How Multiracial People Manage Messages of Stigma: A ... conceptualizations of stigma are currently...

Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 225

How Multiracial People Manage Messages of Stigma:

A Qualitative Research Study

Audrey Scranton

Over nine million people identify as multiracial in the U.S. according to the

2010 Census, however, research dedicated to studying multiracial

populations’ experiences and communication is lacking. Multiracial

individuals encounter unique situations because they are members of two or

more social and cultural groups but are often perceived as belonging to one.

It is imperative to study how mixed-race individuals respond to hurtful

messages related to racial identity because profound implications for their

physical, social, and emotional well-being result. A qualitative study was

conducted to analyze how multiracial people communicatively respond to

messages of stigma related to one’s racial background by searching online

message boards where subjects posted about their experiences and responses

to stigma messages. Once themes were gathered from their stories, the

existing research on stigma communication was used to create a new

framework from which to study patterns of responses from multiracial

people. General types of responses found were confronting, deflecting,

internalizing, and no response due to confusion. Future research expanding

on the outcomes of each response type on the individual as well as the

offender can help provide people specific strategies to deal with offensive

messages in daily interactions, as well as yield insight on how rigid

perceptions of race are challenged and upheld in interpersonal contexts.

n 2010, the U.S. Census reported that over nine million

people identified as belonging to two or more racial

categories. Multiracial people are a substantial and growing

demographic in the United States. In fact, one in five Americans are

estimated to identify as multiracial by the year 2050 (Shih &

Sanchez, 2009). However, mixed-race people are rarely discussed in

social, political, or academic spheres. Mixed-race people face

relentless reminders that they do not fit into society’s norms, for

instance, race is often represented as unidimensional in surveys and

questionnaires, and multiracial people lack a common community

(Renn, 2000).

Multiracial individuals have many unique experiences due to

their uncommon identity that make them worthy of study. Among

other challenges, they may have to construct a complex racial

identity in the face of a monoracial identification system, manage a

Audrey Scranton (B.A. University of Iowa) is a doctoral student at the

University of Iowa in Communication Studies. She would like to thank Keli

Steuber for her mentorship on this project as well as throughout her

undergraduate career. Correspondence should be addressed to audrey-

[email protected].

I

226 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication

lack of family acceptance, struggle in the search for role models,

justify their identity choices to others, and face rejection from

multiple racial groups (Root, 1996; Salahuddin & O’Brien, 2011;

Shih & Sanchez, 2005). Many of these incidents originate from

others who see race as a salient factor in interactions thereby making

these messages related to stigma. The fact that a large population

faces such a stressful set of circumstances justifies the importance of

researching experiences of the multiracial community as well as the

individual and societal implications for these potentially stressful

situations.

However, race is difficult to study because its meanings are

culturally and historically constructed. The United States uses a

rather rigid and subjective racial classification system based on

ancestry, whereas other countries, such as Brazil, categorize people

more by individual looks (Carvalho, Wood, & Andrade, 2004; Piper,

1992). Even more complexities exist in the study of multiracial

people due to the extraordinary variance of the group. Due to culture

and history, different racial mixes face unique experiences and

challenges with identity and treatment (Root, 1998). It is difficult to

study and generalize from a category of people that holds such

incredible variety.

The goal of the present study is to use existing frameworks for

how people communicatively respond to stigma in order to create one

for a multiracial context. This area of research is important because

how a person reacts to such messages may profoundly impact

individuals’ health as well as the social boundaries reinforced or

broken within interactions.

Literature Review

Experiences Multiracial individuals face a unique set of experiences that

stem from others’ messages about themselves. Often this

communication is related to stigma because others find it necessary

to communicatively bring race into the interaction, which signifies

they view that characteristic as salient in the particular situation. Past

research has assumed being multiracial in today’s world is naturally

tragic leading to adverse outcomes (Rockquemore, Brunsma, &

Delgado, 2009). However, not all of their unique experiences are

negative; some have positive outcomes for well-being.

Multiracial people are often discriminated against or excluded

based on race, try to fit into multiple groups but do not feel a true

member of any, and experience difficulties with identity development

(Miville, Constantine, Bayson, & So-Loyd, 2005). They also must

deal with a variety of stressful communicative experiences such as

denial of their racial heritage, exclusion by family members, being

targeted with the questions “What are you?” and “Where are you


from?” and racial misidentification. These events do not necessarily

elicit similar reactions for each individual, for example, one person

may resent being questioned about his or her ancestry while another

may enjoy it. Mixed-race people’s experiences can also result in a

variety of positive, negative, or neutral outcomes. Salahuddin and

O’Brien (2011) found that while some common incidents related to

multiracial identity (such as multiracial discrimination or lack of

family acceptance) are correlated with higher depression, lower

social connectedness, or lower self-esteem, adversity also yields

positive ways of thought (such as appreciation of human differences

and multiracial pride) that are associated with higher self-esteem,

social connectedness, or ethnic identity.

Racially different experiences arise due to society’s need to

make race salient in an interaction. As a result, many of the incidents

that are unique to multiracial individuals’ lives arise from stigma.

The communication of stigma is essential in understanding this

population’s daily lives and interactions.

Stigma Stigma and conceptualizations. Social constructions affect

how people pay attention to particular aspects of a person and send

messages about those characteristics. People feel a need to classify

others they meet, cognitively link stereotypes about how members of

that particular group act, and discriminate based on a person’s

qualities (Goffman, 1963). Because of how society classifies

individuals, stigma is a necessary element of the conversation about

the multiracial population’s experiences.

Goffman (1963) was one of the first major contributors to

scholarly discussions of stigma, which refers to an individual’s

disqualification from full acceptance into society. Stigma may have

served an evolutionary purpose in the past; exclusion could be

utilized to remove a social threat from society (Smith, 2007).

Goffman defined stigma as an attribute that is discrediting to a

particular social group. He also described stigma as a relationship

between an attribute and a stereotype; a particular denigrating mark

must be linked with a negative expectation for how people with that

mark will act. Finally, Goffman (1963) discussed two important

related terms: the discredited and the discreditable. The discredited

are individuals whose stigma is known, and they must manage their

stigma in interactions with others; the discreditables’ stigma is

hidden until revealed, and they must manage this information.

However, conceptualizations of stigma are currently disparate

and imprecise. A common critique is that the term “stigma” is too

vague, and it is unclear how it can be distinguishable from terms such

as stereotypes, discrimination, and power. In response to this

critique, Link and Phelan (2001) created their own conceptualization


of stigma as a series of interrelated steps: (1) people distinguish and

label human differences, (2) dominant cultural beliefs link labeled

people to negative stereotypes, (3) labeled people are placed into

distinct categories to separate “us” from “them,” (4) labeled people

undergo status loss and discrimination, and (5) each of these steps

takes place in a power situation (Link & Phelan, 2001). While it may

be difficult or even impossible to tell if each of these conditions is

present in a given context, this conceptualization provides

synthesized, valuable insight into how stigma can be viewed as a

process.

Stigma and communication. The communication of stigma

happens in several ways. Smith (2007) researched the spread of

messages that are intended to teach members of communities how to

recognize stigmatized attributes, thus communication is necessary in

order to convey what is considered “normal” to societies. Stigma is

also communicated to the stigmatized, however, few scholars have

explored this area. This lack of research may be in part due to the

complexity of who is able to define an action as stigma

communication, for instance, questions arise regarding whether

stigma communication is present when the producer of the message

has a negative or ostracizing intent, or if it exists only when the

stigmatized feels hurt.

How a person responds to a message is dependent upon how he

or she perceives the situation (Fleming, Lamont, & Welburn, 2012).

Interpreting a message as negative communication about oneself has

profound effects on a person’s well-being; negative impacts of

stigmatization include decreased self-esteem and academic

achievement as well as a greater risk of psychological issues (Major

& O’Brien, 2005). These adverse health consequences emerge when

the stigmatized perceives that he or she is being degraded, therefore,

the perspective of the recipient of stigma messages is essential to the

definition of stigma communication.

Some scholarly work exists regarding how stigmatized people

respond to messages of stigma. Situations in which stigma is

communicated can be difficult to manage, as stigma messages are

identity threatening and therefore produce an affective response

(Blascovich, Mendes, Hunter, & Lickel, 2000). Ashforth, Kreiner,

Clark, and Fugate (2007) found managers in stigmatized occupations

tended to use four strategies to communicatively respond to stigma:

reframing the job, utilizing social buffers, confronting clients and

social perceptions, and defensive tactics. In the context of racial

stigma, Fleming et al.’s (2012) study about how African Americans

respond to stigmatization is helpful. The authors categorized answers

received into two general strategies: confronting and deflecting.

These approaches involve either challenging the discriminatory ideas


about African Americans or ignoring the messages. Finally,

Meisenbach (2010) developed a communication model related to the

management of stigma listing strategies including accepting the

stigma, avoiding the stigma, evading responsibility for the stigma,

reducing offensiveness of the stigma, denying the stigma, and

ignoring/displaying the stigma. Although Meisenbach’s work marks

an important step in creating an organized system of responses to

stigma, the number of attributes that can be stigmatized is so

immense that this typology may not work perfectly for each one.

Multiracial stigma and communication. Members of

discredited racial groups receive messages that they are inferior in

many areas of life, are expected to act in certain ways, and are not fit

to do certain actions. Multiracial people belong to more than one

racial group, and it is likely that at least one aspect of their identities

is stigmatized. Simply being multiracial is also stigmatized, due to

powerful racial groups’ past beliefs in the superiority of a “pure” race

(Storrs, 1999). Stigma communication is also unique for multiracial

people due to others’ incessant questionings, misidentifications, or

disbeliefs of their racial heritages.

The common experience of multiracial people being asked to

identify their races can be described as others attempting to complete

the first part of the process in stigma: identification. According to

Link and Phelan’s (2001) definition of stigma, each step of labeling,

stereotyping, separation, status loss, and discrimination must take

place in a power situation in order to be considered “stigma.”

Relating the concept of “stigma” to multiracial people’s experiences,

therefore, can be rather complicated due to the unique situation in

which multiracial people exist. Many multiracial people are clearly

different from the “norm,” but others may be uncertain as to how

they can classify them, this situation brings multiracial people to a

strange sort of limbo between Goffman’s terms of the discredited and

the discreditable.

Even if it is not obvious that each of Link and Phelan’s steps

has been realized, experiences of incredulity or puzzlement regarding

one’s racial heritage still can be classified as stigma communication

because the very presence of such a question communicates the

necessity of knowing an individual’s race in that particular

interaction. Whatever a questioner’s intentions of asking about one’s

racial heritage, many multiracial people describe the presence of such

inquiries as insulting and degrading. Being misidentified and having

racial expectations placed upon one’s shoulders can also be a unique

point of stress for multiracial people if they do not identify with one

race. The presence of inquiries or misidentification also can cause

the racial hierarchies that come with these identifications salient in

interactions. Therefore, attempts to identify a multiracial person can


imply the existence of the next few steps in the stigma process.

Attempts to complete this first step in Link and Phelan’s process of

stigma are considered to be stigma communication in this paper; the

fact that many multiracial individuals take offense at these statements

makes this phenomenon worthy of study.

How the addressee of stigma communication responds to these

messages may have a profound impact on the social boundaries

drawn or minimized in an interaction (Fleming et al., 2011). Social

boundaries emerge when a person communicates stigma, as these

messages’ purposes are to remove a social threat from society

(Smith, 2007). The communication of Link and Phelan’s first step of

stigma (such as a person inquiring about one’s identity) is also an

assertion of social boundaries, as the presence of these questions can

imply the necessity of knowing one’s race in an interaction in order

to categorize and possibly discriminate. When a person challenges or

avoids confronting the social boundaries communicated, these

borders may break down or solidify. For instance, by challenging a

person’s racial misattribution, the offender may learn to avoid

making the same assumptions in the future. These micro-interactions

make up a larger societal discourse and may eventually have

implications for how large groups of people see these group

boundaries.

The current study’s purpose was to help fill certain gaps in the

multiracial research by adding to the scholarship on stigma

communication related to the multiracial experience and extend the

literature to a communication perspective. The communicative

tactics multiracial individuals used when responding to stigma

communication were examined. As no research has been conducted

that specifically studies multiracial people’s responses to stigma

communication, the following research question was posed:

RQ: How do multiracial people communicatively respond to

messages of stigma?

Methods To study how multiracial people respond to stigma

communication, stories written by multiracial people were examined

by systematically surveying online discussion boards and selecting

stories that contained experiences about perceived negative

communication related to mixed-race identities. Surveying existing

discussions as a method likely brought the issues that were most

common or salient for participants forward for analysis.

Sample Discussion boards are websites where people can post their own

stories or respond to other comments posted on particular topics.

Using the search engine Google to locate online discussion boards


multiracial people use to discuss their common experiences, search

terms such as “mixed race forums,” “multiracial forums,” and

“mixed race experiences” were used to ultimately find and use four

websites: Intermix (http://www.intermix.org.uk/forum/default.asp),

EurAsian Nation (http://eurasiannation.proboards.com/), Experience

Project (http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Am-Mixed-Race

/3362), and the forum section of Experience Project

(http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Am-Mixed-Race/3362/

forum). The main Experience Project site is not strictly a discussion

board, but a similar website in which people can post stories and

others can comment on them. From the threads used, the earliest post

dated June 17, 2007, and the latest dated January 23, 2012. The

sample included English-speaking multiracial individuals who have

Internet access.

Each post, whether an original story or a comment that

appeared in response to the original story, was considered one unit of

analysis. The following criteria had to exist in order for a post to be

included: (1) the author described an experience (general or specific)

in which he or she communicated feeling uncomfortable, degraded,

or disrespected, and (2) the author expressed a response to that

action, whether to the offender or to other posters online. Posters

were determined to have felt degraded based on the presence of a

negative emotional response (anger, shock, sadness, disgust, or

exasperation) to the communication in question. Such emotions were

showcased in a variety of ways, including emoticons, name-calling,

or explicit statements about the offensiveness of the comment. There

were 137 units in the categories discussed in this paper. Saturation in

themes was reached when no new patterns or categories for how

multiracial people responded to degrading communication appeared.

Analytic Procedures A theme analysis was conducted by reading the chosen posts

four times to gather a holistic view of multiracial people’s

experiences. The fifth time the posts were examined was to look

particularly for patterns in responses; the identification of these

themes was established based on the frequency, intensity, and

extensiveness of stated issues (Krueger, 1998). Frequency refers to

the number of times a reaction was listed, intensity signifies the

power or force of a stated message, and extensiveness refers to the

presence of a stated idea across different units (Krueger, 1998;

Rabiee, 2004). Following Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) coding

framework, open coding was used to identify the common themes

within the data and utilized axial coding to map out relationships

among the listed themes. Finally, similar categories of responses

were condensed to set the unique ones apart, and stigma

http://www.intermix.org.uk/forum/default

http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Am-Mixed-Race

http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Am-Mixed-Race/3362/


communication models were used to create a new framework for how

multiracial people respond to messages of stigma.

Results The data were placed into Word documents from the four

different websites or sections of websites for the analysis. The page

numbers from the Word document where the data are stored serve as

a reference point for specific examples reported here.

The data yielded four themes for how multiracial people

respond to stigma communication. It should be noted that the

cultural meanings of race might be different in each location because

international discussion boards (most posters were from the U.S. and

Europe) were used; the participants still share a multitude of common

experiences, emotions, and reactions. Participants’ responses were

not limited to communication directed at the offender, although the

majority of what was studied falls into this category. Some

individuals were not hurt by the same messages by which others felt

degraded; emotional responses ranged from apathy to amusement.

The apathetic responses were excluded from analysis given the focus

was to examine how multiracial people reacted to messages that were

perceived as stigma. People also commonly used multiple strategies

within one interaction. The four main response types observed

include confronting, deflecting, internalizing, and no response due to

confusion.

Confronting (n=63) Confronting includes any communicative action that challenges

the statements, stereotypes, or assumptions the offender makes.

Because of the rather unique stigma situation many multiracial

people are forced to tolerate (being misidentified or questioned about

one’s racial identity), they must often confront others’ assumptions of

their racial identities. When confronting, they challenge the very

core of society’s expectation that all people belong to solely one

racial group. Reactions that align with the confronting label include

showing anger, revealing or asserting identity/background, teaching

the ignorant, and challenging assumptions with creativity and humor.

Showing anger (n=7). Showing anger, irritation, or other

negative affect is a way of challenging a statement because such a

confrontational emotion can send the message that the commenter

has crossed a boundary. In these stories, anger was not necessarily

used strategically, but it nevertheless had the effect of denouncing the

insult. One multiracial person described such a situation:

I remember one time my friend and I were looking for a part

time job while we were at 6th form, he just randomly said

"you'll have a better chance of getting a job then me cuz your


only half black" To be fair when he saw how pissed off and

upset his comments made me feel he did try and apoligise and

make out like it was a joke but I could tell by his tone he was

serious at first. (p. 28 Intermix)

In this situation, showing anger communicated the offensiveness of

the comment and possibly changed the offender’s future behavior.

Anger can be expressed in a variety of ways; in another situation, an

individual used physical force to convey fury: “I remember a very

long time ago that some kid ‘laughed’ when he saw my dad and said

‘That's your dad??!!’ […] But I beat the sh*t out of him for it. Wasn't

going to hide my dad” (p. 19 EurAsian). However expressed, anger

confronts the behavior by communicating to the offender that the

message is unacceptable.

Revealing or asserting identity/background (n=34). In

instances where multiracial people are falsely identified or in which a

racist comment is unknowingly spoken around them, they have the

rather unique option of revealing information about themselves that

challenges the validity of the comment, embarrasses the offender, or

reveals the comments as offensive:

I heard a story from another Eurasian about how she went for a

meal with her father (white) and some rude, nosy woman kept

[…] saying on loud how disgusting it was that her father had an

'Asian fetish'. Eventually she got fed up and said 'He's my dad!'

and some other punters congratulated her on shutting the

woman up. (p. 8/9 EurAsian)

In this situation, revealing an identity that others were previously

unaware of confronted the offensive communication and made the

offender look foolish.

Asserting one’s identity or background is another way that

multiracial people challenge the way others think about ethnicity.

Whereas revealing is usually utilized when others are unaware of a

multiracial person’s presence, asserting involves correcting an

assumption by insisting on a particular way to identify. Several

multiracial people indicated feeling frustrated when forms did not

allow them to answer in terms of their racial identities. Therefore,

some found creative ways to navigate this constraint: “When I do fill

out a form and it asks for my race, I choose ‘Other’ and write in

Human Race!” (p. 55 MRES). Asserting can also take the form of

answering in ways that emphasize how a person identifies, even

though the answers may be unexpected: “I always get asked ‘what

are you?’ I […] simply answer ‘American’ (p. 58 MRES). These

answers challenge an offending statement’s presence.

Teaching the ignorant (n=8). Teaching the ignorant is a tool

used to gain recognition and challenge stereotypes; its purpose is to


paint a more complete picture of reality to counter or replace the

expressed stereotype or ignorance (Fleming et al., 2011). It always

involves explaining race in a way that is more detailed than simply

revealing one’s personal background, presumably to prevent the

offender from making the same remark in the future. One poster

tried to help another reach understanding by detailing his personal

background:

I was asked by a store clerk in Prague where I was from and I

said "America," he then said, "No I mean your color." I told

him that I was mixed with black and white. He didn't know

what I meant when I said black! I stood there for a good two

minutes trying to explain to him what black was. I ended up just

telling him I was African and white. I couldn't think of any

other way of explaining it. (p. 31 MRES)

In this situation, the poster not only revealed his background, but also

spent a significant amount of time trying to make the other

understand the details. Educating the ignorant does not have to relate

to one’s personal background, however. One individual, after

hearing a friend’s ignorant comment, simply corrected his statement:

“Teammate: 'You can go and get a Thai bride. Pretty cheap I hear.'

Yours truly: 'Not likely I'll find a Thai bride in China'” (p. 26

EurAsian). Correcting one’s assumptions is a clear way to confront

ignorance.

Challenging assumptions with creativity and humor (n=14).

Creativity and humor most often were used to make a point when

others asked for specific information related to multiracial people’s

backgrounds or identities. Even though this category is related to

revealing or asserting one’s identity, these responses avoid disclosing any personal information and instead involve answering the questions

in a completely different way than expected. For example, one

poster challenged her principal’s assumption of her and her mother’s

race without revealing information about her background: “My

prinpcial asked me once when she had to call me mom ‘Does she

speak English?’ I just looked at her and said ‘I don't know do you?’”

(p. 25 MRES).

Multiracial people also used humor to challenge existing ideas

about race. This response type always stemmed from others’

inquiries about one’s race or heritage. For instance, in response to

the questions, “what are you and where are you from?” one poster

stated that he usually replies: “Hungry, but I’ll wait till lunch and

Oregon” (p. 45 MRES). Another poster encouraged the use of humor

while discussing a friend’s strategies:

Start telling these folks your Swedish and watch their heads

spin. I actually have a friend who's mom's family was from

Jamaica and his dad's were from Africa but HEEE was born in


Sweden.....He's had some AWESOME fun with this too!!” (p.

12 MRES)

In both cases, humor was used to confront existing ideas about race

when the questioned refused to answer in the ways the questioner

expected.

Deflecting (n=60) Another common category of response is deflecting conflict or

avoiding confrontation and is a way to conserve emotional energy

(Fleming et al., 2011). People used seven common strategies to

deflect conflict: managing social networks, ignoring/saying nothing,

shifting focus, reframing, understanding/forgiving, avoiding, and

managing information. Many of these deflecting strategies may not

be communicative at the time, such as reframing and

understanding/forgiving. Nevertheless, they are important to include

because how someone mentally processes an event can profoundly

affect that person’s actions and communication as a result.

Managing social networks (n=12). Common reactions for

multiracial people who encountered offensive others was to cut those

people out of their social networks or seek validating relationships.

Many multiracial people stopped associating with people who made

hurtful or offensive comments. One person even stated explicitly: “I

have dumped many ‘friends’ once I discovered how racist they were

towards my own ancestry” (p. 1 EurAsian). Another poster described

such an occurrence:

I met this French woman one day. She offered to help me get

used to the area and I accepted. On our first trip together, a

group of Chinese people sat in front of us and began talking in

Cantonese. She immediately pulled a disgusted face and went,

'Nyeah, nyeh, nyeh!' […] I don’t talk to her any more. (p. 5

EurAsian)

Choosing to no longer affiliate with people who cause stress is a way

of deflecting because it saves one’s emotional energy in the long

term.

In addition to limiting one’s social network, the stigmatized

work to cultivate and seek validating relationships, a response often

involving searching for a mixed community in order to share

experiences with others who may understand. The use of these

online message boards itself may indicate such an action; one poster

stated: “I am glad that I found a group where I can talk with others

just like me” (p. 19 MRES). One Black/White biracial individual

expressed that she wished she could continue to meet others who

could understand her experiences: “I feel left out of my own culture

and I wish I knew of other people in the same unique situation, it

would make things a lot easier!” (p. 53 MRES). Even though the


search for like-minded others is not a direct response to conflict, it is

an important communication behavior that manages emotional

energy as a result of derogatory or draining statements from

insensitive others.

Ignoring/saying nothing (n=12). Many people mentioned

ignoring comments that are stereotypical or otherwise hurtful.

Sometimes they explained the action as a way to prevent emotional

baggage: “I could have roasted him, but I prefer not to burden

myself with other peoples' stupidity” (p. 26 EurAsian). Others

described their lack of engagement by stating their belief that action

would make the situation worse: “No use getting into a pointless

argument and have a lotta unnecessary friction added to the situation”

(p. 56 MRES). Another poster stated: “Its classic stereotyping. I

don't think it will ever stop, when it happens to me I usually let it fly

over my head […] Its not worth getting the hump about, especially

when it happens because of other people's ignorance” (p. 14

Intermix). Here, the poster saw confronting as an option that was

likely to lead to fewer rewards and more emotional drainage.

Shifting focus (n=5). Shifting focus involves ensuring that

one’s energy is being directed towards things that are meaningful in a

person’s life rather than responding to those who have communicated

something harmful. These values may include family, significant

others, or other life goals. Shifting focus can relate to managing

one’s social network in that people may choose to focus on those

who matter to them, but this approach is not limited to relationships.

Many of the experiences people shared in which they shifted

focus stemmed from hurtful comments; focusing on things that

mattered to them was a strategy to manage emotions. In response to

chronic bullying, one person eloquently described why she shifted

focus:

I have […] tried: ignoring it, talking to people, rationalizing it,

laughing along etc and so on. I am 48 years old, I have lived

through some very bad things and I find the only way I can deal

with it without turning bitter and mean (tried that too and it isn't

for me) is to stay focused on the people in my life I love and my

spiritualality. (p. 38 EurAsian)

Refocusing on important matters was the only way she was able to

avoid stress from the hurtful comments she received. Multiracial

people describe shifting focus as a tool to manage energy in

uncomfortable or injurious interactions.

Reframing (n=18). Reframing refers to cognitively changing

the story of a situation or choosing to view a concept in a particular

way in order to manage emotional energy. The data showed two


patterns of reframing: participants viewing their stigma as positive

and expressing superiority to monoracial people. Many posters

conveyed the opinion that being multiracial was beneficial even if

they had been mistreated for the same characteristic: “I feel quite

lucky to have inherited the genetic mixture that I have, and that I’ve

received different gifts from each side. Intellectually I think I’ve

benefitted enormously, and maybe emotionally too in certain

respects” (p. 3 MRES). At other times, multiracial people tried to

encourage others by lifting their multiracial status above monoracial

people:

Don’t think that you need to be accepted by any race because

you are special mixed race people are usually better looking

than other races this is a big factor in why we get resentment

from other races (because they want to be mixed race).” (p. 3

MRES Forums)

By reframing a societally stigmatized identity as positive or even

superior, multiracial people are managing stigma communication in a

way that does not directly confront the offender.

Understanding/forgiving (n=2). While forgiveness and

understanding take cognitive energy, these tactics may also be used

to calm down and disengage from feelings of resentment or anger.

These processes relate to reframing because they involve changing

the way one thinks about a situation, which changes how he or she

reacts communicatively. However, in understanding/forgiving, the

stigmatized individual thinks about the offender differently rather

than his or her own identity, as that person would do in reframing.

One responder described his mental process: “Anglo people have

dehumanised my daughter before she is even born, this the reality of

my life. Yet I've come to understand why they have such racial views

instead of condemn them entirely as racists with no hope” (p. 24

EurAsian). Changing how the victim thinks about the perpetrator

may prevent negative emotional flooding.

Avoiding (n=7). Another solution for multiracial people who

had felt hurt by certain comments was to avoid the people or

situations in which they were likely to receive that communication

again. Avoidance can be closely related to social network

management, but is slightly different in that some have reported

avoiding people they have not met whom they fear may say hurtful

things. For instance, one poster stated: “when walking down any

street i do not like to make eye contact or small talk to anybody i

don't know” (p. 7 MRES). Rather than cutting people out of one’s

social network who they know will not treat them respectfully, this

strategy involves avoiding certain interactions altogether.


Posters also reported avoiding situations in which they had bad

experiences. For instance, several European-Asian mixed females

described the desire to avoid the mortifying phenomenon of being

mistaken for their father’s girlfriend when out with their European or

White fathers: “It's gotten to the point where I don't want to go out in

public with my father at all unless my mother is also there” (p. 6

EurAsian). Others have reported moving or wishing to leave the

areas they were living due to negative interactions. One woman

(with presumably some Black or African ancestry) who had faced

ongoing disparaging comments about her hair expressed this

sentiment: “while i was walking to the shops one day two men […]

shouted that i should go and cut my hair :( It made me remember why

i […] kinda want to move out from where i live now” (p. 3 Intermix).

Avoiding locations one may experience painful remarks may lessen

fear of dealing with such an interaction again.

Managing information (n=4). As Goffman (1963) discussed,

sometimes a stigmatized attribute is not immediately obvious to

others. Others may communicate confusion to multiracial people in a

variety of ways, such as inquiring about one’s racial identity or

misidentifying someone. In response to these potentially frustrating

or offensive situations, multiracial people use information

management tactics. Individuals may strategically hide their racial

identifications in situations to avoid confrontation; being

misidentified and choosing to get away with it is called passing

(Goffman, 1963). They may also answer in ways that make sense to

the asker, don’t tell the whole story, or hide part of their identities.

Several participants discussed passing as a strategy to save

energy: “Nowadays if I can get away with it, I deny the white part of

my ancestry, makes life a lot simplier when you can deny your mix if

your looks favor one side” (p. 16 EurAsian). Sometimes passing

consisted of simplifying one’s ancestry, as one half Malaysian

Chinese individual explained: “I usually alternate between half

Malaysian & half Chinese when I'm asked depending on who I'm

talking to. Saves time and futile effort” (p. 11 EurAsian). These

posters passed in order to save energy.

Managing identity can also take the form of giving the offender

an answer that he or she can understand rather than attempting to

challenge assumptions. In the following example, a European-Asian

person first attempted to educate the ignorant and reveal information

before deciding it was not worth the effort to try and explain:

Her: What nationality are you? Me: British Her: Really? Me:

Yeah. Got a British passport, go to a British school. Her: I

mean like where were you born? Me: France (truth) Her: So

you're French? *Short pause* Me: Yes. I'm French. (p. 10

EurAsian)


To eventually deflect, the multiracial person related information that

the ignorant would understand despite its inaccuracy. Managing

information in this way is rather unique to multiracial individuals, as

some others can tell that they are part of some stigmatized group but

are not sure which.

Internalizing (n=8)

Internalizing here refers to incorporating another’s beliefs about

oneself, or accepting others’ communication as truth. Some

multiracial people were emotionally or psychologically affected by

others’ hurtful communication in such a way that they became

uncertain or unconfident. With loss of self-assurance often came

desires to be “normal” and even attempts to erase the stigma. This

process is not strictly in the realm of communication, but it can affect

communication.

Many multiracial people, in response to verbal abuse, inquiries

about background, and the feeling of not fitting into social groups,

reported a loss of feelings of self-worth. Wishing to be “normal” was

often expressed in conjunction with a loss of self-confidence: “I

have always seen myself as ugly, and with my skin I feel even uglier.

i wish I was just one race, I am sick of being called a mutt […] I just

hate the color of my skin” (p. 23 MRES). This individual’s

internalization of others’ comments has dramatically affected her

confidence.

The longing to be like others sometimes leads to actions that are

an attempt to eliminate the stigma itself, for example, some change

their looks to be more like one race or another. In these stories the

act was often expressed as a result of others’ hurtful communication.

One woman related a time when she was a girl and she tried to

change her looks: “im mixed race and i have two older sisters and

when i was little they use to make fun of my afro, […] this went on

until i cried one day and brushed my hair until it was straight” (p. 4

Intermix). Changing one’s appearance in attempts to resemble a

member of one racial group is not necessarily a result of

internalization or a negative act in itself; Root (1998) argues that it

can be a way for multiracial individuals to reject society’s racial

classification system. However, the fact that the receiver felt hurt

enough by the social rejection to be coerced into changing her

appearance to feel better about herself reveals the potential for

harmful psychological effects of stigma messages. The emotions

experienced as a result of exclusion can affect how multiracial people

communicate about themselves and interact with others.

No Response due to Confusion (n=6)

Finally, some people reported experiencing such bewilderment

at the time a comment was stated that they could not respond, or they


gave an answer with which they were not happy. Not knowing what

to say in certain situations may be a step in the process of gaining

strategic communication to deal with these circumstances. Some

described confusion as a part of their experiences when trying to

learn how to define themselves, especially in communication with

others. A Peruvian/Dominican man described this struggle: “Other

kids would ask me what are you? Though I would eventually learned

to say Hispanic I really didn’t know what that really meant” (p. 28

MRES). Others have reported bemusement when others mistook

them for another ethnicity: “People have thought i was almost every

ethnicity under the sun. i can’t decide how i feel about it, but it’s a

conversation that makes me uncomfortable… i don’t really know

what to say” (p. 59 MRES). This perplexity is integrated with

multiracial people’s struggles in discovering where they fit in a world

where others see race as discrete and mutually exclusive.

Discussion The goal of the current study was to use existing frameworks of

stigma management communication in order to understand

multiracial people’s response strategies to degrading communication.

The participants were recipients of a wide variety of circumstances

including bullying, misidentification, racism, exclusion from social

groups, and inquiries about identity or background. These messages

relate to stigma communication because the comments were

offensive and communicated the necessity of knowing another’s race

in the interaction. An analysis of online forums used to discuss

multiracial experiences revealed themes among the responses.

Regarding the research question, multiracial people tended to use one

of four responses to stigma: confronting, deflecting, internalizing,

and no response due to confusion. Confronting and deflecting

included a variety of sub-strategies used to challenge the spoken

ideas or avoid conflict and save emotional energy. These tactics

came most obviously from Fleming et al.’s (2011) framework for

monoracial management of stigma, but both Meisenbach (2010) and

Ashforth et al. (2007) provided valuable information in the shaping

of the sub-strategies.

Implications for Theory The findings suggest gaps in the current research on stigma

management theories. A stigma management model that aligns

completely in a multiracial context does not exist. Accordingly, three

different frameworks informed this work. Fleming et al.’s (2011)

study of general strategies monoracial people used to confront and

deflect conflict was immensely useful in the analysis, but the article

was unable to provide detailed information on specific strategies

utilized. However, even a more comprehensive model such as


Meisenbach’s (2010) general stigma communication model did not

translate well to the given responses of multiracial individuals

handling stigma. Although several of the actions or strategies

Meisenbach describes were observed, the behaviors occurring did not

necessarily happening for the reasons she provides. For instance,

Meisenbach (2010) lists humor as a strategy used in a self-

deprecating manner solely to ease others’ discomfort, highlight the

stigma, and “indicate to others that they are right to stigmatize the

individual” (p. 279). However, participants here used humor to make

the offender uncomfortable and challenge stereotypes and

assumptions. It is possible that each stigmatized attribute yields

slightly different stigma communication strategies, but if this is the

case then differences need to be specified. These results indicate a

need for a more complete theoretical picture of stigma and responses.

Implications for Practice A practical implication of studying multiracial management of

stigma communication is that individuals may learn specific

strategies to assist their daily interactions. Guidance related to

increasing one’s repertoire of communicative skills may be useful, as

each behavior may yield different outcomes for the individual’s

emotional state or social relationships (Meisenbach, 2010).

Therefore, it would be beneficial for scholars to gather more

information about the health and social network effects of different

reactions so researchers or practitioners could provide more complete

feedback in counseling or similar contexts. Future studies on the

emotional outcomes of different response types or the perceptions of

the best ways to respond could also yield more guidance for

recipients of stigma communication.

Directions for Future Research Mixed-race issues are gaining more attention in social science

research, but scholarship thus far has been slanted by biases and

leaves many gaps. Most research has been cross-sectional, making

causality impossible to determine, and qualitative studies dominate

the literature (Rockquemore et al., 2009). Only certain populations

have been commonly studied, and few empirically tested measures

uniquely for multiracial individuals exist (Romo, 2011; Salahuddin &

O’Brien, 2011). Furthermore, few studies have connected the

experiences multiracial people have with stigma communication.

Future research that fills these gaps will help to paint a more

complete picture of challenges this population face.

As stigma management communication interacts with many

variables, almost endless possibilities exist for study in relation to it.

One such area involves what factors affect how people

communicatively respond to stigma. The variables could include


gender, sexuality, modeled behavior from parents or guardians,

culture, aspects of the interactive situation, frequency of encounters

with stigma communication, and diversity of one’s environment.

The effects of different types of responses on the recipient of stigma

communication as well as on the offender may also be useful. After

discovering if certain responses lead to different social or emotional

outcomes, researchers and practitioners can give concrete advice for

people who wish to learn how to effectively use these strategies.

Studies on how challenging assumptions or stigma in conversations

affects perceptions in interpersonal contexts as well as broad societal

discourse also may be valuable.

Finally, issues exist with the current breadth of theory about

stigma management communication. This study has emphasized that

multiracial people experience unique stigma situations, and there

exist so many types of stigmatized attributes that it is likely

impossible to create a model that works for all types of stigma.

Therefore, researchers must gather a more detailed, nuanced picture

of the types of stigma communication according to stigma. This

exploration may involve completing a meta-analysis of response

strategies for multiple types of stigma to determine the similarities

and differences among them.

Strengths and Limitations Analyzing experiences from online discussion boards ensured

that strengths as well as limitations existed in the study. Allowing

the individuals to share their stories before attempting to determine

how they communicatively respond was a large advantage to this

method. By utilizing spontaneous accounts, themes and patterns

were gathered without preconceived notions constraining the data.

However, there exist several limitations from this method of

data collection as well. There were almost certainly unknowable

population limitations from this sample, as whoever wanted to

participate in these forums could do so. For instance, young people

seemed more likely to participate in discussions, and it is possible

that different racial mixes would be more likely to post based on

whether a person had the inclination to identify as multiracial or not.

Those who had negative or frustrating experiences related to being

multiracial and possibly even people who utilized a certain strategy

type may have been more likely to post on these forums.

Furthermore, reliable information on the demographics of the posters

was incapable of being gathered, which does not allow analysis of the

diversity of responses or generalizability.

Another limitation refers to the frequency of strategies that

emerged in the data. Some of the listed responses emerged only a

few times, but remained a noticeable pattern or were potent enough

to be included. It may be natural that even significant themes emerge


only a few times, but caution must also be taken to avoid overstating

the results.

Finally, this study was largely exploratory in nature and cause

and effect behaviors could not be assessed. Future research should

attempt to examine this phenomenon in observational and

longitudinal studies.

Conclusion A clear need for more complete research on the historically

ignored but significant population of multiracial people particularly

in the context of stigma communication is evident. In the discourse

examined, multiracial people engaged in a variety of strategies to

confront or deflect conflict and offensive messages. They were often

emotionally affected by these messages having implications for their

future communication. Future research relating to this group’s

responses to stigma-related communication may not only give people

specific strategies to help with their daily interactions, but it also can

provide information on the social, emotional, and physical health of

multiracial people and possibly give insight into how assumptions are

broken down or reinforced in interpersonal contexts. Studying how

these boundaries are communicated and how borders are being

changed will yield new insight into how people in society relate to

one another and how these relationships can be improved.

References Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., Clark, M. A., & Fugate, M. (2007).

Normalizing dirty work: Managerial tactics for countering

occupational taint. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1),

149-174. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.24162092

Blascovich, J., Mendes, W. B., Hunter, S. B., & Lickel, B. (2000).

Stigma, threat, and social interactions. In Heatherton, T, Kleck,

R., and Hull, J. G., (Eds.), Stigma. Retrieved from

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/

Carvalho, J. A. M. D., Wood, C. H., & Andrade, F. C. D. (2004).

Estimating the stability of census-based racial/ethnic

classifications: The case of Brazil. Population

Studies, 58(3),331-343. doi:10.1080/0032472042000272375

Fleming, C. M., Lamont, M., & Welburn, J. S. (2012). African

Americans respond to stigmatization: The meanings and

salience of confronting, deflecting conflict, educating the

ignorant and ‘managing the self’. Ethnic and Racial

Studies, 35(3), 400-417. doi:10.1080/01419870.2011.589527

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled

identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Krueger, R. A. (1998). Analyzing and reporting focus group results:


Focus group kit 6. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications,

Inc.

Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2001). Conceptualizing stigma. Annual

Review of Sociology, 27(1), 363-385. doi:10.1146/annurev.

soc.27.1.363

Major, B., & O'Brien, L. T. (2005). The social psychology of

stigma. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 393-421. doi:10.

1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137

Meisenbach, R. J. (2010). Stigma management communication: A

theory and agenda for applied research on how individuals

manage moments of stigmatized identity. Journal of Applied

Communication Research, 38(3), 268-292. doi:10.1080/0090

9882.2010.490841

Miville, M. L., Constantine, M. G., Bayson, M. F., & So-Loyd, G.

(2005). Chameleon changes: An exploration of racial identity

themes of multiracial people. Journal of Counseling

Psychology, 52(4), 507-516. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.507

Piper, A. (1992). Passing for white, passing for black. In Ginsberg, E.

K. (Ed.), Passing and the fictions of identity. Retrieved from

http://www.books.google.com/

Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis.

Proceedings of the NutritionSociety, 63, 655–660.

Renn, K. A. (2000). Patterns of situational identity among biracial

and multiracial college students. The Review of Higher

Education, 23(4), 399-420. doi:10.1353/rhe.2000.0019

Rockquemore, K. A., Brunsma, D. L., & Delgado, D. J. (2009).

Racing to theory or retheorizing race? Understanding the

struggle to build a multiracial identity theory. Journal of

Social Issues, 65(1), 13-34. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.

01585.x

Romo, R. (2011). Between black and brown: Blaxican (black-

mexican) multiracial identity in California. Journal of Black

Studies, 42(3), 402-426. doi:10.1177/0021934710376172

Root, M. P. P. (1996). 50 experiences of multiracial people.

Retrieved from http://www.drmariaroot.com/doc/50Experien

ces.pdf

Root, M. P. P. (1998). Experiences and processes affecting racial

identity development: Preliminary results from the biracial

sibling project. Cultural Diversity and Mental Health, 4(3),

237-247. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.4.3.237

Salahuddin, N. M., & O’Brien, K. M. (2011). Challenges and

resilience in the lives of urban, multiracial adults: An

instrument development study. Journal of Counseling

Psychology, 58(4), 494-507. doi:10.1037/a0024633

Shih, M., & Sanchez, D. T. (2005). Perspectives and research on the

http://www.drmariaroot.com/doc/50


positive and negative implications of having multiple racial

identities. Psychological Bulletin, 131(4), 569-591. doi:10.1037

/0033-2909.131.4.569

Shih, M., & Sanchez, D. T. (2009). When race becomes even more

complex: Toward understanding the landscape of multiracial

identity and experiences. Journal of Social Issues, 65(1), 1-11.

doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01584.x

Smith, R. A. (2007). Language of the lost: An explication of stigma

communication. Communication Theory, 17(4), 462-485.

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00307.x

Storrs, D. (1999). Whiteness as stigma: Essentialist identity work by

mixed‐race women. Symbolic Interaction, 22(3), 187-212.

doi:10.1525/si.1999.22.3.187

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research.

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

How Multiracial People Manage Messages of Stigma: A ... conceptualizations of stigma are currently...

Documents

Transcript of How Multiracial People Manage Messages of Stigma: A ... conceptualizations of stigma are currently...