Yesterday's New York Times ran an article titled "Poll Shows Racial Division on Obama's Candidacy." The story included several examples of divergence between White and Black Americans' perceptions of the presidential campaign; for example, more than 80% of Black respondents reported a positive impression of Barack Obama, compared to closer to 30% of Whites. Some of the most interesting findings, however, have nothing to do with presidential politics, but rather speak to the persistent divide in how Americans think about race, a divide that too frequently is only discussed by behavioral researchers.

The Times article provides a link to the results of the entire survey, revealing a number of interesting findings. First, as reported in the story, White respondents (79%) were more likely to agree that progress has been made towards eliminating racial discrimination in recent years than were Black respondents (59%). But the article doesn't note the interesting change in responses to this question over time. When it was first asked in 1992, 53% of Whites agreed that progress was being made, compared to only 29% of Blacks. While some sort of racial gap has been found each time this question has been asked, it is interesting to note that in a decade-in-a-half, both White and Black respondents have moved up over the 50% agreement mark on it.

A notable contrast is provided by responses to a more general question regarding whether race relations in the U.S. are currently good or bad. 55% of Whites in the recent poll said "generally good," compared to only 29% of Blacks. When this question was first asked in 1990, the racial split was 43% to 33%, indicating that only the White respondents have become more optimistic on this count over time.

So the Times poll indicates that a majority of White and Black Americans think progress towards racial equality is being made, but only Whites seem to be getting more optimistic over time regarding the general state of race relations. Why is this? Well, in large part it seems to be the case that Whites and Blacks use different reference points in answering these questions.

In a series of research studies, Yale social psychologist Richard Eibach has observed the comparable result that White Americans typically perceive more progress towards racial equality than do Blacks. One reason for this racial gulf is that Whites typically answer the type of question found in the Times poll by comparing the present to the past, whereas Blacks tend to answer it by comparing the present to the racial ideals they envision for the future.

In other words, when you ask White Americans about race relations in this country, on average they tend to respond by thinking, well, things are certainly better now than they used to be, so I'll say we're doing OK. Blacks, on the other hand, are more likely to think about their personal experiences with prejudice or current racial disparities in important outcomes like health, income, or employment. Accordingly, Blacks more typically think, things still aren't as good as they could or should be, so we're not doing so great.

A few important notes here. First, any time you discuss differences by race (or gender, age, sexual orientation, political affiliation, etc.), you're talking about generalized differences at a group level. Within-group variability exists as well, of course. Certainly some Whites think U.S. race relations aren't going so well (in fact, the Times poll data puts that number currently at 34%). And some Blacks see real progress being made. So neither the Times nor Eibach would argue that it's an either/or proposition, that all Whites think this and all Blacks think that.

The second important note, I think, is that both reference points discussed by Eibach are reasonable. That is, neither Whites nor Blacks are wrong in how they're seeing the racial landscape of the country. They're just using different comparison points to answer the question. It seems indisputably true that we have made progress towards racial equality over the past several decades. The conclusion that we still could do better, that we still have a ways to go seems equally compelling. How could we not hold out hope to do even better when, for example, 15% of White Democrats in West Virginia say they wouldn't vote for Obama because of his race? It would be fairly depressing if that were the best we could do, no?

So some of this racial disparity reflects different reference points used by Whites and Blacks in answering these questions. Anytime you ask someone for a global assessment of anything—whether marital happiness, job satisfaction, or the state of the economy—the reference point they choose to use is hugely important in determining the answer they give. This is why anytime we used to call my wife's late grandfather to ask how he was doing, his answer was always, "compared to what?" Grandpa Syd understood the importance of the reference point in making any global assessment.

But there also remains a more pessimistic interpretation of this racial divergence in opinions. Some of it clearly has to do with self-interest. In another set of studies, Eibach concludes that many White Americans view gains in racial equality as personal losses, whereas Black Americans see them as personal gains. Of course, it's hard to get people to support movements that they see as working against their self-interests, suggesting that this gulf between Whites and Blacks can't be bridged completely by getting everyone to focus on the same point of reference.

In short, the Times poll raises a lot of provocative questions about race in contemporary America, but these are issues that transcend Barack Obama and this year's election. I can't help but think that the Times article (and obviously this blog entry) aren't really about Obama per se—it's just that his candidacy is prompting many in our society to engage in these issues more than they ordinarily would, to join in the discussion about race relations in this country that too often is relegated to academic journals instead of our newspapers and dinner tables.