence. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 74, 238-242.


18
viewing clients through a culturally-stereotyped lens.
Other psychologists including Theodora Abel (1956) and
Gilbert Wrenn (1962) urged counselors to avoid being
culturally-encapsulated when working with clients from
different cultures.
Despite the beginnings of cultural awareness, much of
the ethnic-minority research conducted, usually on Blacks,
during this time period focused on the deficit model. Using
this model, scientists studied groups of Blacks and Whites
and focused on how these groups differed. For example,
research focused on the study of intellectual and
personality differences (Davidson, Gibby, McNeil, Segal, &
Silverman, 1950; Sperrazzo & Wilkins, 1959).
Psychology's most influential contribution to race-
related public policy fell under the rubric of the deficit
model. Kenneth Clark's "Doll Studies" (1965, 1991), which
eventually formed the basis both for Thurgood Marshall's
case arguments in favor of school desegregation and for the
Supreme Court's ensuing decision in Brown v. Board of
Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954), were used extensively to
document the detrimental effects of mandatory segregation on
Black children (Cook, 1984). Although Clark's studies were
fraught with methodological and interpretational problems
(Farrell & Olson, 1983; Semaj, 1979; Spencer, 1984), his
work was part of the initial stirrings of multicultural


105
White, G. M. (1975). Contextual determinants of
opinion judgments: Field experimental probes of judgmental
relativity boundary conditions. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 32, 1047-1054.
Wierzbicki, M., s Pekarik, G. (1993). A meta-analysis
of psychotherapy dropout. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 25, 190-195.
Woodmansee, J., & Cook, S. W. (1967). Dimensions of
verbal racial attitudes: Their identification and
measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Jj_ 240-250.
Wrenn, C. G. (1962). The culturally encapsulated
counselor. Harvard Educational Review, 32, 444-449.
Zuwerink, J. R., Devine, P. G., Monteith, M. J., &
Cook, D. A. (1996). Prejudice toward blacks: With and
without compunction? Basic and Applied Social Psychology,
18, 141-150.


THE ROLE OF COVERT RACIAL PREJUDICE, ATTITUDINAL
AMBIVALENCE, AND GUILT
IN RECEPTIVITY TO MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
By
MARNIE G. SHANBHAG
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1998


56
with guilt scores (Guilt Inventory) and attitudinal
ambivalence scores (PAAQ) serving as the correlated
variables.
Hypothesis 5: This hypothesis stated that students who
expressed the strongest intention to attend multicultural
training workshops would also score the lowest on measures
of prejudice. To test this hypothesis, a one-way, between-
subjects ANOVA was used with the independent variable being
clear intention to attend a workshop versus no intention to
attend. The dependent variable was prejudice scores (MRS).


45
were asked to respond to a manipulation check included at
the end of the questionnaire packet. All who failed to
answer the manipulation check item or responded with an
impossible value were dropped, leaving 105 White students
whose responses comprised the actual data set for analysis.
Students ranged in age from 17 to 44 years old, with a
mean of 19.1 years (SD=2.7). Fifty-seven percent of the
participants were first year students, 43% were upperclass
students. Females comprised 78% of the sample (n=81)
whereas men comprised 22% (n=24). Thirty-five percent of
participants identified themselves as psychology majors.
The majority of the individuals (62%) were from the state of
Florida.
Manipulation of Forewarning
Whether or not participants received a forewarning,
constituted the manipulated variable. The control group
received an information sheet at the front of their packet
of materials stating that a presenter would be coming later
in the week to give a lecture on stress and was interested
in soliciting their opinions on a wide variety of topics.
The forewarned group received the identical packet, except
that the information sheet stated that a presenter would be
coming later in the week to give a lecture on racial issues
and was interested in getting an idea of participants
opinions on a variety of topics, including attitudes on race


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID ET98SQBXE_U6WVQY INGEST_TIME 2013-09-28T01:53:06Z PACKAGE AA00014288_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES


71
the White Racial Identity Scale. That is, forewarned
students were more likely to denigrate Blacks and over
idealize Whites than students in the control group. These
findings suggest that anticipating the possibility of
receiving a lecture on racial issues may actually increase
anti-Black sentiment in Whites.
Although these findings are contrary to the original
hypothesis, they are consistent with some of the extant
anticipatory opinion research. Research indicates that when
people expect to receive a persuasive communication, they
often react by either moderating their views or amplifying
them towards the extreme (Agnew & Insko, 1996; Cialdini &
Petty, 1981). The students in the current study appear to
have amplified their anti-Black views in response to the
expectation of an upcoming lecture on race.
The increase in anti-Black sentiment and in
Reintegration attitudes following forewarning may also be
the result of semantic priming (Lepore & Brown, 1997).
Research has shown that both high and low prejudiced White
students exhibit more negative cognitions toward Blacks
after being primed to either the category of Blacks or the
negative stereotypic attributes about Blacks (Devine, 1989;
Wittenbrink, Judd, and Park, 1997). In this study, the
simple act of informing students of an upcoming racial
issues lecture may have activated both the category of


82
that its properties do not appear to support a stage-model
of racial identity development (Behrens, 1997).
Recently, J. E. Helms (personal communication, July,
1997) has been encouraging a move away from using her scale
to measure discrete stages of identity development, and
instead recommending that researchers focus on the way each
of the five subscales compare to the others. However,
Helms' model (1990) is described as a linear stage-model of
racial identity development and is taught as such in
multicultural training programs. Advancing levels is
interpreted as a sign of increasing multicultural competence
(Ottavi, Pope-Davis, & Dings, 1994; Ponterotto, 1988;
Sabnani, Ponterotto, & Borodovsky, 1991). If the WRIAS is
no longer a stage-based measure, then to continue using it
as a valid indicator of multicultural competence following
training (as shown by progressing to more advanced stages)
is not justified.
The Mosher guilty-conscience scale used in this study
measures guilt, generally, (Mosher, 1988; 1968) not
specifically White guilt regarding racial issues.
Unfortunately, I uncovered no such measure. Before the link
between prejudice, ambivalence, and White guilt can truly be
established or discounted, a measure of White guilt must be
constructed and validated.


28
Reynolds, 1995).
At present, psychologists have not yet arrived at a
consensus regarding multicultural training. Although most
agree that psychologists need to receive some training to
work effectively with people from a variety of backgrounds,
little agreement exists as to how best to instantiate this
training. Sue, Arredondo, and McDavis (1992) published what
has arguably become the standard for multicultural
competence; however, APA has yet to incorporate their
suggestions into national accreditation requirements.
Current State of Multiculturalism
Despite 30 years of a multicultural presence in
psychology, the multicultural movement still appears to be
struggling for legitimacy (Das, 1995; Essandoh, 1995). In
the process of examining current multicultural literature,
potential drawbacks have surfaced that may in part shed some
light on the current struggle for legitimacy. First, the
voluminous nature of multicultural writing may leave all but
the most committed academic scholars confused as to the
direction in which to proceed. Second, much of the
multicultural literature often confuses the need for
training imperatives with multicultural politics, which
potentially alienates those who disagree with the politics
but acknowledge the need for culturally-relevant skills.
Third, multicultural literature has avoided openly


87
I have been fully informed of the procedure in this study .
I am free to withdraw my consent and to discontinue
participation in this study at any time without consequence.
I will receive no compensation other than extra-credit for
participation in this study at any time. I agree to
participate in the procedure and have received a copy of
this description.
Participant's Name [Print] Date
Participant's Signature
M. G. Shanbhag, M.S.


76
endorsed less prejudice, is it because they indeed harbor
less prejudice in conjunction with a higher moral standing,
or is it that their guilt motivates them to adopt only the
patina of greater multicultural sensitivity? At first
glance, a motivation based on guilt may seem useful in the
reduction of prejudiced responses toward clients. However,
White guilt may constitute an equally-harmful reaction to
Black clients (and all clients of color) because the
experience of guilt may generate self-preoccupation at the
expense of genuine concern for and openness to others
(Niedenthal, Tangney, Gavanski, 1994; Steele, 1990).
With respect to guilty-conscience, women in this
sample reported significantly more guilt than men. One
explanation for the difference in guilt scores may be due,
in part, to gender differences in interpersonal orientation
and moral development (Gilligan, 1982). However, no gender
differences existed in prejudice, White racial identity
scores, or racial ambivalence.
Finally, contrary to Hypothesis 5, those students who
expressed clear intent to attend a workshop did not differ
in their expressed prejudice scores from those who did not
express that intent. Clear intent was measured as agreeing
or strongly agreeing to attend at least one
diversity/multicultural workshop at the university in the
next month or year. On the other hand, dichotomizing intent


19
psychology and deserves recognition in any history of
multicultural psychology. Moreover, no other psychological
study to date has influenced national public policy to such
an extent. Clark's work is also important in multicultural
history, because his work reminds psychologists that deficit
research of ethnic-minorities was not only the domain of
White researchers but of African-American researchers as
well, influenced by the prevailing intellectual forces of
their time, a point that is sometimes overlooked by current
multicultural rhetoric.
The advent of the 1960's and 1970'S, however, gave rise
to the awakenings of multicultural psychology in its current
form, which initially relied on a Consciousness Raising
Model. Despite the contributions of psychologists prior to
the Civil Rights movement, psychological science was still
being conducted within a monocultural framework, focused on
White, Westernized values. The Civil Rights movement gave
activist psychologists the national political backing to
demand that psychology as a field broaden its theoretical
bases (Jackson, 1995; Wehrly, 1995). In short succession,
several early pioneers, including Vontress (1967, 1970) and
Attneave (1969) challenged the ethnocentrism of psychology
and of counseling in particular (see Wehrly, 1995, for a
detailed description of these early works). Instead of
viewing ethnic-minority groups as culturally deprived, a


41
lucid and extremely balanced discussion of multiculturalism.
Everything I have read on this topic until now has been
tendentious and polemical, driving me to view such writing
with a jaundiced eye" (p.658).
It appears that despite several notations of fourth-
force status (Essandoh, 1995), several psychologists have
serious reservations about the direction multiculturalism
has taken in psychology (Eckstrom, 1997; Fowers, &
Richardson, 1996; Karp, & Sutton, 1993); yet the current
multicultural literature has done little to address their
concerns. In the end, it may be far easier to dismiss the
critics of multiculturalism as misguided (or perhaps
ethnocentric) than to engage in frank, sometimes painful
dialogue through which a meaningful and lasting
multiculturalism might be achieved.
Multiculturalism has made a valuable contribution to
both the theory and practice of psychology (Hall, 1997;
Pope-Davis S Coleman, 1997; Sue & Sue, 1990). However, the
fields' inability to acknowledge radical countervailing
views in a constructive manner keeps multicultural
scholarship as a fringe endeavor, and the status quo remains
unchanged. Committed multicultural scholars may not have
the luxury that, say, constructivist theorists do in writing
for a select group of individuals who agree on the
parameters of the theory or discussion. In order for


20
multicultural or pluralistic model emerged which did not
view difference as evidence of pathology or inferiority
(Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992). By the 1970's the stage
was set for multicultural research to flourish (Guthrie,
1976; Pedersen, Lonner, & Draguns, 1976; Sue & Sue, 1971) .
Psychologists at the organizational level followed at the
1973 Vail Conference and suggested that it was unethical to
treat culturally different clients without adequate training
(Korman, 1973). In addition, Sue and Sue (1971) encouraged
psychologists to think multiculturally in more than Black or
White terms, so that by the end of the 1970's
multiculturalism could be clearly defined as a burgeoning,
distinct movement within psychology.
Today, multiculturalism is sometimes referred to as the
fourth force in professional psychology (Pedersen, 1991;
Ponterotto & Casas, 1991), building upon the three previous
theoretical movements of psychodynamism, behaviorism, and
humanism. Although it is still arguable whether
multiculturalism has met all the epistemological
requirements to warrant fourth-force status (Essandoh,
1996), there is little doubt that for a majority of
counseling psychologists, "a multicultural perspective has
changed the way we look at counseling across fields and
theories" (Pedersen, 1991, p. 6).


This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of the Department of Psychology in the College of Liberal
Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate School and was
accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
August, 1998
Dean, Graduate School


5
Ponterotto, & Borodovsky, 1991). Although none of these
models posits that only counselors who are in the end stages
of racial identity development are able to be cross-
culturally effective, model-driven research findings do
suggest that the adoption of a more advanced White racial
identity is related to Whites increased self-reported
multicultural therapy competencies (Neville et al., 1996;
Ottavi, Pope-Davis, & Dings, 1994). According to Richardson
and Molinaro (1996), as a counselor moves through the
various stages of White racial identity, he/she is
increasingly likely to abandon racist ideology and to
develop a positive, nonracist White identity.
Despite little empirical support, the theoretical
literature suggests that exposure to multicultural training
should be associated with increased levels of multicultural
therapy competency and White racial identity development
(DAndrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991; Pope-Davis & Ottavi,
1994). In the only study uncovered that assessed
multicultural training and levels of competence, Neville et
al. (1996) found that completion of a multicultural
diversity course was associated with increased self-reported
multicultural competency and with White racial identity
development, an increase that remained stable over a one-
year period.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
ABSTRACT vi
CHAPTERS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
Overview 1
Purpose of the Study 11
Hypotheses 12
Importance of the Study 13
2 LITERATURE REVIEW OF MULT I CULTURAL ISM 15
Overview 15
History 17
Current Approaches to Multicultural Training .... 21
Current State of Multiculturalism 28
Summary 42
3 METHOD 44
Participants 44
Manipulation of Forewarning 45
Measured Variables 46
Procedure 53
Planned Data Analyses 55
4 RESULTS 57
Statistical Analyses Procedures 57
Descriptive Statistics 57
Hypotheses 59
Ancillary Analyses 64
Summary 67
iv


24
some merit to this argument because constructs such as race,
gender, and sexual orientation may be viewed as holding
equivalent influence on daily life under an etic approach.
Triandis, Bontempo, Leung, and Hui (1990) suggested that
cultural constructs such as dialects, norms, roles, and
values overshadow virtually all other demographic variables,
such as age or gender. Moreover, most members of minority
groups still define race as the crucial factor in their
societal interactions, and an etic or universal perspective
only serves to dilute the importance of race in the everyday
lives of ethnic-minorities (Locke, 1990). Finally, a
universal approach may be used to overemphasize
similarities, which can serve to further trivialize cultural
difference (Pedersen, 1996).
Proponents of the culture-specific or emic perspective
argue that different cultural groups are best served by
different counseling approaches (Sue S Sue, 1990) and
acknowledge the value in viewing multicultural counseling as
being first and foremost about visible racial and ethnic
minorities, or VREGS (Helms & Richardson, 1997; Lee, 1991;
Locke, 1990). This approach focuses on culture-specific
education and requires that all behavioral analysis occur
within the realm of internal group criteria (Pedersen,
1995). Although some attention has been given to cultural
groups residing outside the United States (Pedersen,


97
Hass, R. G., Katz, I., Rizzo, N., Bailey, J., s Moore,
L. (1992). When racial ambivalence evokes negative affect,
using a disguised measure of mood. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 18, 786-797.
Heath, A. E., Neimeyer, G. J., & Pedersen, P. B.
(1988). The future of cross-cultural counseling; A Delphi
poll. Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 27-30.
Helms, J. E. (1984). Toward a theoretical explanation
of the effects of race on counseling: A Black and White
model. Counseling Psychologist, 12, 153-165.
Helms, J. E. (Ed.). (1993). Black and White racial
identity: Theory, research, and practice. Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Helms, J. E., & Carter, R. T. (1993). Development of
the White Racial Identity Attitude Scale. In J. E. Helms
(Ed.), Black and White racial identity: Theory, research,
and practice (pp. 67-80) Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Helms, J. E., & Richardson, T. Q. (1997). How
"multiculturalism obscures race and culture as differential
aspects of counseling competency. In D. B. Pope-Davis and
H. L. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural counseling competencies:
Assessment, education and training, and supervision (pp. 60-
79). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hills, H. I., & Strozier, A. L. (1992). Multicultural
training in APA-approved counseling psychology programs: A
survey. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice,
23, 43-51.
Ho, D. Y. (1985). Cultural values and professional
issues in clinical psychology: The Hong Kong experience.
American Psychologist, 40, 1212-1218.
Hollis, J. W., s Wantz, R. A. (1994). Counselor
preparation, 1993-1995: Vol. 2. Status, trends, and
implications (8th ed.). Muncie, IN: Accelerated
Development.
Jackson, M. L. (1995). Multicultural counseling:
Historical perspectives. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas,
L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of
multicultural counseling (pp. 3-16). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.


58
mean MRS was 17.2 with a standard deviation of 4.7.
Students scores ranged from a low of 7 to a high of 29.
White racial identity was measured using Helms White
Racial Identity Attitudes Scale (Helms & Carter, 1993). The
five subscales (Contact, Disintegration, Reintegration,
Pseudoindependence, and Autonomy) consist of 10 items each
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Higher scores indicate greater adherence to a particular
subscale. Only three students fell in the first stage
(Contact) of White racial identity development and were
eliminated because of the small sample size. Nine
individuals fell in Stages 2 and 3, which were combined
because of conceptual similarities. The majority of
individuals fell in Stage 4 (n=24 or 26%) or 5 (n=55 or
60%) .
Racial ambivalence was measured using the Pro-Black
Anti-Black Attitude Questionnaire (PAAQ; Katz & Hass, 1988).
The two scales have 10 items each, with items using a
Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree). Scores may range from 0 to 50 on each
scale. Students scores on the Pro-Black scale ranged from 3
to 44, with a mean of 26.3 (SD = 7.7). Anti-Black scale
ranged from 9 to 47, with a mean of 26.8 (SD = 8.7). Scores
on the two scales were moderately and inversely correlated
with each other (r = -.3, ¡o = .001). Ambivalence scores,


52
21 reads "I detest myself for thoughts I sometimes have."
Items are scored using a 7 point Likert-type rating scale,
anchored by 0 "Not At All True for Me" and 6 "Extremely True
of Me." Scores on guilty-conscience can range from 0 to
132.
Intent to attend a multicultural workshop. In order to
measure the degree to which students would attend a
multicultural workshop, a questionnaire was constructed.
The questionnaire was composed of three items measuring the
likelihood of attending a multicultural workshop across
varying times and contexts. These three items were summed
to form an intention measure. This general method of
measuring behavioral intention is widely employed in the
attitude literature (see Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; see
Appendix C for a copy of this questionnaire). A principle
components factor analysis of the three items revealed only
a single factor with an eigenvalue greater than 1.0. Item-
total correlations ranged from .60 to .83. Cronbach's alpha
for the measure was .82, suggesting adequate internal
consistency reliability. Intention was also dichotomized
into clear intent versus nonintent. Clear intent was
operationally defined as agreeing or strongly agreeing to
attend at least one diversity/multicultural workshop at the
university in the next month or year.


CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Overview
Although the inclusion of a multicultural perspective
to counseling psychology has been a welcome and needed
addition, this dissertation identifies several potential
weaknesses in the current multicultural training literature,
which have seldom been addressed empirically. First, the
attempt to focus multicultural training on the acquisition
of culture-specific information has been achieved at the
expense of an emphasis on prejudice-reduction. Second,
multicultural training has not sufficiently taken into
account the possibility that White people engage in overt
self-presentational strategies to appear culturally aware,
while still harboring covert racist attitudes and beliefs.
Finally, multicultural literature has failed to address the
role of White guilt in motivating Whites to adopt the patina
of multicultural sensitivity, which prevents honest dialogue
regarding their prejudicial attitudes and beliefs.
1


3
With an eye to Americas increasingly pluralistic
society, counseling psychology training programs have
invested much energy in developing ways of training
counselors (particularly White counselors) to work more
effectively with racially diverse clients (Hills & Strozier,
1992; Lee & Richardson, 1991). Concurrently, universities
around the United States have encouraged counselors to
provide "cultural diversity" training workshops to students
and staff in an effort to increase racial harmony and
decrease the incidence of racial conflict on college
campuses (McCormack, 1995; Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994).
Most of the training models designed to increase
cultural sensitivity aim to increase knowledge, awareness,
and skills with respect to culturally relevant variables.
They operate from three basic premises (Richardson &
Molinaro, 1996). First, in order to become more effective
in working with persons from different backgrounds,
counselors need to expand their knowledge base of various
cultural groups. Second, counselors need to recognize
cultural differences between these groups. Third,
counselors need to expand their repertoire of skills,
including skills associated with communication styles and a
broad array of interventions. Cultural diversity workshops
aimed at improving intergroup relations operate from the
same premises but deliver the information within a shorter


7
measures of less consciously controllable responses (Crosby,
Bromley, & Saxe, 1980; Devine, 1989; Gaertner & Dovidio,
1986; McConahay, 1986). Consciously controllable verbal
reports about racial and ethnic attitudes may primarily
reflect Whites self-presentational strategies, which can be
influenced by prevailing social norms, which sanction
overtly racist behavior.
Self-presentational strategies, however, are more than
calculated endorsements of particular attitudes or beliefs
to achieve the approval of others. Gaertner and Dovidio
(1986, 1981) have suggested that whereas most Whites harbor
some racist feelings and beliefs, most (particularly those
who view themselves as political liberals) are also invested
in viewing themselves as nonprejudiced and
nondiscriminatory. These so-called "aversive racists" do
not endorse traditionally hostile and aggressive forms of
racism; they willingly acknowledge past injustices, support
affirmative public policies, and identify with politically
liberal social agendas; however, they also typically possess
negative feelings regarding members of ethnic-minority
groups (Gaertner, & Dovidio, 1986, p. 69). Their
prejudicial feelings are usually outside of awareness, which
may function to preserve the positivity of their self-
concepts. When situations bring to consciousness this
internal conflict between their egalitarian values and their


23
The universal or etic approach is the most similar to
traditional counseling theories in that its focus is on the
individual (Carter & Qureshi, 1997; Sue, 1990), and all
counseling can be referred to as multicultural in nature
(Speight, Myers, Cox, & Highlen, 1991). While etic
approaches acknowledge the existence of cultural and
societal oppressive practices, they rely on the universal
value of shared human experiences (Fukuyama, 1990). Several
advantages exist in having a universal perspective toward
counseling. First, this approach acknowledges the
uniqueness of each individual. In doing so, it avoids
stereotyping people by expecting that all individuals
belonging to a cultural group experience reality in the same
way. Second, by avoiding narrow culture-specific techniques
and skills, a universal definition aligns more closely with
a theoretical approach to counseling than a methodological
one (Pedersen, 1991) Third, etic perspectives acknowledge
the complexity of multiculturalism and recognize that
diversity is not subsumed by any one ethnographic,
demographic, or affiliative variable.
Several multiculturalists disagree with this approach
(Lee, 1991; Locke, 1990; Triandis, Bontempo, Leung, & Hui,
1990). For example, Lee (1991) has argued that an etic
definition renders the term "multicultural" almost
meaningless, because it is defined so inclusively. There is


APPENDIX A
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
You are being asked to volunteer as a participant in a
research study conducted by M. G. Shanbhag, a doctoral
candidate in the Department of Psychology. This form is
designed to inform you about the study and to answer any
questions you may have. The purpose of this study is to
obtain people's opinions on a wide variety of topics.
Participants in this study will be asked to complete four
questionnaires. Participants will be asked not to put their
names on any questionnaires to insure their anonymity.
Instead, each questionnaire in a packet will have the same
numerical code on it for correlation purposes only. You do
not have to answer any question you do not wish to answer.
It will take approximately 30 minutes to complete this
study.
For your participation, you will receive 2 extra-credit
points in PCO 2714. Following the study, you will have the
chance to learn more about the nature of the study. Any
questions or concerns that participants may have as a result
of participating in this study will be addressed at that
time.
There are no risks or discomforts anticipated for
participants in this study. You may benefit by learning
more about your own opinions. If you wish to discuss any
potential discomforts you may experience, you may call the
Principal Investigator at 392-0601. Please read the
statement attached and print and sign the form. Questions
or concerns about research participants rights may be
directed to the FIRB office, P.O. Box 112250, UF,
Gainesville, FL 32611 or call 392-0433.
86


61
conscience scores from the Mosher Guilt Inventory (MGI) as
the dependent variable. Again, results showed that guilt
did not differ significantly by group [F(l, 84) = 1.73, p =
.19]. A comparison of the means for prejudice (MRS),
ambivalence (PAAQ), and guilt (MGI) for forewarning versus
control can be found in Table 1.
Table 1
Prejudice (MRS), Ambivalence (PAAQ), and Guilt (MGI) Means
by Forewarning Group
Control
Forewarning
n = 30
n = 55
MRS
M
16.9
17.4
SD
4.7
4.7
PAAQ
M
653.1
701.2
SD
201.6
284.4
MGI
M
65.1
62.7
SD
17.1
13.5
The second hypothesis posited that students at all
levels of White racial identity would show similar levels of
prejudice scores (MRS). This hypothesis was tested by a
one-way, between-subjects ANOVA with White racial identity
stage level (WRIAS) as the independent variable and
prejudice scores (MRS) as the dependent variable. The
original planned analysis was modified slightly because only
three students fell in the first (or Contact) stage of
WRIAS; therefore, Stage 1 was eliminated for the purposes of


29
addressing the possibility that students engage in self-
presentational strategies, which raises questions as to
whether multicultural training results in internal and
enduring changes that are reflected in behavior. Finally,
the tone of some multicultural dialogues may alienate many
psychologists from entering the multicultural conversation.
These points represent a summary of an analysis of potential
drawbacks in current multicultural thinking. These
observations are offered to facilitate the development of
multiculturalism, so that it can and will one day assume its
rightful place as a legitimate and necessary theoretical
foundation in psychology.
Multicultural Conceptual Variety
Currently, myriad definitions exist of the term
"multicultural" (Stone, 1997), and multiculturalists have
yet to agree on a direction in which to proceed with the
multicultural theoretical movement. Multicultural training
may consist of universal perspectives (Patterson, 1996), a
variety of technique specific approaches (Ponterotto, Casas,
Suzuki, & Alexander, 1995), and a host of conceptual
competency models (Pope-Davis & Coleman, 1997) ; all of these
models contain some commonalities but also many differences
in their approach which contributes to the field's image as
lacking in theoretical consensus (Leach & Carlton, 1997;
Ponterotto, Alexander, & Grieger, 1995). "Multiculturalism"


85
identity development as a construct may not be synonymous
with prejudice.
Although the lack of anticipated findings in this study
is disappointing, the evidence gathered suggests that the
original ideas about the potential weaknesses in current
multicultural training practices are still viable. The
design of the present study may not have been the ideal
vehicle to test such ideas.


73
previous studies which have found that college students tend
to fall into the latter stages of racial identity
development, when a discrete stage model is utilized
(Carter, 1990; Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994). The possibility
that most college individuals consistently appear to fall
into only certain stages of racial identity development
raises questions about the validity of Helm's model (1993)
or the method by which White racial identity development is
measured (Tokar & Swanson, 1991).
In addition, those students in this sample who fell in
the latter two stages of racial identity development
(Pseudoindependence and Autonomy) still endorsed a degree of
prejudice. This result suggests that advances at the latter
stages of racial identity development may not necessarily be
adequate indicators of the absence of prejudice. Such a
finding may be important given that White trainees' racial
identity development has frequently been cited as a key to
multicultural competence (Neville et al., 1996; Ottavi,
Pope-Davis, & Dings, 1994; Ponterotto, 1988; Sabnani,
Ponterotto, & Borodovsky, 1991). For example, Neville et
al. found that their multicultural course (covering 45 hours
of training) encouraged trainees to adopt a more positive
White racial identity and increased students' multicultural
competencies. However, Neville et al.'s course had no
significant impact on trainees' Contact, Disintegration, or


34
multicultural training (Stone, 1997). Frequently,
multicultural courses are taught by university faculty or
others in positions of power to directly affect a trainee's
progress in an academic training program. Because mastery
of multicultural counseling competencies often involves the
examination of personal and societally-sanctioned
prejudicial viewpoints, the likelihood that trainees engage
in self-presentational strategies to appear less prejudiced
and more multiculturally competent must be seriously
entertained in this research literature.
Given these power differentials between faculty and
students, are educators being realistic when they expect
trainees to acknowledge openly and fully their own prejudice
and racism? Faculty may underestimate their trainees when
they assume that students are not cognizant of the power
dynamics of graduate school and do not conduct themselves in
a way that furthers their own interests. Programs may need
to be willing to create safe spaces for trainees to examine
their own racism without fear of adverse consequences, and
students must be convinced of their safety before they may
be willing to engage in such exploration.
Multicultural Dissension and Dialogue
The tone of some multicultural dialogues may discourage
psychologists not previously committed to multiculturalism
from entering the field. Two examples illustrate this


50
constituted two essentially unrelated dimensions, and a low
non-significant correlation (r=.12) attested to the
independence of the two scales (Katz & Hass, 1988). All
items that did not show significant correlations with the
total score for other items of the same type, or showed a
high correlation with the total score on items of the
opposite type were dropped. Support for the construct
validity of the PAAQ was found through tests of convergent
and discriminant validity. Both the Pro-Black and Anti-
Black scales were significantly correlated in the expected
directions with various conceptually-related racism scales,
such as the Derogatory Beliefs Scale and the Ease in
Interracial Contacts Scale (Brigham, Woodmansee, & Cook,
1976; Woodmansee, & Cook, 1967). Neither the Pro-Black nor
the Anti-Black scale correlated significantly with the
Crowne and Marlowe Social Desirability Scale. Several
additional studies have attested to the PAAQs validity
(Hass, Katz, Rizzo, Bailey, & Eisenstadt, 1991; Hass, Katz,
Rizzo, Bailey, & Moore, 1992; Katz & Hass, 1988). Reported
Cronbachs coefficient alphas equal .73 for the Pro-Black
scale and .80 for the Anti-Black scale.
Guilt. One of the most widely used measures, the
Mosher Guilt Inventory (MGI; Mosher, 1968; 1988) was used to
measure guilt. The MGI measures three aspects of guilt:
sex-guilt, hostility-guilt, and guilty-conscience. For the


APPENDIX B
FOREWARNING MESSAGE
Students in the forewarning group received the following
message on the first page of their packet of materials:
The class lecture on racial issues will be given by a guest
speaker later this week. He is interested in getting an
idea of your attitudes on a variety of topics, including
your attitudes on race. Remember, your responses will be
completely anonymous. In no way will your answers be
traceable to you, so please be as honest as possible. Thank
you.
Students in the non-forewarning, control group received the
following message on the first page of their packet of
materials:
The class lecture on coping with stress will be given by a
guest speaker later this week. He is interested in getting
an idea of your attitudes on a variety of topics, including
your attitudes on stress. Remember, your responses will be
completely anonymous. In no way will your answers be
traceable to you, so please be as honest as possible. Thank
you.
88


DEMOGRAPHIC
Age:
Gender: M _
Ethnicity:
Class
Home State
APPENDIX D
INFORMATION AND MANIPULATION CHECK
0 F 1
African American
Asian American
Hispanic American and Latino
White or Anglo American
American Indian/ Native American
International (please specify)
Biracial (please specify)
Other (please specify)
0
1
2
3
'4
5
6
0
'l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
First year
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Graduate Student
Post-Bac
Other (please specify)
South Florida (Dade and Broward)
Florida
Southeast
(GA,AL,NC,SC,KY,TN, LA,MS,AR)
Midatlantic (MD,DC,DE,NJ,VA,WV)
Northeast
(PA, NY,MA, CT,NH,ME,VT,RI)
Mideast
(OH, OK, IL, IN, KS,MI,MN,MO, IA, NE)
Midwest (ID,MT,ND, SD,WY)
Southwest (AZ,TX,CO,NM,NV,UT)
West (CA, WA, OR, AL, HI)
Other


83
Lastly, this study design relied on self-report
measures of sensitive personal information, such as
prejudice. Research has already documented that survey data
on prejudice often underestimate the amount of prejudice
present (Crosby, Bromley, and Saxe, 1980; Dovidio & Fazio,
1992; Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995). Despite all attempts to
ensure anonymity of the participants, time constraints led
to the next class's students coming in and to participants
being rushed to finish their questionnaires, which may have
compromised the results. Finally, the question still
remains as to the link between explicit and implicit levels
of prejudice and actual prejudiced behavior towards others
(Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 1997). Further research is
needed to address such a question.
Suggestions for Future Research
Because much of the research conducted in this study
was new, the first step in future research would be to
replicate this study using the present design to compare
findings. Next, use of a stronger forewarning measure is
warranted, along with use of a sample of more advanced
students to test whether a socialization process regarding
the acceptability of acknowledging prejudice exists on
university campuses. It would also be relevant to include
Mosher's Hostility-guilt scale in addition to the Guilty-
conscience scale to differentiate between these two aspects


5 DISCUSSION 69
Summary and Interpretation of the Results 70
Implications of Current Findings 78
Limitations of the Current Study 79
Suggestions for Future Research 83
Conclusions 84
APPENDICES
A INFORMED CONSENT FORM 86
B FOREWARNING MESSAGE 88
C INTENT TO ATTEND A MULTICULTURAL WORKSHOP 89
D DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION AND MANIPULATION CHECK ... 90
E DEBRIEFING FORM 92
REFERENCES 93
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 106
v


25
Draguns, Lonner, & Trimble, 1989) most of the focus remains
on the four major ethnic-minority groups within the US:
African American, Asian American, Hispanic/Latino, and
Native American/Indian (Stone, 1997). Training programs are
structured toward increasing trainees' awareness, skills,
and knowledge and broadening theoretical, intervention, and
assessment approaches with respect to each of the four
ethnic-minority groups (DAndrea 6. Daniels, 1991) Although
one can infer that culturally-specific knowledge is
sufficient for a more beneficial outcome, it is more likely
that cultural information is necessary but not sufficient
for effective treatment (Sue & Zane, 1987).
The biggest advantage to the emic approach is its
attention to the sociopolitical histories of each of the
four major ethnic-groups (Sue & Sue, 1990) and its inclusion
of the idea that trainees need to understand the varied
cultural values, behaviors, and expectations of different
clients. The emic perspective is also largely responsible
for the overall consciousness raising that has occurred in
counseling psychology with respect to cultural hegemony in
the United States (Stone, 1997).
The emic approach has several disadvantages as well.
First, the overemphasis on cultural differences can often
lead to stereotyping (Arbona, 1995) and disregards the need
for common ground and universal humanity (Patterson, 1996;


60
between-subjects ANOVAs. In order to ensure that only those
students who fully understood the manipulation were included
in this analysis, students's initial forewarning group
(identified by the coded number on the front of each
questionnaire packet referring to forewarning or control)
had to match their final response on the manipulation check.
In other words, participants had to have accurately
acknowledged that they were expecting either a lecture on
racial issues or on stress, and their response had to match
the actual condition to which they were randomly assigned.
Eighty-five White students met the necessary condition, with
55 students in the forewarning group and 30 in the control.
The first one-way, between-subjects ANOVA used
forewarning as the independent variable and prejudice scores
from the Modern Racism Scale (MRS) as the dependent
variable. Results showed that prejudice did not differ
significantly by group [F(l, 84) = 0.23, p = .64],
The second one-way, between-subjects ANOVA used
forewarning as the independent variable and ambivalence
scores from the Pro-Black Anti-Black Attitudes Questionnaire
(PAAQ) as the dependent variable. No support was found to
suggest that attitudinal ambivalence differed by forewarning
group [F(l, 84) = 0.67, p = .41].
The third one-way, between-subjects ANOVA used
forewarning as the independent variable and guilty-


55
Planned Data Analyses
Hypothesis 1: The hypothesis that forewarning would
lead to anticipatory race-based attitude shifts, increased
feelings of guilt, and increased attitudinal ambivalence was
tested by three one-way between subjects analyses of
variance (ANOVA). Group (forewarning vs. control) served as
the independent variable and prejudice scores (MRS), racial
attitudinal ambivalence (PAAQ), and guilt scores (MGI)
served as the dependent variables.
Hypothesis 2: The hypothesis that there would be no
significant relationship between White racial identity level
and prejudice scores was tested with a one-way, between-
subjects ANOVA. White racial identity stage level (WRIAS)
served as the independent variable and prejudice scores
(MRS) served as the dependent variable.
Hypothesis 3: This hypothesis stated that White
students who endorsed higher levels of attitudinal
ambivalence regarding members of ethnic-minority groups
would show significantly lower levels of prejudice. A
Pearson product moment correlation was performed with
attitudinal ambivalence (PAAQ) and prejudice scores (MRS)
serving as the correlated variables.
Hypothesis 4: The hypothesis that a significant
relationship would exist between racial ambivalence and
guilt was tested with a Pearson product moment correlation,


46
(see Appendix B for copies of the two information sheets).
Measured Variables
Prejudicial beliefs. As a measure of racial prejudice,
the Modern Racism Scale (MRS; McConahay, Hardee, & Batts,
1981) is designed to measure prejudicial beliefs toward
Blacks in a nonreactive fashion. The MRS consists of 22
items, seven of which are used to calculate the racism
score. For example, Item #9 reads, "Over the past few
years, blacks have gotten more economically than they
deserve." Items are scored on a Likert-type scale, from -2
(strongly disagree) to +2 (strongly agree), with a possible
range of -14 (low prejudice) to +14 (high prejudice).
The MRS's Cronbachs alphas have ranged from .76 to .83
(McConahay, Hardee, & Batts, 1981; Monteith, 1996).
Although (and perhaps because) the scale is not face valid,
the MRS has shown sound construct validity. The MRS is
significantly correlated with anti-black feeling as measured
by the Feeling Thermometer (Campbell, 1971) and the Old-
Fashioned Racism Scale (McConahay, 1982) and is
significantly negatively correlated with the scale of
Sympathetic Identification with the Underdog (McConahay, &
Hough, 197 6). Finally, McConahays experimental study of
simulated hiring decisions (1983) showed that high scorers
on the MRS were less willing to hire a Black candidate than
a White candidate with identical credentials, suggesting


96
Essandoh, P. K. (1996). Multicultural counseling as
the "fourth force": A call to arms. Counseling
Psychologist, 24, 126-137.
Farrell, W., & Olson, J. (1983). Kenneth and Mamie
Clark revisited: Racial identification and racial
preference in dark-skinned and light-skinned Black children.
Urban Education, 18, 284-297.
Fehr, L. A., & Stamps, L. E. (1979). The Mosher guilt
scales: A construct validity extension. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 43, 257-260.
Fowers, B. J., & Richardson, F. C. (1996). Why is
multiculturalism good? American Psychologist, 51, 609-621.
Fukuyama, M. A. (1990). Taking an universal approach
to multicultural counseling. Counselor Education and
Supervision, 30, 6-17.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1981). Racism
among the well-intentioned. In E. G. Clausen & J.
Berminghan (Eds.), Pluralism, racism, and public policy:
The search for equality (pp. 208-222). Boston: G. K. Hall.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The
aversive form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner
(Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 61-89).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Green, S. E., & Mosher, D. L. (1985). A causal model
of sexual arousal to erotic fantasies. Journal of Sex
Research, 21, 1-23.
Guthrie, R. (1976). Even the rat was white: A
historical view of psychology. New York: Harper & Row.
Hall, C. I. (1997). Cultural malpractice: The
growing obsolescence of psychology with the changing U.S.
population. American Psychologist, 52, 642-651.
Hall, G. N. (1997). Misunderstandings of
multiculturalism: Shouting fire in crowded theaters.
American Psychologist, 52, 654-655.
Hass, R. G., Katz, I., Rizzo, N., Bailey, J., &
Eisenstadt, D. (1991) Cross-racial appraisal as related
to attitude ambivalence and cognitive complexity.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 83-92.


26
Pedersen, 1996). This overemphasis on cultural diversity in
conjunction with culture-specific counseling techniques also
has the potential of leading to chameleon-like counselors,
who change from client to client (Patterson, 1996) which
may be inconsistent with Rogers' notions of authenticity and
genuineness in counseling (Rogers, 1957) Moreover,
Patterson (1996) has argued that an emic perspective ignores
the reality of the global village phenomenon in which
cultural practices are increasingly becoming unified across
boundaries and migratory patterns. He warns that the emic
perspective's preconceived notions of client behavior could
lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy, in which clients behave
in the way that the counselor expects simply because the
counselor expects it. Finally, there "is a limit to the
degree to which the fundamental psychological-therapeutic
orientation can be compromised" (Ho, 1985, p. 1214) given
that counseling as currently envisioned in the West relies
on such qualities as verbal facility about personal problems
for success. It is potentially unwise to abandon those
aspects that are crucial to therapeutic progress, such as
the centrality of the relationship between the counselor and
client.
Given the lack of consensus regarding appropriate
multicultural education, most counseling educators try to
offer training that combines an etic and emic focus to help


37
motivations are rarely scrutinized. For example, it seems
undoubtedly probable that those psychologists who study the
issues of poverty and homelessness belong comfortably to the
middle class themselves. To question the motives of White
multicultural researchers only serves to discourage more
Whites from pursuing this interest area.
These multicultural practices are in many ways the
result of double standards already in place in psychology.
Parham (1993) described many of these unfair practices,
including the irony that many ethnic-minority researchers
are denied tenure for studying communities of color while
White multicultural researchers receive promotion for doing
the same. In addition, journal editors often appear more
willing to publish the ethnic research of White colleagues,
yet reject similar articles from psychologists of color
(Parham, 1993).
Parham's (1993) open examination of these inequities
and honest exploration of the resentment among minority
researchers toward their majority colleagues was an
important step in the examination of multicultural
scholarship. However, multicultural researchers have fought
long to have access to scholarly productivity, and their aim
has never been to create unfair practices of their own. To
turn around and question the rights of others to engage in
multicultural research ultimately limits scholarly


104
Sue, D. W. (1990) Culture specific techniques in
counseling: A conceptual framework. Professional
Psychology, 21, 424-433.
Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992).
Multicultural counseling competencies and standards: A call
to the profession. Journal of Counseling and Development,
70, 477-486.
Sue, S., S Sue, D. W. (1971). Chinese-American
personality and mental health. Amerasia Journal, 2, 39-49.
Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (1990). Counseling the
culturally different: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). New
York: Wiley.
Sue, S., Sl Zane, N. (1987). The role of culture and
cultural techniques in psychotherapy. American
Psychologist, 42, 37-45.
Taylor, C. (1994). The politics of recognition. In A.
Gutmann (Ed.), Multiculturalism: Examining the politics of
recognition (pp. 25-73). Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Tokar, D. M., & Swanson, J. L. (1991). An
investigation of the validity of Helms's (1984) model of
White racial identity development. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 38, 296-301.
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Leung, K., & Hui, C. H.
(1990). A method for determining cultural, demographic and
person constructs. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
21, 302-318.
Vontress, C. E. (1967). Counseling Negro adolescents.
The School Counselor, 15, 86-91.
Vontress, C. E. (1970). Counseling blacks. Personnel
and Guidance Journal, 48, 713-319.
Wehrly, B. (1995). Pathways to multicultural
counseling competence: A developmental journey. New York:
Brooks/Cole.
White, A. M. (1994). A course in the psychology of
oppression: A different approach to teaching about
diversity. Teaching of Psychology, 21, 17-23.


78
Implications of Current Findings
The lack of findings supporting this study's hypotheses
suggests either that the original ideas are flawed or that
flaws exist in the research design. For example, this
study's results may suggest that forewarning of an upcoming
racial issues lecture may not affect or moderate Whites
attitudes towards Blacks. It is possible that people are
honest on self-report questionnaires of prejudice without
moderating their opinions in the face of an upcoming
diversity presentation, or in the context of multicultural
training. Perhaps White students do not engage in self-
presentational strategies to appear more sensitive on racial
issues. Although such a conclusion is consistent with the
lack of empirical support for the hypothesis, it appears
somewhat unlikely given the wealth of social psychology
research on prejudice. Such research has extensively
documented the difference between White people's explicit
and implicit manifestations of prejudice (Crosby, Bromley, &
Saxe, 1980; Dovidio S Fazio, 1992; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986;
McConahay, 1986; Pettigrew & Meertens, 1995). A more likely
explanation is that the forewarning message in this study
did not evoke the intended reaction. This explanation is
described in detail in the following limitations section.
Second, although no hypothesis was upheld by the data,
post-hoc analyses did provide evidence to suggest some


53
Demographics A Demographic Questionnaire was used to
gather information on participants, including age, gender,
race, and year in college (see Appendix D for a copy of the
items).
Procedure
First, interested participants were solicited from one
of the psychology departments undergraduate summer classes
by presenting participation in this study as a voluntary,
extra-credit opportunity. Data was collected during a
single class meeting with all class members who elected to
participate. The principal investigator supervised the
overall data collection process; however to minimize the
effects of racial priming, two White male students actually
administered the data collection.
Participants were randomly divided into two groups.
Both groups received an identical packet of materials
including an Informed Consent Form, the White Racial
Identity Attitudes Scale, the Modern Racism Scale, the Pro-
Black Anti-Black Attitude Questionnaire, the Mosher Guilt
Inventory, and the Intention to Attend a Workshop. In
addition, the first group received an information sheet at
the beginning of the packet of materials stating that a
presenter would be coming later in the week to give a
lecture on stress and was interested in soliciting opinions
on a wide variety of topics. The forewarned group received


36
between White and non-White multicultural researchers, his
comments in the symposium suggested that a new litmus test
was being developed in counseling psychology regarding who
could serve as a multicultural researcher. Being a person
of color was emerging as the necessary qualifier for
producing multicultural research that could be assured not
to derive from racist, colonial, or patriarchical
motivations.
The questioning of the motivations of White researchers
who study multicultural topics sets up unfair standards in
several ways. First, although White multicultural
researchers are scrutinized as to their racial identity
development stage, guilt, racism, and colonial
underpinnings, multicultural scholars from ethnic-minority
backgrounds do not receive the same scrutiny, despite the
fact that "color, gender, and sexual orientation do not make
people diversity experts" (Hall, 1997, p. 645) Second,
discouraging White researchers from pursuing multicultural
research ultimately decreases the number of studies on a
much needed topic. Third, the question as to what drives
psychologists to spend their lives studying a particular
issue may be applied to almost all psychologists and their
respective areas of interest, although such a question is
seldom posed. Finally, many psychologists study issues with
little outward relevance to their own lives; yet, their


CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
Overview
In this chapter, the results of this study's hypotheses
are discussed along with possible explanations to account
for the findings. First, I briefly review the purpose of
the study. Then, I describe the study's findings in light
of previous research and explore the limitations in the
current study. Finally, I offer suggestions for future
research.
This study's purpose was to assess the viability of
several potential weaknesses identified in current
multicultural literature, based on previous findings from
social psychology. These findings from social psychology
confirm that Whites harbor more prejudice toward Blacks than
they willingly admit (Crosby, Bromley, & Saxe, 1980;
Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; McConahay, 1986), that Whites are
ambivalent about their racial attitudes (Katz, Wackenhut, &
Hass, 1986), and that Whites often selectively change their
69


51
purposes of this study, only the guilty-conscience subscale
was used, which Mosher defines as the generalized expectancy
for self-mediated punishment for violating internalized
standards of moral behavior or anticipating the violation of
such standards.
The inventory has been described favorably with regard
to convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity (Fehr &
Stamps, 1979; Green & Mosher, 1985; Kelley, 1985; Mosher &
Vonderheide, 1985). Criterion validity is evidenced by the
MGIs ability to discriminate first offenders from
recidivists at the Ohio Penitentiary (Mosher & Mosher, 1966)
and delinquent boys from matched controls (Ruma, 1967). In
addition, the MGI has correlated significantly with several
other personality inventories, including the Edwards
Personality Profile Inventory (Abramson, Mosher, Abramson, &
Wochowsi, 1977) and with global clinical ratings of guilt
(Fehr & Stamps, 1979). Finally, the MGI has shown
predictive validity with respect to authoritarianism, moral
judgment, Machiavellianism, and a host of sexuality-related
attitudes including contraceptive attitudes (Drake, 1995;
Mosher & Vonderheide, 1985; Ruma & Mosher, 1967). Split-
half reliability coefficients have averaged approximately
.90 (Mosher S Vonderheide, 1985; Mosher, 1968).
The guilty-conscience subscale consists of 22 items
with higher scores indicating more guilt. For example, Item


47
that the MRS is a valid measure of racism. Discriminant
validity is evidenced by Polin (1982) who showed that
beliefs in a just world cannot be used to explain prejudiced
responses to the MRS; in two different samples, the
correlations between the MRS and the Belief in a Just World
Scale (Rubin & Peplau, 1973) were not statistically
significant. In addition, the lack of significant effects
in several studies for race of the experimenter supports the
notion of the nonreactiveness of the MRS (McConahay, 1986).
White racial identity development. The White Racial
Identity Attitudes Scale (Helms & Carter, 1993) was used to
assess level of racial development of the participants. The
WRIAS is based on Helms (1984) five stages of White racial
identity development in which Whites increasingly abandon
racism and define a positive White identity. The stages
consist of the following: (a) Contactlimited
understanding of racial and cultural issues. Sample items
include "I hardly think about what race I am, and "I find
myself watching Black people to see what they are like;" (b)
Disintegrationawareness of race as a social construct
(e.g., "Society may have been unjust to Blacks, but it has
also been unjust to Whites," and "I do not understand what
Blacks want from Whites"); (c) Reintegrationidealization
of Whiteness and denigration of Blackness (e.g., "I get
angry when I think about how Whites have been treated by


59
which were computed by multiplying Pro and Anti scores,
ranged from 100 to 1710 (out of a possible 0 to 2,500), with
a mean of 682.4.
Guilt was measured using the Guilty-Conscience Subscale
of the Mosher Guilt Inventory (MGI; Mosher, 1988; 1968).
The MGI consists of 22 items, each using a Likert-type
rating scale ranging from 0 to 6. Possible scores may range
from 0 to 132. The MGI mean was 62.9 (SD = 16.2), with a
range of 5 to 94.
Intent to attend a multicultural workshop was measured
by summing a three-item questionnaire using a Likert-type
scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Scores could range from 3 to 15. Students' responses ranged
from 3 to 14 (M = 8.4, SD= 2.8). Clear intent to attend a
multicultural workshop was operationally defined as
participants having agreed or strongly agreed that they
would voluntarily attend a workshop in the next month or
year. Forty-three of the 105 participants expressed clear
intent to attend.
Hypotheses
The first hypothesis predicted that forewarning
students of the race-based nature of the study would lead to
significant anticipatory race-based attitude shifts,
increased feelings of attitudinal ambivalence, and increased
guilt. This hypothesis was tested by three one-way,


21
With this growing recognition that culture helps to
explain human behavior has come the need to give counselors
a greater variety of counseling tools and techniques to use
with clients from different cultures, and the multicultural
movement's focus has shifted from demanding that
psychologists think critically about racial and ethnic
issues to exploring the makeup of multicultural competencies
(Hills & Strozier, 1992; Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992) .
At the national level, professional groups, including the
American Psychological Association (APA) and the American
Personnel and Guidance Association (APGA) have called on
academic programs to provide their students with
multicultural counseling skills (American Psychological
Association, 1983; Casas, 1984; Carter & Qureshi, 1995).
Many counseling psychology and counselor education programs
have begun offering multicultural courses in their curricula
to address these concerns (Heath, Neimeyer, s Pedersen,
1988; Ponterotto & Casas, 1987). This focus on
multicultural training and competency has occupied much of
multicultural scholarship's priority in the 1990's.
Current Approaches to Multicultural Training
Today, most professional programs in psychology offer
some type of multicultural training for their students
(Hills & Strozier, 1992). Unfortunately, the field still
lacks consensus concerning training models (Carey, Reinat, &


CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Statistical Analyses Procedures
This chapter presents the results of statistical
analyses designed to test the hypotheses under study.
First, descriptive data are presented. Then, the results of
the analyses to test the hypotheses follow. Finally, post-
hoc analyses are presented.
The data collected in the current study were analyzed
using SAS software (SAS Institute Inc., 1990). In order to
compensate for unequal cell sizes, the general linear model
procedure and the Type III Sum of Squares were used in all
analyses of variance.
Descriptive Statistics
Prejudice was measured using McConahay's Modern Racism
Scale (MRS; McConahay, Hardee, & Batts, 1981) employing a
Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree). Obtainable scores range from 7 to 35,
with the higher scores representing more prejudice. The
57


65
vs. control) as the independent variable and Pro-Black
scores as the dependent variable. No significant results
were found to suggest that Pro-Black scores differed by
forewarning [F(l, 84) 1.26, p = .26], The second ANOVA
used group (forewarning vs. control) as the independent
variable and Anti-Black scores as the dependent variable.
In this case, results did differ significantly [F(l, 84) =
5.54, g =.02], with those who received forewarning actually
reporting more anti-Black sentiment (M = 29.1, SD = 8.9)
than those who received no forewarning (M = 24.5, SD = 7.7).
The third hypothesis, which had predicted a significant
relationship between ambivalence and prejudice, was tested
by two Pearson product moment correlations looking at the
relationship between prejudice and pro-Black or anti-Black
feelings. In the first correlation, Pro-Black and prejudice
(MRS) scores served as the correlated variables. A
significant inverse relationship was found between MRS and
Pro-Black scores (r; = -.45, p < .001) In the second
correlation, Anti-Black and prejudice (MRS) scores served as
the correlated variables. A significant relationship was
found between MRS and Anti-Black scores (r = .49, p < .001).
The fourth hypothesis, which had predicted a
significant relationship between ambivalence and guilty-
conscience (MGI), was reanalyzed using two Pearson product
moment correlations to assess the relationship between guilt


66
and Pro-Black or Anti-Black scores. Neither correlation
attained significance [MGI and Pro-Black scores, r = .12, g
= .21; MGI and Anti-Black scores, r = .07, g = .50].
Interestingly, a significant inverse relationship was found
between prejudice, as measured by the MRS, and guilt; the
more prejudice students endorsed, the lower their guilty-
conscience scores (r = -.23, g = .02).
To see if White racial identity differed by
forewarning, five one-way, between-subjects ANOVAs were run,
with group (forewarning vs. control) serving as the
independent variable in all ANOVAs and the score on each
subscale of White racial identity serving as the dependent
variable. The only racial identity level score that
differed as a function of forewarning was Reintegration,
which refers to an idealization of Whiteness and a
denigration of Blackness, [F(l, 84) = 3.96, g = .05], Those
who received a forewarning actually expressed higher
Reintegration attitudes (M = 26.1, SD = 6.4) than those who
received no forewarning (M = 23.5, SD = 4.5), suggesting
that scores on the Reintegration subscale may be susceptible
to forewarning effects.
In order to explore whether students in different
classes expressed different amounts of prejudice, a Pearson
product moment correlation was conducted with year-in-school
and prejudice (MRS) scores serving as the two variables. A


49
other measures of personality constructs, such as the
Fundamental Interpersonal Relationship Orientation scale
(McCaine, 1986). A principal components factor analysis
confirmed that items from the same subscales had factor
loadings in the same direction; however, some items did load
significantly across more than one factor (Helms, 1993).
None of the items correlated significantly with the Crowne
and Marlowe Social Desirability scale.
Racial ambivalence. The Pro-Black and Anti-Black
Attitude Questionnaire (PAAQ; Katz & Hass, 1988) is designed
to assess racial ambivalence toward Blacks. The pro-Black
items indicate level of positive feelings toward Blacks as a
disadvantaged group while anti-Black items measure the
degree to which people are critical of Blacks.
The two scales (one pro-Black and one anti-Black) have
10 items each, with items using a Likert-type scale ranging
from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). One
example of a pro-Black item states "Many Whites show a real
lack of understanding of the problems that Blacks face;" an
anti-Black item reads, "Blacks dont seem to use
opportunities to own and operate little shops and
businesses." Ambivalence scores are computed from the
product of both Pro-Black and Anti-Black scores.
In the initial construction of the PAAQ, a principal-
components factor analysis confirmed that the two scales


9
key features in common with the process by which students
typically sign up to take a multicultural workshop or
course, such as a description of the presentation or course
and the intended outcome. Several explanations exist as to
why anticipatory opinion effects occur, including a desire
to protect ones self-esteem from damage, conformity
pressures, and a motivation to appear more moderate
(Cialdini, Levy, Herman, & Evenback, 1973; McGuire &
Millman, 1965; White, 1975). These anticipatory opinion
shifts, however, are not necessarily indicative of conscious
attempts at self-presentation, but may also reflect internal
attitude change, but of an impermanent nature.
Anticipatory opinion shifts are important for
multicultural scholarship because they suggest that Whites'
self-reported attitude change following multicultural
training may not always be trustworthy or stable. Results
suggest that anticipatory shifts are either strategic in
nature or reflect only temporary attitude change. After
situational pressures are eased, peoples opinions are
likely to shift back to their original positions (Cialdini,
Levy, Herman, & Evenback, 1973).
These findings from social psychological research on
prejudice, racism, and anticipatory attitude change
processes are particularly problematic for the field of
counseling psychology because they suggest that counseling


84
of guilt. Conceivably, White students may have hostile
guilt in response to prejudice rather than guilt resulting
from conscience. Finally, a measure of White guilt needs to
be developed.
Long term, it would be interesting to include pre and
post measures of prejudice such as the Modern Racism Scale
(McConahay, Hardee, & Batts, 1981) and measures of White
guilt as part of the evaluation of multicultural training
effectiveness. These measures would address whether
multicultural training produces unintended outcomes such as
hypervigilant and avoidance behaviors, driven by
defensiveness and guilt, on the part of White students.
Including these measures would also shed light on whether
White students overtly endorse their own multicultural
competence while covertly harboring prejudicial thoughts.
Conclusions
This dissertation empirically addressed several
identified weaknesses in the current multicultural training
literature. These potential weaknesses included the idea
that Whites might engage in self-presentational strategies
to appear culturally aware, while still harboring covert,
racially-prejudiced attitudes, that White guilt might play a
role in encouraging Whites to adopt the patina of
multicultural sensitivity in order to avoid honest dialogue
regarding their own prejudice, and that White racial


70
attitudes to appear more moderate (Cialdini & Petty, 1981;
Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986).
This study looked at the possibility that White people
engage in overt self-presentational strategies to appear
culturally aware while still harboring covert prejudiced
attitudes and beliefs. Second, the study explored the role
of guilt in motivating Whites to adopt the patina of
multicultural sensitivity, while also motivating Whites to
avoid honest dialogue regarding their prejudicial attitudes
and beliefs. Finally, I suggested that Whites who
voluntarily choose to attend multicultural workshops are
potentially the persons who least need such training.
Summary and Interpretation of the Results
Hypothesis 1 stated that forewarning White students of
an upcoming racial issues lecture on prejudice would lead to
a shift in race-based attitudes. According to this
hypothesis, students who believed they were to receive a
racial issues lecture would endorse less prejudice, more
guilt, and more race-related ambivalence. Data did not
support this hypothesis. In fact, a post-hoc analysis
revealed that forewarning students of an upcoming racial
issues lecture actually led to their endorsing more anti-
Black sentiment than students who thought they were to
receive a lecture on stress. Students who received a
forewarning also showed stronger Reintegration attitudes, on


74
Reintegration attitudes, suggesting further that the
adoption of a positive White racial identity may not be
linked to the abandonment of racism and prejudice (White,
1994).
Although the data did not support Hypothesis 2, the
findings raise some doubts as to the validity of using
increases in White racial identity development as an
indicator of both prejudice reduction and multicultural
competence for the reasons discussed above. Treating
prejudice and White racial identity as distinct may
encourage multicultural scholars to use both measures in
outcome research of multicultural efficacy, rather than
relying only on an increase in White racial identity level
as an adequate indicator of the benefits of training.
No significant relationship existed between White
students' level of prejudice and attitudinal ambivalence;
thus, Hypothesis 3 was not supported. Although racial
ambivalence and prejudice may simply be unrelated, the lack
of a significant relationship may lie in the way racial
ambivalence is currently measured. By simply multiplying
Pro and Anti scores, the ability to distinguish between all
but the most ambivalent people is lost. Presumably those
with high Pro and low Anti scores would have different
prejudice levels from those with low Pro and high Anti
scores. The ambivalence measure used in this study,


35
discouragement. The first example comes from a symposium
held at the 1990 APA convention that subsequently made a
Counseling Psychologist special issue topic (Mio & Iwamasa,
1993) the second comes from a 1996 article by Fowers and
Richardson in the American Psychologist.
The 1990 APA convention symposium examined the role of
White researchers in addressing multicultural issues and
addressed several topics, including the historical role of
White researchers in cross-cultural psychology, the ways in
which science has reinforced stereotypic views of minority
individuals, the role of White racial identity development,
and the relationship between White and ethnic-minority
researchers (Mio & Iwamasa, 1993). In particular, Thomas
Parham discussed the feelings of resentment on the part of
some ethnic-minority researchers at the reality that it was
not until White researchers began studying people of color
that multicultural research gained an intellectual
legitimacy in the dominant culture. As a result, he
described the continued disenfranchisement in psychology of
many multicultural researchers from ethnic-minority
backgrounds and asked the question, "Who truly spoke for
multicultural counseling?" (Mio & Iwamasa, 1993; Parham,
1993).
Although Parham's frankness was valuable in honestly
describing the interactional subtleties of the relationship


13
increased feelings of guilt, and increased race-related
attitudinal ambivalence.
Hypothesis 2: White students at all levels of White
racial identity will endorse similar levels of covert
prejudice; there will be no significant relationship between
White racial identity level and prejudice scores.
Hypothesis 3: White students who endorse higher levels
of racial attitudinal ambivalence regarding members of
ethnic-minority groups will show significantly lower levels
of prejudice.
Hypothesis 4: White students high in racial
ambivalence will be high in guilt; there will be a
significant relationship between racial ambivalence and
guilt.
Hypothesis 5: White students who express the strongest
intentions to attend multicultural training workshops will
be those who demonstrate the lowest need. That is, those
Whites with the strongest intentions will also score lowest
on measures of prejudice.
Importance of the Study
This study has important potential implications for
both the utility of offering cultural diversity workshops to
volunteer participants (e.g., though classroom
presentations) and for the effectiveness of multicultural
training as it is currently practiced in counseling


27
their students expand their awareness, skills, and knowledge
about culturally diverse populations (D'Andrea & Daniels,
1991; Hollis & Wantz, 1994) Much of this multicultural
training is provided through a single course, as opposed to
an integrative curriculum approach (D'Andrea S Daniels,
1991). The one-course approach may be more popular because
of budget constraints, a low number of faculty who believe
in the importance of multicultural education, a low number
of faculty capable of providing multicultural training, and
the desire to avoid revamping curricula (Reynolds, 1995;
Ridley, Mendoza, & Kanitz, 1994). Currently, 73% of
counseling psychology programs offer a multicultural course,
but fewer than 50% make the course a requirement (Quintana &
Bernal, 1995).
Despite honorable intentions, however, much of the
multicultural information provided by programs is
superficial and stereotypic (Corey, 1991; D'Andrea &
Daniels, 1991; Pedersen, 1988). Few graduating students
feel competent to work with culturally-diverse populations
(Allison, Crawford, Echemendia, Robinson, & Knepp, 1994).
It appears that multicultural training efforts to date have
yet to achieve their desired outcomes, and that much
progress remains to be made before programs systematically
provide their students the necessary training for
multicultural competence (D'Andrea & Daniels, 1991;


32
valid concerns, and it is irresponsible of multiculturalists
to dismiss their critics as conservative or reactionary
without seriously addressing their claims.
The differentiation between the politics of
multiculturalism and the multicultural counseling movement,
which the current multicultural literature fails to make, is
important because this distinction allows honest debate
about the philosophical foundations of the first while
leaving the need for the second intact. Advocates of
multiculturalism seldom acknowledge that the political
position may be orthogonal to the knowledge and skills
needed to work effectively with clients of color. For
example, a person's dislike of the airline pilots' union is
unrelated to his or her effectiveness in flying an airplane.
Ultimately, the training imperative to provide psychologists
with the knowledge and skills to be effective counselors
with people of all colors may be more important for the
profession than garnering political agreement from
psychologists. In addition, given the recent backlash
against political correctness, with which multiculturalism
is often closely associated, distinguishing politics from
training imperatives may be doubly necessary to ensure the
very survival of the multicultural counseling movement
(Leach & Carlton, 1997).


8
underlying negative beliefs about people of color, aversive
racists respond with feelings of discomfort, uneasiness, and
guilt (Devine, 1996; Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986).
Because of the affective discomfort caused by the
discrepancy between beliefs and actual feelings, people
often respond in one of two ways: they either become
hypervigilant against committing perceived transgressions
indicative of racial antipathy, or they engage in avoidance
behaviors. In both cases, people are motivated to distance
these negative underlying feelings from their self-images,
in an attempt to maintain a nonprejudiced sense of self.
Instead of being able to be authentic and spontaneous,
aversive racists vigilance leads them to amplify their
positive behavior toward minority group members so as to
reaffirm their nonracist convictions or to express "the
underlying negative portions of their attitudes . but in
subtle, rationalizable ways" (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986, p.
62) .
Finally, several studies from social psychology confirm
the existence of anticipatory attitude changes. These are
opinion shifts that occur when people expect to hear a
persuasive communication designed to influence their
opinions (Cialdini & Petty, 1981; Romero, Agnew, & Insko,
1996). The process by which people are informed of an
upcoming communication is referred to as forewarning and has


39
their article showed how far multiculturalism in psychology
has yet to travel to achieve a lasting consensus.
Fowers and Richardson (1996) made four major points,
briefly summarized here, to illustrate several
inconsistencies in multicultural scholarship. The authors
first wondered why, if psychology were truly such a racist
discipline, had it embraced multiculturalism? Second, they
were discouraged by a multiculturalism that heightened
cultural separatism even though they acknowledged the self-
protective motives that often underlie inter-ethnic
distance. Third, the authors explored the moral conflict
involved in promoting tolerance and respect for cultural
practices that violated international standards of human
welfare; for example, virginity tests, female circumcision,
and ethnic "cleansing." Finally, Fowers and Richardson
explored the intricacies of radical cultural relativism. In
sum, the authors accused proponents of multiculturalism of
failing to be self-reflective about the inconsistencies in
multiculturalism1s messages and cautioned that psychology
"confronts these issues thoughtfully rather than rushing
pell-mell to embrace multiculturalism, even in the service
of important aims" (p. 620).
The published reactions to Fowers and Richardson came
from those who agreed and disagreed with the original
authors. The first reaction came from proponents of


APPENDIX E
DEBRIEFING FORM
Thank you for your participation in this experiment. Your
responses to the questionnaires will be kept completely
anonymous; you will be identified by code number only.
The purpose of this study was to examine White people's
attitudes toward African Americans and to determine whether
racism, ambivalence toward Blacks, and guilt are related.
Moreover, this study looks at whether receiving a
"forewarning" of the multicultural intent of the
investigation influences people's responses. This study may
ultimately help clarify the benefits of providing
multicultural training to college students.
Thank you again for your participation in this study. If
you have any questions about the study, please feel free to
contact the Principal Investigator, Marnie G. Shanbhag, at
392-0601.
92


17
Despite some 40 years of a multicultural presence in
psychology, much work remains to be done. Ethnic-minority
psychologists still only make up 5% of APA's total roster,
ethnic-minority clients continue to underutilize mental
health services, and the call to increase multicultural
competencies remains somewhat unheeded by the majority of
doctoral training programs (D'Andrea & Daniels, 1995; Das
1995). Multiculturalism appears to have stalled on the
brink of achieving a lasting legitimacy in psychology, and
recent multicultural dialogues have been fraught with
dissension and tension (Eckstrom, 1997; Fowers & Richardson,
1996; Mio & Iwamasa, 1993).
History
It is common to date the beginning of the multicultural
movement to the mid 1960s and 1970s, in the immediate
aftermath of the civil right's movement (Casas, 1984;
Jackson, 1995; Wehrly, 1995). In fact, the first stirrings
of multiculturalism in psychology date back even further
(Wehrly, 1995). Abraham Maslow, in 1954, devoted much space
in his classic text Motivation and Personality to the role
of culture in maintaining personality, and in the same year
Gordon Allport (1954) published his seminal work The Nature
of Prejudice. Soon after, George Kelly (1955) encouraged
clinicians to assess cultural variations in clients, while
also admonishing clinicians not to fall into the trap of


95
Corey, G. (1991). Theory and practice of counseling
and psychotherapy (4th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA;
Brooks/Cole.
Corvin, S. A., & Wiggins, F. (1989). An antiracism
training model for white professionals. Journal of
Multicultural Counseling and Development, 17, 105-114.
Crosby, F., Bromley, S., s Saxe, L. (1980). Recent
unobtrusive studies of black and white discrimination and
prejudice: A literature review. Psychological Bulletin,
87, 546-563.
DAndrea, M., & Daniels, J. (1991). Exploring the
different levels of multicultural counseling training in
counselor education. Journal of Counseling and Development,
70, 78-85.
DAndrea, M., & Daniels, J. (1995). Promoting
multiculturalism and organizational change in the counseling
profession: A case study. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M.
Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of
multicultural counseling (pp. 17-33). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
DAndrea, M., Daniels, J., & Heck, R. (1991).
Evaluating the impact of multicultural counseling training.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 143-251.
Das, A. K. (1995). Rethinking multicultural
counseling: Implications for counselor education. Journal
of Counseling and Development, 74, 45-52.
Davidson, K. S., Gibby, R. G., McNeil, E. B., Segal, S.
J., & Silverman, H. (1950). A preliminary study of Negro
and White differences on Form 1 of the Wechsler-Bellevue
Scale. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 14, 489-492.
Drake, D. S. (1995). Assessing machiavellianism and
morality-conscience guilt. Psychological Reports, 77, 1355-
1359.
D'Souza, D. (1991). Illiberal education: The
politics of race and sex on campus, New York: Free Press.
Ekstrom, R. D. (1997). Compliments to Fowers and
Richardson. American Psychologist, 52, 658.


APPENDIX C
INTENT TO ATTEND A MULTICULTURAL WORKSHOP
Please use the following scale to indicate your degree of
agreement with each item:
1 2 3 4 5
Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
1. I plan to attend voluntarily at least one multicultural
training workshop sometime in the next 5 years.
2. If a multicultural training workshop is offered one
evening within the next year at UF, I would volunteer
to attend.
3. If a multicultural training workshop is offered one
evening would volunteer to attend.
89


LD
1*78 0
.55 2?
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
3 1262 08556 6817


CHAPTER 3
METHOD
Participants
Participants were recruited from one Psychology
Department summer undergraduate class at the University of
Florida. Students were randomly assigned to two groups.
One group received a forewarning of the race-related content
of the study; the other group receive no such warning.
Students received extra course credit for their
participation. Data from non-Whites were collected but not
analyzed for this dissertation.
Of the 198 students who elected to participate,
eighteen were dropped from the data set initially because
they either neglected to fill out their racial/ethnic
background or failed to complete 90% of the questionnaire
packet. Of the remainder, 134 participants identified
themselves as White or Anglo American.
In order to ensure that all of the White participants
whose responses were to be analyzed had adequately
understood the conditions of the experiment, participants
44


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Marnie G. Shanbhag graduated magna cum laude from the
University of Pennsylvania in 1993, with a Bachelor of Arts
in psychology. She is currently enrolled in the doctoral
program in Counseling Psychology at the University of
Florida and is completing her internship at the South Texas
Veterans Health Care System in San Antonio, Texas.
106


79
validity for the original ideas proposed. Data supported a
link between forewarning and some shift in racial attitudes,
but in a direction different from the one predicted. White
students who received the forewarning actually increased in
their anti-Black sentiment and Reintegration attitudes. In
addition, most students fell into the two highest categories
of racial identity development, despite little difference in
their respective prejudicial attitudes, which lends support
to the idea that White racial identity development as it is
measured by the White Racial Identity Attitudes Scale
(Helms, 1990) may not be an adequate measure of prejudice
reduction. Furthermore, guilt and prejudice were inversely
related, which attests to the potential importance of guilt
in the field of multicultural training, an association that
multicultural literature often overlooks. Finally, the more
likely White students were to voluntarily attend
multicultural workshops, the lower their prejudice scores;
multicultural training may indeed be "preaching to the
choir."
Limitations of the Current Study
The limitations of the current study center around
possible flaws in the design: the forewarning message, the
sample used, and the quality of the study's measures.
First, the forewarning message may have been too weak to
evoke student's awareness. The message informed students


91
6. Major
0 Psychology
1 Social Science (Sociology, etc.)
2 Engineering
3 Natural Sciences (Biology,Math..
4 Humanities (English, History..
5 Business
6 Education
7 Other
8 Undecided
7. I understand that later this week a guest speaker will
lecture on
(0) time management
(1) stress
(2) racial issues
(3) sexually transmitted diseases
(4) none of the above


training. If counseling psychology fails to recognize or
address these potential occurrences and reactions, then
multicultural training may not produce fundamental
improvements in attitudes and beliefs toward people of
color. Instead, multicultural training may be teaching
Whites how to become more skilled at overt pro-multicultural
self-presentational strategies, while exerting little
influence on Whites' underlying beliefs and attitudes
regarding people of color.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to assess the viability of
these concerns, based on the four weaknesses just identified
in current multicultural training literature. First,
multicultural training has failed to address the existence
in students of both underlying attitudinal ambivalence and
covert prejudicial thoughts. In other words, the
multicultural literature has not adequately addressed the
possibility that Whites are engaging in self-presentational
strategies when they attest to their improved multicultural
awareness and skills. Second, multicultural training has
assumed that White racial identity development is an
appropriate measure of prejudicial attitudes. Third,
multicultural training has not adequately considered the
role of White guilt and its implications for multicultural
training. Lastly, the multicultural literature has not


4
time-frame (i.e., a one session workshop versus a semester-
long course; Pope-Davis & Ottavi, 1994). Unfortunately, the
link between providing workshops on campus and decreasing
Whites antipathy toward members of other racial and ethnic
groups remains undocumented. Furthermore, little evidence
exists to support the idea that training counselors in
multicultural education actually increases the quality or
availability of counseling services provided to ethnically
diverse populations (Das, 1995; Wierzbicki & Pekarik, 1993).
Several researchers have raised the concern that
providing counselors only with culture-specific information
has the deleterious effect of encouraging stereotyping
(Arbona, 1995; Patterson, 1996; Sue & Zane, 1987). Instead,
some professionals have emphasized the need (particularly in
White individuals) for learning about oneself as a racial,
ethnic, and cultural being before learning about others
(Carter, 1991; McRae & Johnson, 1991; Sue, Arredondo, &
McDavis, 1992).
One of the most widely employed models for training
both counselors and the general population involves a stage
theory of racial identity development (Corvin & Wiggins,
1989; Helms, 1984; Ridley, 1989). In particular, a minimum
level of White racial identity development has been viewed
as integral to White counselors achieving multicultural
competence (Helms, 1990; Ponterotto, 1988; Sabnani,


64
training workshops would score the lowest on measures of
prejudice. A one-way, between-subjects ANOVA was used with
the independent variable being clear intention to attend a
workshop versus no intention to attend. The dependent
variable was prejudice scores (MRS). The results of the
ANOVA when intention was grouped in two categories (clear
expressed intent vs. no intent), failed to attain
significance [F(l, 105) = 0.26, g = .61]. In looking at
mean data, students expressed uncertainty as to the
likelihood of their attending any multicultural workshop in
the next 5 years (M = 3.1, SD= 1.2) This uncertainty
moved closer to disagreement when students were asked the
likelihood of their attending a multicultural workshop in
the next month (M = 2.6, SD = 1.0). However, an inverse
relationship did exist between intention to attend a
workshop and prejudice, with those who expressed more intent
endorsing significantly less prejudice (r = -.24, p = .02).
Ancillary Analyses
All hypotheses that involved racial ambivalence (PAAQ)
were analyzed with ambivalence separated into its two
components, Pro-Black and Anti-Black scales; thus,
Hypotheses 1, 3, and 4 were reanalyzed. The first
hypothesis, which stated in part that ambivalence would
differ by forewarning, was tested by two one-way between-
subjects ANOVAs. The first ANOVA used group (forewarning


63
product moment correlation was performed with attitudinal
ambivalence (PAAQ) and prejudice scores (MRS) serving as the
correlated variables. The correlation failed to reach
statistical significance (r = 0.08, p =.41), suggesting that
no relationship existed between ambivalence and prejudice.
However, White students's prejudice scores did correlate
significantly with their scores from the Anti-Black scale
from the PAAQ (r = .49, p < .001) and correlated
significantly in a negative direction with their Pro-Black
scores from the PAAQ (r = -.45, p < .001). These results
suggest that independently Pro-Black and Anti-Black scores
do correlate with prejudice scores, but that when Pro-Black
and Anti-Black scores are multiplied (to indicate
ambivalence), the relationship between ambivalence and
prejudice remains unclear.
The fourth hypothesis predicted that a significant
relationship would exist between racial ambivalence (PAAQ)
and guilt (MGI). To test this hypothesis, a Pearson product
moment correlation was used with guilt scores and
attitudinal ambivalence scores serving as the correlated
variables. This correlation also failed to reach
significance (r = -0.01, p =.97), indicating no relationship
existed between racial ambivalence and guilt.
The fifth and final hypothesis stated that students who
expressed the strongest intention to attend multicultural


72
Blacks for participants as well as the stereotypes
associated with this category. Therefore, the increase in
anti-Black sentiment shown by the forewarning group may
simply have been a result of semantic priming. Both
potential explanations, however, have important implications
for the efficacy of multicultural training, insofar as
multicultural training is not intended to increase negative
sentiment towards members of ethnic-minority groups.
Contrary to the second hypothesis, students at all
levels of White racial identity development did not show
similar levels of prejudice; students in the combined
Disintegration and Reintegration stages, acknowledged more
prejudice than students in the latter two stages. This
finding is consistent with Helm's (1993) racial identity
developmental theory in that Whites in the Disintegration
and Reintegration stages experience anxiety about racial
issues and may denigrate Blacks, using paternalistic and
stereotypical thinking.
Interestingly, 85% of the sample fell into the two
highest stages of Helm's (1993) racial identity development.
Although published normative data from college students are
not available for the White Racial Identity Development
Scale, it seems unlikely that most of a collegiate sample
would really be so advanced in their racial identity
development. This finding, however, is consistent with


103
Ridley, C. R. (1989). Racism in counseling as an
aversive behavioral process. In P. B. Pedersen, J. G.
Draguns, W. J. Lonner, & J. E. Trimble (Eds.), Counseling
across cultures (3rd ed., pp. 55-77). Honolulu: University
of Hawaii Press.
Ruma, E. H., & Mosher, D. L. (1967). Relationships
between moral judgment and guilt in delinquent boys.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 72, 122-127.
Sabnani, H. B., Ponterotto, J. G., & Borodovsky, L. G.
(1991). White racial identity development and cross-
cultural counselor training: A stage model. Counseling
Psychologist, 19, 76-102.
SAS Institute, Inc. (1990). SAS language and
procedures. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
Schlesinger, Jr., A. (1992). The disuniting of
America: Reflections on a multicultural society. New York:
Norton.
Semaj, L. (1979, May). Reconceptualizing the
development of racial preference in children: The role of
cognition. Presented at the 12th Annual National Convention
of the Association of Black Psychologists, Atlanta.
Speight, S. L., Myers, L. J., Cox, C. I., & Highlen, P.
S. (1991). A redefinition of multicultural counseling.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 29-36.
Spencer, M. (1984). Black children's race awareness,
racial attitudes and self-concept: A reinterpretation.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 25, 433-441.
Sperazzo, G., & Wilkins, W. L. (1959). Racial
differences on progressive matrices. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 23, 273-274.
Steele, S. (1990). The content of our character: A
new vision of race in America. New York: St. Martin's
Press.
Stone, G. L. (1997). Multiculturalism as a context
for supervision: Perspectives, limitations, and
implications. In D. B. Pope-Davis and H. L. Coleman (Eds.),
Multicultural Counseling Competencies: Assessment,
Education and Training, and Supervision (pp.263-289).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


100
Mi, J. S., & Iwamasa, G. (1993). To do, or not to
do; That is the question for White cross-cultural
researchers. The Counseling Psychologist, 21, 197-212.
Monteith, M. J. (1996). Contemporary forms of
prejudice-related conflict: In search of a nutshell.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 461-473.
Mosher, D. L. (1968). Measurement of guilt in females
by self-report inventories. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 29, 690-695.
Mosher, D. L. (1988). Revised Mosher Guilt Inventory.
In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, & S. L. Davis (Eds.),
Sexuality-related measures: A compendium (pp. 152-155).
Lake Mills, IA: Graphic Publications.
Mosher, D. L., s Mosher, J. B. (1966). Guilt in
prisoners. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 171-173.
Mosher, D. L., & Vonderheide, S. G. (1985).
Contributions of sex guilt and masturbation guilt to womens
contraceptive attitudes and use. Journal of Sex Research,
21, 24-39.
Nagayama Hall, C. (1997). Misunderstandings of
multiculturalism [Comment]. American Psychologist, 52, 654-
655.
Neville, H. A., Heppner, M. J., Louie, C. E., Thompson,
C. E., Brooks, L., Baker, C. E. (1996). The impact of
multicultural training on White racial identity attitudes
and therapy competencies. Professional Psychology: Research
and Practice, 27, 83-89.
Ottavi, T. M., Pope-Davis, D. B., s Dings, J. G.
(1994). Relationship between White racial identity
attitudes and self-reported multicultural counseling
competencies. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41, 149-
154.
Outlaw, L. T. (1995). Racial and ethnic complexities
in American life: Implications for African Americans. In
D. A. Harris (Ed.), Multiculturalism from the margins: Non
dominant voices on difference and diversity (pp. 39-53).
Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.


81
The number of fourth-year students in this sample were
too few to test whether their prejudice scores differed
significantly from first year students. However, one may
argue that the university experience does offer a particular
socialization regarding the acceptability of prejudice and
the openness with which racial issues may be discussed. The
racial climate on university campuses often differ markedly
from students' previous experiences, and as one moves
through a university, a "politically correct" socialization
occurs, influenced by campus life, administrative actions,
and the aftermath of race-related incidents (D'Souza, 1991;
Magner, 1988). It would be interesting to run the study
again with only fourth-year students and compare those
results with the current ones because fourth-year students
may more willingly moderate their expressions of prejudice
when forewarned. Fourth-year students may also resemble
most closely the first year graduate students in counseling
psychology programs who take multicultural training and
counseling courses.
Third, the measures used may not have been adequate to
address the hypotheses. The potential inadequacy of both
the forewarning message and the ambivalence measure have
already been discussed. In addition, the validity of Helm's
White Racial Identity Attitudes Scale is questionable, given


38
competition and the search for cross-culturally effective
treatments. At a time when more multicultural research is
sorely needed, turning away willing hands, which Mio and
Iwamasa (1993) discouraged, would not only be a travesty but
also narrow the diversity of scholastic voices from which
multiculturalism develops and matures.
The second more recent example of multicultural
dissension and dialogue occurred in the pages of the
American Psychologist. Two White male psychologists, Fowers
and Richardson (1996) wrote a lengthy article on the
pitfalls of multiculturalism labeled "Why Is
Multiculturalism Good?" Although they briefly acknowledged
the multicultural value of promoting all human welfare, they
took umbrage at the anti-European, anti-White nature of
multiculturalism and demanded "that the majority culture
deserves the same presumption of moral legitimacy as any
other group" (p. 613). This article illuminates the current
status of multiculturalism in three ways. First, the
article described several perceived inconsistencies in
multiculturalism's message that multiculturalists have yet
to address. Second, the article elicited the reactions of a
variety of psychologists and showed the tensions that
currently exist in multicultural psychotherapeutic training.
Finally, the authors and those who responded in print to


12
sufficiently addressed the idea that the White students most
likely to volunteer to attend multicultural workshops or
classes may be those who least need such training.
In this dissertation, I argue that White students
engage in anticipatory opinion shifts, in the interest of
self-presentation, when they expect to receive some type of
multicultural education. In addition, I believe that
students at many levels of Helms White racial identity
development may harbor similar amounts of prejudice when
tested by more covert measures. I also examine the
relationship between race-related ambivalence, underlying
prejudice, and guilt. Finally, I assess whether those
students who voluntarily attend multicultural presentations
may be the students who least need such information.
Ultimately, I am interested in Whites underlying
attitudes toward people of color, generally. However, given
that the majority of the prejudice and racism literature and
virtually all of the available measures address only
attitudes toward Blacks, this study remains similarly
confined.
Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1: Forewarning White students of racially
relevant message content should lead to anticipatory race-
based attitude shifts in the less-prejudiced direction,


Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
THE ROLE OF COVERT RACIAL PREJUDICE, ATTITUDINAL
AMBIVALENCE, AND GUILT
IN RECEPTIVITY TO MULTICULTURAL TRAINING
By
Marnie G. Shanbhag
August 1998
Chairperson: Martin Heesacker, Ph.D.
Major Department: Counseling Psychology
This dissertation identified several potential
weaknesses in the current multicultural training literature
and addressed their viability empirically. These weaknesses
centered around the possible existence in Whites of
underlying racial attitudinal ambivalence and covert
prejudicial thoughts, despite overt endorsements of
multicultural sensitivity.
It was hypothesized based on social psychological
research, that White students would engage in anticipatory
opinion shifts, in the interest of self-presentation, when
they expected to receive some type of multicultural
education. It was further hypothesized that students who
vi


54
an information sheet stating that a presenter would be
coming later in the week to give a lecture on racial issues
and was interested in getting an idea of participants
opinions on a variety of topics, including their attitudes
on race.
At the beginning of the data collection, participants
were told that all materials would be treated anonymously
and coded only by number to protect participants
identities. Additionally, the participants were told that
they were free to leave at any time during the
administration. All participants were then asked to read
and sign the human subjects consent form (see Appendix A).
Next, they were given a packet of materials containing, in
the following order, the Demographic Questionnaire, the
Modern Racism Scale, the White Racial Identity Attitudes
Scale, the Pro-Black Anti-Black Attitude Scale, the Mosher
Guilt Inventory, and the Intent to Attend a Workshop Form.
All responses were entered by each participant on a scanable
bubble sheet. Participants were told that the packet would
take approximately 30 minutes to complete. After completion
of the study, all participants received debriefing
instructions (see Appendix E). Extra-credit was awarded by
obtaining students' names from the Informed Consent Forms.


98
Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.).
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Karp, H. B., & Sutton, N. (1993). Where diversity
training goes wrong. Training, 30, 30-34.
Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence
and American value conflict: Correlational and priming
studies of dual cognitive structure. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 55, 893-905.
Katz, I., Wackenhut, J., & Hass, R. G. (1986). Racial
ambivalence, value duality, and behavior. In J. F. Dovidio
& S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and
racism (pp. 35-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal
constructs. New York: W. W. Norton.
Kelly, K. (1985). Sex, sex guilt, and
authoritarianism: Differences in response to explicit
heterosexual and masturbatory slides. Journal of Sex
Research, 21, 68-85.
Korman, M. (Ed.). (1973). Levels and patterns of
professional training in psychology. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Leach, M. M., & Carlton, M. A. (1997). Toward
defining a multicultural training philosophy. In D. B.
Pope-Davis and H. L. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural
counseling competencies: Assessment, education and
training, and supervision (pp.184-208). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Lee, C. C. (1991). Promise and pitfalls of
multicultural counseling. In C. C. Lee & B. L. Richardson
(Eds.), Multicultural issues in counseling: New approaches
to diversity (pp. 1-13). Alexandria, VA: American
Association for Counseling and Development.
Lee, C. C., s Richardson, B. L. (Eds.). (1991).
Multicultural issues in counseling: New approaches to
diversity. Alexandria, VA: American Association for
Counseling and Development.
Locke, D. (1990). A not so provincial view of
multicultural counseling. Counselor Education and
Supervision, 30, 18-25.


68
(1993), but contrary to Hypothesis 2. Interestingly, 85% of
the sample fell in the two, most advanced, stages of racial
identity development.
Third, no relationship existed between prejudice (MRS)
and racial ambivalence (PAAQ), or racial ambivalence (PAAQ)
and guilt (MGI); therefore, Hypotheses 3 and 4 were not
supported. A positive relationship was found between
prejudice and anti-Black sentiment (from the PAAQ), whereas
a negative relationship existed between prejudice and pro-
Black sentiment (from the PAAQ). This pair of results
supports the validity of the MRS. Although not
hypothesized, an inverse relationship was also found between
prejudice (MRS) and guilt (MRS).
Finally, although there was a significant inverse
relationship between intent to attend a multicultural
workshop and expressed prejudice, there was no significant
prejudice level difference between those who expressed clear
intent and those who did not express clear intent to attend
a multicultural workshop. Thus, Hypothesis 5 was only
partially supported.


Campbell, A. (1971). White attitudes toward black
people. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
94
Carey, J. C., Reinat, M., & Fontes, L. (1990). School
counselors' perceptions of training needs in multicultural
counseling. Counselor Education and Supervision, 29, 155-
169.
Carter, R. T. (1990) The relationship between racism
and racial identity among White Americans: An exploratory
investigation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69,
46-50.
Carter, R. T. (1991). Cultural values: A review of
empirical research and implications for counseling. Journal
of Counseling and Development, 70, 164-173.
Carter, R. T., & Qureshi, A. (1995). A typology of
philosophical assumptions in multicultural counseling and
training. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, &
C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling
(pp. 239-262). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Casas, J. M. (1984) Policy, training, and research
in counseling psychology: The racial/ethnic minority
perspective. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds), Handbook of
counseling psychology (pp. 785-831). New York: Wiley.
Cialdini, R. B., Levy, A., Herman, C. P., & Evenbeck,
S. (1973). Attitudinal politics: The strategy of
moderation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
25, 100-108.
Cialdini, R. B., & Petty, R. E. (1981). Anticipatory
opinion effects. In R. E. Petty, T. M. Ostrom, & T. C.
Brock (Eds.), Cognitive responses in persuasion (pp. 217-
235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Clark, K. B. (1965). Dark ghetto. New York: Harper
& Row.
Clark, K. B. (1991). How children learn about race.
In C. Carson, D. Garrow, G. Gill et al. (Eds.), Eyes on the
prize civil rights reader (pp. 74-81) New York: Penguin
Books.
Cook. S. W. (1984). The 1954 social science statement
and school desegregation: A reply to Gerard. American
Psychologist, 39, 819-832.


14
psychology. The ultimate goal of multiculturalism is not
under dispute in this study. Increasing the quality of
services offered to ethnic-minority clients and decreasing
racial majority members racial prejudices are noble goals.
However, the multicultural literature has mostly avoided
addressing the possibility that people may be engaging in
self-presentational strategies, rather than in fundamental
self-analysis and change. Moreover, if multicultural
training does not reduce covert prejudice and attitudes,
then providing multicultural training may only serve as an
appeasement gesture to placate concerns that Whites are not
being adequately trained to work with people of color.
Finally, the multicultural literature must assess the role
of White guilt which may actually promote hypervigilant
self-presentations and avoidance behaviors, instead of
genuine self-awareness and change.