Racisms
and no ma i e
p essu es:
a new ou b eak
o biological acism?
Jo ge Vala
Cíce o Robe o Pe ei a
9.
218 ci izenship in c isis
in oduc ion
Racism is a co e opic in esea ch on ci izenship in con empo a y socie ies,
mainly ega ding disc imina ion and he denial o ci il igh s. This pape
p esen s he main lines o a esea ch p og amme on acism in con empo a y
Eu ope, and i s impac on social ela ions in di e se socie ies. P e ious and
new empi ical esea ch is p esen ed. This esea ch is amed by he concep s
o social ep esen a ion and social no ms, wi h he me apho o acism as an
e ol ing i us being used o explain i s mu a ions in con empo a y socie ies.
Acco dingly, ou analy ical pe spec i e cla i ies he concep o acism by
app oaching i as a polemical social ep esen a ion ha e ol es and adap s
acco ding o changes in social con ex s. This concep ual cla i ica ion is
impo an because i helps dis inguish he di e ences (and complemen a i ies)
be ween acism as a social ep esen a ion, and he concep o acial p ejudice
as a nega i e a i ude owa ds a social g oup. This dis inc ion is undamen al
o unde s and wha is a s ake when we add ess acism in con empo a y
Eu opean socie ies.
A e his concep ual cla i ica ion, he pape p oposes a dynamic analysis
o acis belie s. I speci ically a gues ha he an i- acis no m de eloped since
Wo ld Wa ii ans o med acis belie s and ha any educ ion o he an i-
acis no m p essu e can induce a new ou b eak o biological acism.
The inal pa o he pape analyses he impac o acis belie s on
disc imina ion agains immig an s pe cei ed as belonging o di e en acial
o e hnic g oups. The o ms o disc imina ion add essed e e mainly o he
ield o basic ci il igh s and a e con ex ualised by legi ima ion p ocesses
(Cos a-Lopes e al. 2013; Pe ei a, Vala and Cos a-Lopes 2010). In o de o
cla i y ou a gumen , some key empi ical esea ch is summa ised in each o
he pape ’s h ee pa s.1 The chap e concludes by p oposing an in eg a ion
1 This chap e in eg a es p e ious wo k de eloped by he au ho s a he ics-ul. I comes mainly
om he chap e published in he book edi ed by Be hencou and Pea ce (2012) abou acism in he
Po uguese-speaking wo ld, and a pape by he i s au ho abou acism as a social ep esen a ion
published in Pape s on Social Rep esen a ions (Vala 2013). This la e pape en i ely s uc u es he i s
pa o he chap e . The las pa o he chap e includes new da a and heo e ical issues p epa ed by he
au ho s and Alice Ramos o publica ion in he Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ions S udies (Ramos, Pe ei a
and Vala, in p ess). The p oblems add essed in his chap e ollow ano he esea ch p og amme on he
cons uc ion o social di e ences in di e se socie ies (Cos a-Lopes, e al. 2008), summa ised in a book
also ocused on e iew esea ch ca ied ou a he ics-ulisboa (I ine á ios: A In es igação nos 25 Anos
do ics).
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 219
o he a gumen s and da a p esen ed, and explo es he possible impac o
economic c isis and ising new igh -wing ex emism on he weakening o
he an i- acism no m and he legi ima ion o disc imina ion
acisms, social ep esen a ions and social no ms
Mosco ici (1961, 1984) e o mula ed he concep o collec i e ep esen a ions
p oposed by Du kheim (1898) and de eloped he concep o social
ep esen a ions accen ua ing he social na u e o he dynamic cons uc ion
o ep esen a ions o complex social objec s ha ques ion he li e o g oups
(e. g. powe , heal h, social needs, jus ice, social di e ences, he unc ioning o
mind e c.). In Mosco ici’s heo y (1984), socie ies a e “ hinking socie ies” ha
p oduce social ep esen a ions o p ac ical social o lay heo ies abou objec s
ha a e ele an o indi iduals, social g oups and he ela ions be ween g oups.
As heo ies, social ep esen a ions a e o ganisa ions o belie s, a i udes and
explana ions o e e y signi ican e en occu ing in hei social en i onmen .
As p ac ical heo ies, hey o ganise social beha iou ; as social heo ies, hey
eme ge, e ol e and disappea in he con ex o e e yday communica ion,
salien social iden i ies and powe ela ions, and no ma i e con ex s.
We p opose ha he analysis o acism as a social ep esen a ion p o ides
he heo e ical elemen s necessa y o g asping acism as a lay social heo y. I
s imula es he diagnosis o di e en o ms o ancho ing and ins i u ionalising
acism, and makes i possible o examine he objec i ica ion o he concep s ha
sus ain acial belie s (Vala 2013). Finally, he heo y o social ep esen a ions
o e s an analy ical amewo k conduci e o a psychosocial analysis o acism
wi hin he con ex o collec i e memo y (Cabecinhas and Feijó 2010; Lica a
and Klein 2010; Lica a and Volpa o 2010; Valen im 2008) and can p omo e
in e -disciplina y dialogue, mainly wi h his o y ( o he Po uguese con ex
and beyond, e. g. Alexand e 1999; 2017; Be hencou and Pea ce 2012;
Be hencou 2013; Cas elo 1998; F ed ickson 2002; Jahoda 1998; Ma os
2006; Sob al 2004; Xa ie 2012; Polla es-Bu ke 2012) and he a icula ion
be ween acism and o he concep s and phenomena like na ionalism and
cosmopoli anism (Baliba 1991; Billig 1995; Sil a and Sob al, 2013).
Mo eo e , he s udy o acism wi hin he amewo k o social ep esen a ions
app oach allows us o es ablish a heo e ically cohe en dis inc ion be ween
acial p ejudice and acism (Vala and Pe ei a 2012; Vala, Pe ei a and
220 ci izenship in c isis
Cos a-Lopes 2009). This dis inc ion is impo an o he unde s anding
o acism in con empo a y socie ies and is pa o a heo e ical deba e ha
mus be enewed. This deba e was ini ia ed by Jones in he usa (1972) and,
mo e ecen ly, was p omo ed by se e al au ho s, speci ically in e ms o social
ep esen a ions heo y (Augous inos 2009; Sanchez-Mazas 2004; Howa h
and Hook 2005) and social iden i y heo y (Augous inos and Reynols 2001;
Vala and Pe ei a 2012), allowing o a deepe unde s anding o acism in
di e se con empo a y socie ies.
Wi hin social psychology li e a u e, as well as in o he social sciences, he
e ms acism and ( acial) p ejudice a e used almos in e changeably. Wi h ew
excep ions, he majo i y o s udies ha e analysed acism as a se o nega i e
a i udes owa ds speci ic de alua ed social g oups, such as black people,
Jewish people and Gypsies. Resea ch has es ablished a signi ican homology
be ween acism and acial p ejudice o , mo e gene ally, be ween acism and
explici o implici nega i e in e g oup a i udes, as exempli ied by he classic
de ini ion o p ejudice p oposed by Allpo (1954) and he esea ch i inspi ed
( o a e ision, see Fiske 1998; Yze bi and Demoulin 2010).
In con as o his iew, we p opose a dis inc ion be ween acism and
acial p ejudice, speci ying ha acism is no a me e nega i e e alua ion
o a speci ic social g oup, hough i may include nega i e a i udes owa ds
acialized g oups, ha is, g oups de ined in e ms o acial ca ego ies. I is
concei able ha , based on eelings o pi y, indi iduals may exp ess acism
wi hou nega i e a i udes owa ds acialized and in e io ised g oups, and ha
no all nega i e eelings owa ds acialized ou g oups a e based on he belie
o hei in ahumani y.
Racism is also dis inc om acial p ejudice since, by de ini ion, i is a
social heo y insc ibed in social ins i u ions and in social hough and no a
pe sonal ai , o me ely a phenomenon ha e lec s indi idual o in e g oup
a i udes. Racism is a phenomenon which o ganises asymme ical ela ions
be ween social g oups. I is mo e han an indi idual nega i e e alua ion o
hese g oups. P ejudice, meanwhile, in social psychology li e a u e, is he
exp ession o an indi idual posi ion wi h espec o a g oup, e en hough ha
indi idual posi ion may be ela i ely widesp ead, as p oposed by he concep
o he cul u al s e eo ype o “ aces” o “e hnici ies” de eloped by De ine
(1989) and De ine and Mon ei h (1993).
In sum, acial p ejudice is closely ela ed o e hnocen ism (Doise 2005),
while acism exp esses adical al e i y, o use a e m coined by Jodele (2005).
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 221
Indeed, minimal o e en i ele an biological o cul u al di e ences a e
pe cei ed as deep-sea ed and he cause o na u al hie a chies ha a e ha d o
o e come, o can only be o e come in he his o ical long e m.
I was wi hin his amewo k ha we ecen ly p oposed (Vala and Pe ei a
2012) he concep ualisa ion o acism as a social ep esen a ion o he na u e
o humani y based on he ollowing undamen al psychological and social
p ocesses: ca ego isa ion (belie ha humani y is o ganised acco ding o acial
o e hnic g oups); di e en ia ion ( he e a e p o ound di e ences be ween
human g oups); hie a chy (ce ain g oups ha e a pe manen supe io i y o
o he s); essen ialisa ion (di e ences a e immu able due o biological as well
as cul u al “essences”); adical al e i y (no all g oups ha e all he essences
which common sense conside s o be speci ic o humans and, consequen ly,
adical al e i y is a o m o dehumanisa ion o acialized g oups). The way
hese psychological and social p ocesses in e wea e assumes pa icula i ies
acco ding o he human g oups in ol ed, he na u e o social ela ions
be ween hose g oups (e. g. coope a ion s. domina ion) and he his o ical
social con ex s.
empi ical e idence o di e ences be ween acism and p ejudice
Is i possible o ind empi ical e idence in a ou o analy ical dis inc ions
be ween acism as a social ep esen a ion and acial p ejudice? Resea ch
by Vala, Pe ei a and Cos a-Lopes (2009) has con ibu ed o his deba e by
examining he ela ionship be ween basic biological and cul u al acial belie s
(e. g. “The human species is di ided in o acial g oups ha a e e y di e en
om each o he ’’; ‘‘The human species is di ided in o e y simila cul u al
e hnic g oups’’ ( e e sed); ‘‘The mix u e o di e en human g oups may
weaken he biological e olu ion o he human species’’; ‘‘Some human g oups
a e cul u ally mo e ci ilised han o he s’’) and ou di e en exp essions o
acial p ejudice. Resul s o a s uc u al equa ion model showed ha he e o-
e hnisa ion ( he pe cep ion o deep cul u al di e ences be ween black
people and, in his case, he Po uguese; Vala, B i o and Lopes 1999/2015);
on ologisa ion ( he g ea e a ibu ion o na u al ea u es o black people han
o Po uguese and he g ea e alloca ion o cul u al ai s o Po uguese han
o black people; Mosco ici and Pe ez 1997); in a-humanisa ion ( he g ea e
a ibu ion o Po uguese han o black people o he capaci y o exp ess
seconda y emo ions; Leyens e al. 2000); and he de alua ion o black people

222 ci izenship in c isis
a e dimensions o a la en ac o ha he au ho s called acial p ejudice
(i. e. nega i e a i udes owa ds a a ge -g oup). These esul s also showed
ha his la en ac o ( acial p ejudice) is p edic ed by co e acis belie s
in eg a ed in he social ep esen a ions abou he na u e o he di e ences
be ween human g oups (see abo e). These acis belie s conce n no only
he biological hie a chisa ion o human g oups (biological acism), bu also
he hie a chisa ion o cul u es (cul u al acism). An al e na i e explana o y
model conside ed a single la en a iable in eg a ing acial belie s and
dimensions o p ejudice. The esul s showed ha he heo e ical p oposed
model had a be e i han he one ha did no dis inguish be ween acial
belie s and acial p ejudice. Thus, acism is di e en om p ejudice, al hough
acism may be an an eceden o acial p ejudice.2
In sum, ou heo ising p oposes ha acial p ejudice is a nega i e
a i ude abou some social g oups, whe eas acism is a lay heo y (i. e. a
social ep esen a ion) abou he na u al hie a chy o human g oups and i s
insu moun abili y, suppo ed by psychological essen ialisa ion o his o ical
p ocesses. Indeed, as in any social ep esen a ion, ha ep esen a ion o
di e ences be ween human g oups is socially ancho ed in social ela ions.
Speci ically, acism is ancho ed in ideas o domina ion. Fi s ly based on
eligious hinking and legi imised by eligious belie s p omo ing a p o o-
acism, and la e based on and legi imised by supposed scien i ic e idence
o e ed by he i s wa e o acial heo ies p oduced in he 19 h cen u y
( o a e iew see Be hencou 2013 and F ed ickson 2002), acism was
inco po a ed by he poli ico-ins i u ional sphe e. I was when acial heo ies
made in oads in o poli ical ins i u ions ha i became possible o legisla e
and bu eauc a ise acism, making acial ca ego ies amilia and pe cei ed as
being as na u al as any o he bu eauc a ic ca ego y. Bo h in e e yday li e and
he ins i u ional ab ic, social g oups pe cei ed as “in e io aces” we e hen
domina ed, ex e mina ed o excluded on he basis o legi ima ion p ocesses.
This app oach elimina es pe se he possibili y o a domina ed g oup acially
in e io ising a dominan g oup. Howe e , his posi ioning does no elimina e
he possibili y ha he domina ed g oup will exp ess p ejudice o gene al
nega i e a i udes owa ds he dominan one.
2 A comple e desc ip ion o he s udy, including samples, me hods, e c. is a ailable in Vala
e al. (2009).
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 223
he dynamics o acisms: is acism like an e ol ing i us?
Acco ding o ou heo ising, acis social ep esen a ions o di e ences be ween
human g oups, acial p ejudice and i s o ms o exp ession can e ol e in and
adap o social con ex s. This pape o e s a con ibu ion o his app oach in
con empo a y Eu opean socie ies. I is based on socio-no ma i e p inciples
(Beau ois and Dubois 1988; Cialdini, Kallg en and Reno 1991; Pe ei a and
Cos a-Lopes 2012), on heo ies abou in e -g oup ela ions (Doise 1986;
Taj el 1982) and on social iden i y heo y (Taj el and Tu ne 1979; Gae ne
and Do idio 2005).
This no ma i e app oach o acis belie s is pi o al in unde s anding he
social exp essions o acism in he dynamics o con empo a y poli ical and
social ela ions. I is hese dynamics ha d i e he ans o ma ion o acis
exp essions om o e o hidden, om conscious o delibe a e o unconscious
o implici , om biologically o cul u ally based.
The e en s o he Second Wo ld Wa , he p og essi e expansion o he
Uni e sal Decla a ion o Human Righ s in 1948, and o he social mo emen s
a e all impo an momen s in he p ocess o delegi imising he idea o ace and
o social inequali ies ounded on ace. Such social p ocesses show he g adual
dissemina ion o he an i- acis no m and e ec ed obs acles o he iumph
o he idea o ace. A e such e en s, acism is no longe a hegemonic social
ep esen a ion bu a con o e sial social ep esen a ion, he subjec o dispu e
and con lic egula ed by an i- acis legisla ion and he dissemina ion o he
an i- acis social no m.
om explici o hidden and implici acial p ejudice
These ans o ma ions ha e been mo e success ully s udied wi hin esea ch on
acial p ejudice han wi hin esea ch on acism i sel . I is h ough he s udy o
p ejudice ha a signi ican decline in he a ibu ion o nega i e s e eo ypical
ai s o black people in he Uni ed S a es be ween he 1930s and he 1990s has
been iden i ied (Do idio e al. 1996). A he beginning o he 1990s, a ious
Eu opean s udies also showed a educ ion in he a ibu ion o nega i e ai s
o people om acialized g oups. Fo example, Pé ez (1996) showed ha
in Spain esponden s a ibu ed mo e nega i e ai s o he Spanish han o
Gypsies. A simila e ec was obse ed in B azil by Camino e al. (2001), whe e
whi e pa icipan s concealed hei acis mo i a ions by exagge a ing hei
224 ci izenship in c isis
a ibu ion o mo e posi i e ai s o black han whi e people. In bo h s udies,
esponden s we e clea ly keen o show ha hey we e no acis owa ds g oups
p o ec ed by he an i- acis no m.
On he o he hand, in he s udy on acial p ejudice agains immig an s
conduc ed by Pe ig ew and Mee ens (1995) in ou Eu opean coun ies, he
au ho s showed ha acial p ejudice mani es ed i sel h ough he absence
o posi i e eelings abou immig an s ( a he han he exp ession o nega i e
eelings). A s udy ca ied ou in Po ugal in he same decade (Vala, B i o
and Lopes 1999/2015) ob ained simila esul s, and also showed ha an i-
black p ejudice was exp essed by he a ibu ion o mo e posi i e ai s
o he Po uguese han o black people and no h ough he a ibu ion o
mo e nega i e ai s o he la e . These, like o he s udies, showed ha i is
no no ma i e o exp ess openly nega i e opinions abou membe s o g oups
who a e he a ge o explici acializa ion ( o example, in he s udies ci ed,
Gypsies in Spain, black people in Po ugal, A o-Ca ibbeans and Asians in
he Uni ed Kingdom, Su inamese and Tu ks in Holland, No h A icans and
people om Sou heas Asia in F ance, and Tu ks in Ge many).
Pe haps one o he bes examples o hidden acial p ejudice is he
esea ch line inaugu a ed by Leyens e al. (2000, 2003) abou wha hey
called “in ahumnisa ion”. Fi s ly, he au ho s e i ied ha people implici ly
dis inguish be ween p ima y emo ions (e. g. pleasu e and ange ) and seconda y
emo ions (e. g. lo e and hope). Secondly, hey empi acly demons a ed ha
people conside p ima y emo ions common o humans and animals bu no
seconda y emo ions, which a e conside ed uniquely human. Thi dly, h ough
dozens o s udies, hey demons a ed ha people di e en ia e be ween he
ing oup and de alua ed ou g oups (e. g. black people) ega ding he capaci y
o exp ess seconda y emo ions ( ha ep esen human uniqueness). This
means ha membe s o de alua ed ou g oups a e ep esen ed as less human
han ing oup membe s.
In pa allel o esea ch on hidden acial p ejudice and acism, he
s udy o implici p ejudice in oduced by Gae ne and McLaughlin
(1983), which measu ed au oma ic associa ion be ween wo ds (posi i e
s nega i e) and a ge s o e alua ion (e. g. Whi es s Blacks), showed
ha acial p ejudice emained e y ac i e, albei in an implici way. This
esea ch became p ominen h ough he dissemina ion o G eenwald and
collabo a o s’ s udies (G eenwald, McGhee and Schwa z 1998; Nosek,
Banaji and G eenwald 2002), using he well-known Implici Associa ion Tes
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 225
(ia ).3 This es and o he simila measu es, which use esponse la encies when
posi i e and nega i e ai s a e associa ed wi h whi e and black people (i. e.
genuine unobs uc i e measu es o a i udes, Fazio and Olson 2003), made i
possible o ques ion whe he acial p ejudice eally has been dec easing. The
na u e o hese measu es makes i impossible o consciously con ol esponses
and hus align hese esponses wi h he an i- acis no m. In o he wo ds, wha
he measu es o implici p ejudice show is ha acial p ejudice is “hidden”, o
is exp essed in less explici ways.
Nume ous c i ics o his ype o measu e a gue ha such analyses o
p ejudice e eal eelings ha a e e y deep-sea ed, bu which do no ha e
an impac on beha iou . Howe e , his does no appea o be he case.
Fo example, in a pa icula ly sensi i e a ea, such as he p esc ip ion o
h ombolysis in a hospi al en i onmen , implici p ejudice, measu ed
h ough he ia , p edic s ha h ombolysis will be ecommended mo e
equen ly o whi e han o black people p esen ing exac ly he same
symp oms (G een e al. 2007).
The s udies men ioned allow us o con i m ha he an i- acis no m has
an impac on he o e exp ession o acial p ejudice, bu no on i s implici
exp ession. On he o he hand, i is impo an o poin ou ha he an i- acis
no m does no ha e he same e ec wi h espec o all acialized g oups, o in
all cul u al con ex s. Fo ins ance, in Po uguese socie y, he an i- acis no m
p o ec s black people, bu no gypsies ( Aguia e al. 2008; Co eia, Vala and
Aguia 2007 and Co eia e al. 2005). This doesn’ occu in Spain, howe e , a
coun y in which he an i- acis no m p o ec s gypsies (Pé ez 1996; Co eia
e al., 2005), bu no black people. In any case, we should unde line ha , in
he empi ical s udies e e ed o abo e, he ole o he an i- acis no m has
been sugges ed bu no di ec ly measu ed. In ac , his no m has been li le
s udied in e ms o obse ing i s e ec s on he exp ession o acial p ejudice,
wi h he excep ion o he ini ial s udies by Ka z and Hass (1988) and mo e
ecen wo k by C and all, Eshleman and O’B ien (2002), Lima e al. (2006),
and Cos a-Lopes, Wigboldus and Vala (2017), as well as in he esea ch by
Mon ei o, F ança and Rod igues (2009) o by Falomi , Ga o and Mugny
(2009). The i s wo cases demons a ed he impac ha he egali a ian
3 Fo a map o implici acism ac oss Eu ope, see he esul s o he p ojec abou ia a he Uni e si y
o She ield: h ps://www.she ield.ac.uk/philosophy/ esea ch/implici -bias-jenni e -saul- ackling-
gende -bias-academia; h p:// hecon e sa ion.com/ his-map-shows-wha -whi e-eu opeans-associa e-
wi h- ace-and-i -makes- o -uncom o able- eading-76661.
232 ci izenship in c isis
The second hypo hesis p edic s ha powe alues opposed o un i e salis ic
alues8 (see Schwa z’s human alues scale, 1996) p edic s biological acism
o e and abo e posi ional and iden i y a iables ( he hi d s ep o each model).
This las hypo hesis is inspi ed by he Social Dominance Theo y (sd ) p oposed
by Sidanius and P a o (1999). Acco ding o his heo y, socie ies a e o ganised
by g oup-based hie a chies and people ha easily accep hese hie a chies and
ag ee ha hie a chical sys ems wo k posi i ely in how socie ies unc ion, i. e.
hese indi iduals ha e a high social dominance o ien a ion. In con as , non-
suppo e s o hose social hie a chies ha e a low social dominance o ien a ion.
These di e en posi ions a e suppo ed by legi imising my hs o ideologies
ha enhance social hie a chies (e. g. conse a ism, powe glo i ica ion and
ai h in s ong leade s) o by hie a chy-a enua ing legi imising my hs seeking
o suppo g oup equali y (e. g. egali a ianism and uni e salism). I is in his
con ex ha we hypo hesise ha mo e suppo o powe alues han o
uni e salis ic alues acili a es acism, speci ically biological acism.9
Ou hypo heses we e es ed in ou di e en g oups o coun ies, plus in
Po ugal alone (Table 9.3).10 Resul s showed a e y consis en pa e n o e ec s
ac oss eg essions and a e in acco dance wi h wha has been demons a ed
ega ding acial p ejudice (Pe ig ew and Mee ens 1995), speci ically
ega ding he posi ional a iables: biological acism mainly inc eases
when subjec i e income, ela i e dep i a ion and educa ion dec ease. The
consis ency o ideological iden i ica ions as p edic o s o biological acism is
exp essi e: he suppo o biological acism is s onge among igh -winge s
and hose exp essing s onge exclusi e na ional iden i y and, as p edic ed,
hese a iables explain a iance o e and abo e he posi ional a iables,
Rela i e dep i a ion (na i es s. immig an s) was measu ed by his i em: “Compa ed o you, does
he go e nmen ea new immig an s be e o wo se?” We coded he answe s o a y om 1 (less
dep i a ion) o 5 (mo e dep i a ion).
8 Powe s. Uni e salism alues is a di e ence sco e (Powe alues minus uni e salism alues) as
measu ed by he Schwa z scale used by ESS (sco es a y om 1 – lesse adhesion o 6 – highe adhesion
o each alue.
9 In Sidanius and P a o’s o iginal heo y (1999), i is no clea i acism, like p ejudice, is a consequence
o Social Dominance O ien a ion (sdo) o a legi imising my h o p ejudice and inequali y gene a ed by
sdo.
10 All coun ies: see Table 9.1; No he n coun ies: Denma k, Finland, No way and Sweden; Cen al
Eu opean coun ies: Aus ia, Belgium, Swi ze land, Ge many, The Ne he lands and he Uni ed
Kingdom; Eas e n Coun ies: he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, Li huania, Poland and Slo enia.

biological acism: a new ou b eak? 233
P edic o s o biological acism (logis ic eg ession coe icien s)
all
coun ies
(n = 23715)
no h
eu ope
(n = 4411)
cen al
eu ope
(n = 7353)
eas e n
coun ies
(n = 7500)
po ugal
(n = 785)
bOdds bOdds bOdds bOdds bOdds
In e cep -2.27*** .10 -2.76*** .06 -3.45*** .03 -2.08*** .13 -1.97** .14
Socio-Posi ional Va iables
Subjec i e Income -.35*** .70 -.56*** .57 -.13** .87 -.11* .91 -.21 .81
Educa ion -.10*** .90 -.21*** .81 -.09*** .91 .00 1.00 -.16** .85
Gende .00 1.00 -.13 .87 .02 1.02 -.18** .84 .08 1.09
Age .01*** 1.01 .01*** 1.01 .02*** 1.02 .01*** 1.01 .03*** 1.03
Rela . Dep i a ion .31*** 1.36 .27*** 1.31 .32*** 1.38 .16*** 1.18 .30** 1.36
R2.09*** .10*** .08*** .02*** .18***
Ideological Va iables
Le - igh .09*** 1.09 .18*** 1.19 .12*** 1.13 .05*** 1.05 .11*** 1.12
Exclusi e Na ional Iden . .41*** 1.57 .75*** 2.11 .59*** 1.80 .88*** 2.40 .87* 2.39
R2.11*** .13*** .10*** .03*** .22***
Human Values
Pode s. Uni e sal. .27*** 1.31 .22*** 1.25 .34*** 1.40 .06* 1.06 .27*** 1.31
R2.13*** .14*** .13*** .04** .24***
No e. Da a om ess7 (2014/2015).The samples only conside pa icipan s ha answe ed “yes” o “no” o bo h indica o s o biological acism. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
Table 9.3
234 ci izenship in c isis
u he suppo ing he ele ance o symbolic and psycho-social a iables in
p edic ing acism.
In he same ein, he salience o powe alues o e uni e salis ic ones,
as hypo hesised, is also ele an o he p edic ion o biological acism,
demons a ing ha suppo o social inequali ies and he enhancemen o
social hie a chies a e key ac o s in he pe sis ence o biological acism. No e,
howe e , ha he explained a iance in he i e models is no high and, in ac ,
is pa icula ly lowe in eas e n coun ies. This sugges s ha new heo e ical
models a e needed o unde s and he pe sis ence o biological acism in
con empo a y Eu opean socie ies and ha hese models should ely mo e on
symbolic and ideological dimensions han on socio-posi ional a iables.
acism and implici and explici disc imina ion:
impac s on ci il igh s
P e ious a gumen s ha e p oposed ha acism, as a social ep esen a ion,
unde wen a p ocess o e ol ing adap a ion due o he p essu e o he an i-
acism no m a e Wo ld Wa ii and ha , ecen ly, a weakness o ha no m
induced by he conse a i e populis ic poli ical clima e seems o ha e e i alised
bla an biological acism. Howe e , a e hese dynamics in social hinking
ac ually impo an o unde s and disc imina ion agains acialized mino i ies?
Do hey speci ically help unde s and esis ance o immig an s’ ci il igh s and,
consequen ly, he social clima e o oday’s di e se socie ies? The hi d pa o
his chap e analyses he impac o acial belie s on a i udes and disc imina ion
agains immig an s pe cei ed as belonging o di e en acial o e hnic g oups.
This opic in ol es a concep ual con o e sy: is disc imina ion al eady a
pa o acism? Fo ins ance, B own (1995) de ines p ejudice as “ he holding
o de oga o y social a i udes o cogni i e belie s, he exp ession o nega i e
a ec , o he display o hos ile o disc imina o y beha iou owa ds membe s
o a g oup on accoun o hei membe ship o ha g oup” (B own 1995, 8). In
he same ein, Be hencou (2013) de ines acism as a combina ion o p ejudice
and disc imina ion. The inclusion o disc imina ion in he concep o acial
p ejudice o ha o acism goes agains he Allpo ian adi ion (Allpo 1954),
ollowed by Pe ig ew (1991), and many o he s. This adi ion does no include
disc imina o y beha iou as pa o he concep o p ejudice, ins ead ace based
disc imina ion is seen as a consequence o acism. Acco dingly, we p opose ha ,
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 235
om an analy ical poin o iew, i is impo an o analyse when and how acis
belie s gene a e disc imina o y beha iou . We will ocus mainly on ace s o
disc imina ion ela ed o co e aspec s o ci il dimensions o social and poli ical
li e, like access o na u alisa ion, he use o e hnicis c i e ia in he selec ion o
immig an s o beha iou al o ien a ion agains an i-disc imina ion laws.
acism and disc imina ion h ough he in e g oup ime bias
The i s esea ch discussed in demons a ing he e ec i e impac o acis
belie s on disc imina ion will add ess a pa icula implici o non-delibe a i e
o m o disc imina ion: depe sonalisa ion, i. e. no conside he o he as an
en i y pe se bu only as a g oup membe , a i s s ep o dehumanisa ion (Vala
e al. 2012) and exclusion o basic igh s. This esea ch e alua es he ime
in es ed by whi e people in o ming an imp ession o whi e and black people.
The hypo hesis was ha pa icipan s would show an implici in e g oup ime
bias (i b), meaning ha hey would pu mo e ime in o o ming an imp ession
o whi e han black people, an implici o m o disc imina ion wi h po en ial
impac on se e al a eas o social li e, such as he e alua ion o s uden s in
schools, employees a wo k, pa ien s o medical diagnosis, when making
poli ical and adminis a i e decisions abou mino i ies. Time, he e, signi ies
he deg ee o in e es , conside a ion and a en ion ha a pe son objec o
e alua ion dese es. To es ou hypo hesis, we ca ied ou a se ies o s udies
which showed, as p edic ed, ha whi e pa icipan s in es ed mo e ime in
o ming an imp ession o o he whi e people han o black people. We also
showed ha he i b co ela ed wi h o he unobs uc i e o implici measu es
o p ejudice and wi h he homogenisa ion o black people ( he pe cep ion hey
a e no indi idual en i ies bu me e membe s o a g oup). Mo e impo an ly,
ou s udies also showed ha explici acism is he main p edic o o i b. In
a b oade sense, i b is a o m o disc imina ion p edic ed by acism ha
depe sonalises o nega es an indi idual iden i y o a pe sonhood s a us, he
i s s ep o being conside ed a ci izen, o o he .
acism, opposi ion o na u alisa ion o immig an s
and o an i- acis legisla ion
The nega ion o pe sonhood s a us o a membe o a acialized g oup is an
impo an s ep in he p ocess o hei dehumanisa ion and, consequen ly,
236 ci izenship in c isis
nega ion o ci izenship. As wi h ou s udies abou i b, o he esea ch has
analysed he ela ionship be ween acism and disc imina ion a in e pe sonal
o g oup le els. Fo ins ance, se e al au ho s ha e shown he impac o acism
on a oiding con ac wi h people pe cei ed as membe s o a acial ou g oup
(Ve kuy en and Thigs 2002; Williams and Ebe ha d 2008). O he s udies ha e
shown ha acism acili a es he a ionalisa ion o social inequali ies (Yze by ,
Roche and Schad on 1997); o e en ha people who hold acis belie s a e
mo e likely o acially s e eo ype o he s (Bas ian and Haslam 2006). Howe e ,
ew s udies demons a e he impac o acial belie s on disc imina ion
conce ning public policy domains.
Con a y o his pano ama, Pe ei a, Vala and Cos a-Lopes (2009, s udy
2), using da a om he issp (In e na ional Social Su ey P og amme, 2003)11
ca ied ou in Po ugal and Swi ze land, analysed he co ela ion be ween an
explici measu e o acism and a measu e o opposi ion o he na u alisa ion o
immig an s. Resul s clea ly showed ha he highe he endo semen o acis
belie s, he highe he opposi ion o he na u alisa ion o immig an s he key
o hei access o ci il, poli ical and labou igh s ( o a con ex ualisa ion o
ci izenship and immig a ion in Po ugal, see Peixo o 2013).
Ano he cen al aspec o basic igh s in mode n democ acies includes he
igh no o be disc imina ed agains on he basis o ace o e hnici y. To lea n
he posi ion o Eu opeans on his, Ramos, Vala and Pe ei a (2008) inqui ed
abou opposi ion owa ds an i- acis laws in hi een Eu opean coun ies,
and abou he ac o s unde lying opposi ion o an i- acis legisla ion.
Acco ding o he an i- acism no m, only 18% o Eu opeans showed an o e
opposi ion o such policies in 2002 (ess1). Mo e impo an ly, howe e , is
he ac ha he same s udy demons a ed ha indi idual ac o s, mo e han
con ex ual o s uc u al ones (unemploymen , pe cen age o o eign people,
pe cen age o non-Eu opean people, and o e o igh -wing pa ies),12
explain he opposi ion owa ds an i- acis legisla ion. Indeed, conse a ion
11 The i em used o measu e acism in his s udy was: “Imagine ha one o you child en has child en
wi h someone o a di e en colou . In o he wo ds, imagine ha you g andchild was a di e en colou
om you. Would you ha e any di icul y in accep ing his?” As we know, he p ohibi ion o “in e acial”
ma iage was supposedly a way o gua an ee whi e pu i y and sup emacy, a co e aspec o acism.
12 These esul s we e ob ained h ough a Mul ile el Analysis ( o a comple e desc ip ion o he esul s,
see Ramos, Vala and Pe ei a 2008).
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 237
o social o de alues, acism13 and he eeling ha immig an s cons i u e a
h ea 14 con ibu e o opposi ion o an i- acis legisla ion. Mo eo e , adhesion
o uni e salis ic alues was posi i ely ela ed o suppo o an i- acis
legisla ion.
To consolida e he ole o acis belie s on disc imina ion in he domain o
public policies, Ramos, Pe ei a and Vala (in p ess) hypo hesised and ound he
impac o bo h biological and cul u al acism on suppo o e hnicis c i e ia
in he selec ion o immig an s ha can be ecei ed by a Eu opean coun y:
o be whi e, Ch is ian and able o speak he hos coun y’s language. In o he
wo ds, exclusion was based on ances ally and supposedly “na u al” c i e ia
and no on aspec s ha indi iduals can con ol.
Despi e he clea p ejudice in acialized people being denied ci il igh s,
na u alisa ion and an i- acis legisla ion, he an i- acis no m has ope a ed
e icien ly by obliging disc imina ion o jus i y i sel h ough legi imising
mechanisms. This is he inal s ep o ou a gumen in a ou o an app oach
o acism based on he a icula ion be ween social ep esen a ions and social
no ms.
acism and he legi ima ion o disc imina ion
Legi ima ion e e s o he social and psychological p ocesses by which a i udes
and beha iou s a e jus i ied and pe cei ed as app op ia e, con o ming o social
no ms, ai ness and jus ice. Legi ima ion and legi imacy a e undamen al
ac o s in in e pe sonal, in e g oup, social and ins i u ional unc ioning ( o
a e iew, see Tyle 2006; Cos a-Lopes e al. 2013; Jos and Majo 2001; Whi e
and C andall 2017). The need o legi ima ion is pa icula ly ele an when a
non-no ma i e belie o beha iou is a s ake.
13 The i ems we used o measu e acism in he ess1 wa e ( o accep o no accep a hie a chical
supe io om ano he ace o e hnic g oup; o accep o no accep a ela i e’s ma iage wi h a pe son o
ano he ace o e hnic g oup) a e some imes conside ed measu es o p ejudice, some imes measu es o
social dis ance. F om ou poin o iew, hese i ems can be conside ed measu es o acism because hey
add ess key poin s o lay hinking abou ace: he supe io i y o one g oup ela i e o ano he ; and he
supe io g oup’s ea o degene a ion h ough sexual con ac wi h an in e io g oup.
14 Two dimensions we e conside ed on he pe cep ion o h ea : a symbolic and a ealis ic one
(S ephan and S ephan 2000). The symbolic dimension ega ds he h ea o iden i y and cul u al ac o s;
he ealis ic one ega ds h ea s o pe sonal secu i y and economic well-being. Recen esea ch sugges s
he impo ance o demog aphic h ea in ela ion o immig a ion (Ou hen e al. 2018), an aspec ha
could be included in he h ea o in-g oup secu i y.

238 ci izenship in c isis
As summa ised by Ramos, Pe ei a and Vala (in p ess), he social
psychological mechanism in ol ed in legi imising p ocesses o acial p ejudice
ha e been speci ically analysed by he Theo y o A e si e Racism (Gae ne
and Do idio 1986) and he Jus i ica ion – Supp ession Model (C andall
and Eshleman 2003). Bo h heo ies p opose ha no ma i e jus i ica ions
allow indi iduals o exp ess p ejudice wi hou eeling o pe cei ing au o o
he e o disapp o al and, consequen ly, p o ec hei sel -es eem. The Jus i ied
Disc imina ion Model (jdm) (Pe ei a, Vala and Leyens 2009; Pe ei a, Vala
and Cos a-Lopes 2010) has also examined he hypo hesis ha disc imina ion
should be legi imised speci ically in con ex s whe e he egali a ian no m is
salien (Pe ei a, Vala and Leyens 2009).
I was in his heo e ical con ex ha ou esea ch aimed o demons a e
ha pe cep ions o h ea play an impo an legi imising ole in disc imina ion
and acialized social ela ions. I was ound ha he ela ionship be ween
acism and disc imina ion was legi imised by he pe cep ion ha hose who
a e acialized ep esen a h ea o socie y and, consequen ly, when hey a e a
a ge o nega i e in e pe sonal o ins i u ional beha iou s, hese beha iou s
a e no he esul o acism o p ejudice bu he consequence o he need o
p o ec socie y.
Using da a om ess7 (2014/15), Ramos, Pe ei a and Vala (in p ess) showed
ha biological and cul u al acism no only p edic he p e e ence o e hnicis
c i e ia in he selec ion o immig an s, bu also ha bo h biological and
cul u al acism p edic he pe cep ion ha mig an s om poo e coun ies
ou side Eu ope and mig an s pe cei ed o belong o a di e en ace o e hnic
g oups ep esen an economic h ea and a h ea o he cul u al iden i y o
hos Eu opean coun ies. Impo an ly, hese h ea pe cep ions legi imise
he associa ion be ween acism and he p e e ence o e hnicis c i e ia o
selec ing immig an s. The p e e ence o hose c i e ia a e psychologically
dissocia ed om acism and associa ed wi h h ea pe cep ions and, he e o e,
he sel -image o indi iduals is p o ec ed om he censu e o he an i- acism
no m and sel -es eem is main ained (Pe ei a, Ál a o and Vala 2018).
discussion and conclusions
Con empo a y Eu opean socie ies a e “ acially” and “e hnically” di e se. This
di e si y will con inue o inc ease due o Eu opean demog aphic and economic
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 239
needs. Peace ul social ela ions in di e se socie ies hus imply ecognising
he igh s o all ypes o mino i ies, pa icula ly hose ha a e he a ge o
acialisa ion and e hnicisa ion. This is why he s udy o acism is a co e opic
in esea ch abou con empo a y Eu opean socie ies, mainly ega ding he
disc imina ion p ocesses agains mino i ies and hei exclusion om ci il
igh s. I is he e ha his chap e o e s new con ibu ions o be e unde s and
he social ep esen a ions ha c ea e and hie a chise social ca ego ies as i
hey we e na u al en i ies, and he mu a ions hose social ep esen a ions ha e
gone h ough ega ding he supposed in e io i y o some human g oups and
he ole o he an i- acis no m in hose mu a ions: om o e o co e , om
explici o implici , om biologically o cul u ally based.
Finally, he pape add esses he complex ela ionship be ween acism,
disc imina ion and legi ima ion. This dynamic app oach o acis belie s
does no mean ha when a “new” o m o exp essing acism eme ges o is
iden i ied, he o he s disappea . Fo example, cul u al acism coexis s wi h
biological acism, albei wi h he la e being mo e an i-no ma i e.
heo e ical issues
In o de o analyse hese social and psychological p ocesses, we p opose h ee
changes in he s udy o acism. The i s is he concep ual di e en ia ion
be ween acism and acial p ejudice; he second is he analysis o acism
wi hin he amewo k o social ep esen a ions; he hi d change e e s o he
need o in oduce social no ms in o he analysis o acial p ejudice and acism.
In his las domain, we ha e shown how no ma i e p essu es ha e p o oked a
shi in o e biological acism and o ced social ep esen a ions o di e ences
be ween human g oups o be econ igu ed, associa ing hem no only wi h
biological essences bu also cul u al ones.
an ou b eak o biological acism?
The cen al ques ion we pu ega ding he acism dynamic conce ns a possible
ou b eak o biological acism. Based on an ess7 ca ied ou in 20 Eu opean
coun ies (2014/2015), high le els o biological acism we e iden i ied in
ele en coun ies, despi e he an i- acism no m con inuing o be majo i a ian.
I is in his con ex ha he social ep esen a ions o he o ganisa ion o social
g oups sus aining acism a e no longe hegemonic, bu polemical, i. e. subjec
240 ci izenship in c isis
o social con o e sy and dispu e, and he sou ce o con lic ual ela ions
be ween g oups.
Howe e , he an i- acis no m can be weakened by eme gence o a a -
igh poli ical cul u e. Indeed, immig an s and e ugees a e a a ge o populis
poli ical leade s, and hei an i-immig a ion and p o-whi e sup emacism
messages a e ampli ied by con en ional media and elec onic social ne wo ks
(and ecei e suppo om he e i al o “ ace science”). Thus, he weakening
o he an i- acis no m can open he doo o an ou b eak o biological acism.
Mo eo e , he combina ion o hese ac o s can inc ease he ep esen a ion o
immig an s pe cei ed as belonging o ano he ace o e hnic g oup as in e io
and a h ea o hos coun ies’ secu i y, economic well-being and sense o
a achmen o Eu opean iden i y and cul u e.
Un il now, howe e , and con a y o he messages sp ead by bo h he
adi ional and new social media, he majo i y o Eu opeans a e esis ing
an i-immig a ion and p o-whi e sup emacis posi ions dissemina ed by a -
igh leade s. Acco ding o he ESS esul s, openness o ecei ing immig an s
inc eased, albei sligh ly, om 2002/3 o 2016/2017 ac oss Eu ope, excep in
7 ou o 20 coun ies (Ramos 2018): Slo enia, he Check Republic, Hunga y,
Poland, Li huania, Aus ia and I aly. In hose coun ies, nega i e a i udes
owa ds immig an s a e s a is ically highe han bo h he Eu opean mean and
he middle poin o he e alua ion scale used.
Mo eo e , h ea pe cep ions associa ed wi h immig a ion in he economic
ield dec eased ac oss Eu ope om 2002/2003 o 2016/2017, excep in Aus ia
and Hunga y. The pic u e, howe e , is no as posi i e ega ding h ea o
cul u al iden i y. The pe cep ion ha immig a ion ep esen s a cul u al h ea
inc eased ac oss Eu ope (despi e being below he medium poin o he scale
used, excep in Aus ia, Hunga y, Slo enia, Li huania and he Check Republic)
(Ramos 2018). No e, howe e , ha he e ec o ac i e and s uc u ed mino i ies
can easily sp ead an i-immig a ion eelings ac oss Eu ope.
This pano ama is, he e o e, cha ac e ised by a di used inc ease in he
pe cep ion o immig an s as a h ea o cul u al iden i y and by exp essi e
pe cen ages endo sing acial belie s in a signi ican numbe o Eu opean
coun ies. Despi e he salience o he an i- acism no m, ha pano ama indica es
ha he legi ima ion o disc imina ion agains immig an s has space o inc ease,
speci ically ega ding disc imina ion in he domain o basic ci il igh s. The
diagnosed scena io is hus a mix u e o an i- acis no m esis ance and he
eme gence o condi ions ha could acili a e he ou b eak o biological acism.
biological acism: a new ou b eak? 241
u u e esea ch issues
Ou da a and heo e ical easoning aise se e al ques ions ha dese e u u e
a en ion. One ques ion ha a ises is he ole ha inancial c ises and aus e i y
policies could ha e had in he pano ama we ha e desc ibed. I was no possible
o his chap e o add ess hese opics sys ema ically, because we don’ ha e
da a ha di ec ly enables a compa ison be ween p e and pos inancial c isis
conce ning acis belie s. Howe e , a ough compa ison o da a om ess7
(2014/15) ega ding biological acism and he da a collec ed in 2008/2009
om he g e p ojec (Vala and Pe ei a 2012) sugges s ha he si ua ion is
now appa en ly wo se. Con a y o his, as desc ibed abo e, he ep esen a ion
o immig an s as a h ea dec eased in 2014/15 compa ed o 2002/3, excep
ega ding he pe cep ion o h ea o Eu opean cul u al iden i y. I one conside s
he appa en inconsis ency be ween ha da a and he ac ha indi idual acial
belie s and a i udes owa ds immig a ion a e mo e dependen on mo al alues
han indi idual economic conce ns (Ramos e al. 2008), he di ec impac
o inancial c isis on he social phenomena s udied is no ob ious. Howe e ,
inancial c isis and es ic i e measu es in social public policies may ha e
an indi ec e ec on acial belie s and a i udes owa ds immig a ion ia he
scapegoa ole ha igh -wing pa ies and he a - igh a ibu e o immig a ion.
The bes illus a i e case o his hypo hesis is he uk’s B exi deba e.
In any case, and despi e he impac o inancial c isis on e e yday li e,
he p o-immig a ion and an i- acism no m con inue o be majo i a ian, in
spi e o su e ing some weakening as shown by he inc eased a - igh o e
in ecen elec ions, mainly ac oss cen al Eu opean coun ies. Ne e heless,
his hypo hesis should be empi ically e alua ed because immig a ion issues
may be only one o he d i e s o his inc ease (o he d i e s may include:
na ionalism, p o ec ionism, conse a ism, pe cei ed insecu i y, o he e i al
by he a - igh o a social agenda, a opic abandoned by mos con en ional
le -wing pa ies, e c.).
Reade s may also be su p ised by he high exp ession o biological acism
in Po ugal, and da a demons a ing ha i was only in he ess 8 (Ramos 2018)
ha Po ugal mani es ed a posi ion owa ds ecei ing immig an s pe cei ed
as acially o e hically di e en ha was below he middle poin o he scale.
We p opose he hypo hesis ha his is less an e ec o economic insecu i y
han o a widesp ead luso- opicalis ic ideology (Valen im 2008), acco ding o
which he Po uguese a e na u ally a people o e o di e si y, dialogue wi h
o he cul u es and he c ea o s o a co dial colonisa ion. Ou hypo hesis is ha
248 ci izenship in c isis
xa ie , Â. B. 2012. “Pu i y o blood and cas e. Iden i y na a i es among ea ly mode n Goan
eli es”. In Race and Blood in he Ibe ian Wo ld, eds. D. Ni enbe g, M.-E. Ma inez, and M.
S. H. To es. London: Li Ve lag, 125-150.
yze by , V., S. Demoulin. 2010. “In eg oup ela ions”. In Handbook o Social Psychology, S.
Fiske, D. Gilbe , and G. Lindzey. New Yo k: Wiley, 1024-1083.
yze by , V., S. Roche , and G. Schad on. 1997. “S e eo ypes as explana ions: a subjec i e
essen ialis ic iew o g oup pe cep ion”. In The Social Psychology o S e eo yping and G oup
Li e, eds. R. Spea s, e al. Camb idge: Blackwell, 21-50.
whi e, M. H., C. S. C andall. 2017. “F eedom o acis speech: ego and exp essi e h ea s.”
Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology. doi: doi.o g/10.1037/pspi000 0095.
williams, M. J., J. L. Ebe ha d . 2008. “Biological concep ions o ace and he mo i a ion o
c oss acial bounda ies”. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, 94 (6): 1033-1047.
ci e his chap e as:
ala, J., C. R. Pe ei a. 2018. “Racisms and no ma i e p essu es: a new ou b eak o biological acism?”. In
Changing Socie ies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. ii. Ci izenship in C isis, eds. M. C. Lobo, F. C. da Sil a
and J. P. Zúque e. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais, 217-248.
h ps://doi.o g/10.31447/ics9789726715047.09