Empathy or Antipathy? The Impact of Diversity

While the enormous costs of ethnic and class divisions are depressingly familiar (William Easterly and Ross Levine, 1997; Claudia Goldin and Lawrence F. Katz, 1997; Paolo Mauro, 1995; James M. Poterba, 1997; Alberto Alesina et al., 1999), much less is known about the impact of various policies designed to ameliorate conflict between groups. Different countries have followed very different policies regarding ethnicity. Some, such as France, encourage mixing and assimilation. Others, such as Belgium, with its separate French and Flemish higher-education systems, seek to preserve the cultural identity of different communities. Much of the recent emphasis on diversity in U.S. schools and workplaces is motivated by the view that mixing between members of different groups will break down stereotypes and encourage development of deeper understanding and, with it, more empathetic attitudes toward other groups (Thomas F. Pettigrew and Linda R. Tropp, 2000). On the other hand, some argue that deliberate efforts to encourage mixing may actually inflame tensions and exacerbate conflict (Walter G. Stephan, 1978). Within this larger debate, views on the impact of affirmative action policies on relations between racial and ethnic groups differ dramatically (see Faye F. Crobsy, 2004; Alison M. Konrad and Frank Linnehan, 1999; David A. Kravitz et al., 1997 for general reviews). Patricia Gurin (2002) and Gurin et al. (2004) argue that diversity promotes critical thinking and learning among white students, while Stephan Thernstrom and Abigail Thernstrom (1997) and John H. McWhorter (2002) argue policies that admit minority students with lower test scores reinforce stereotypes and ultimately hurt minorities. Much of the evidence on these issues comes from examining empirical associations between individuals’ contact with members of other groups and their attitudes toward those groups (summarized in Pettigrew and Tropp, 2000; see also Maura A. Belliveau, 1996; William G. Bowen and Derek Bok, 1999; Gurin et al., 1999; Vladimir T. Khmelkov and Maureen T. Hallinan, 1999; Gretchen E. Lopez et al., 1998; Pettigrew, 1997; Anthony R. Pratkanis and Marlene E. Turner, 1999; and Marylee C. Taylor, 1995). A major problem with this literature, however, is that those who are more tolerant of other groups are more likely to choose to associate with members of those groups, thus making it difficult to determine the direction of causality. An alternative approach relies on laboratory studies, where assignment to treatment is randomized, thus ruling out the possibility of reverse causality. One way to interpret evidence from a fascinating set of laboratory experiments (Elliot Aronson, 1975; Aronson et al., 1978; Aronson and Shelley Patnoe, 1997; David W. Johnson and Roger T. Johnson, 1983; David L. DeVries and Robert E. Slavin, 1978; Stewart W. Cook, 1990; Slavin and Cooper, 1999) is that interactions with members of other groups * Boisjoly: University of Quebec at Rimouski, 300 allées des Ursulines, Rimouski, Quebec G5L 3A1, Canada (e-mail: [email protected]); Duncan: Institute for Policy Research, Northwestern University, 2046 Sheridan Rd., Evanston, IL 60208-2600 (e-mail: greg-duncan@ northwestern.edu); Kremer: Department of Economics, Harvard University, Littauer Center M-20, Cambridge, MA 02138, The Brookings Institution, and NBER (e-mail: [email protected]); Levy: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 79 JFK Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 (e-mail: [email protected]); Eccles: Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, 240 South State Street, 1251 Lane Hall, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1290 (e-mail: [email protected]). Financial support from the W.T. Grant Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and the NICHD Child and Family Well-Being Research Network (2 U01 HD30947-07) is gratefully acknowledged. We thank Sean McCabe, Carol Boyd, and William Zeller for their contributions in the early stages of this research; Brian Madden, David Mericle, and Deanna Maida for research assistance; Patricia Gurin, Bruce Meyer, Bruce Sacerdote, Thomas Sander, Heidi Williams; seminar participants at the NBER Summer Institute, the 2003 AEA meetings, Harvard University, Mathematica Policy Research, Princeton University, MDRC, Johns Hopkins University, New York University, and Syracuse University; and referees for helpful comments on an earlier draft.