The Labeling Power of Critical Race Theory: Evidence from a National Survey Experiment

Abstract

Discussions about educational content on race and racism have captured widespread public and political attention, with much of this debate falling under the umbrella of critical race theory (CRT). Despite this attention, we currently do not know whether it is the content in these lessons or the CRT label that is influencing opinion on this issue. Are critics of CRT reacting to the content that CRT encapsulates? Or does the phrase “CRT” trigger partisan beliefs that are unrelated or only weakly tied to the central claims CRT advances? We use original data from two experiments in national surveys (N = 1,983) to answer these questions. In the first experiment, respondents were randomly assigned to one of three vignette conditions that described a local high school board’s decision to ban a lesson by either (1) describing the content of the lesson, (2) labeling the lesson as CRT, or (3) both describing and labeling the lesson. In the second experiment, a subset of respondents was assigned to conditions where the school board approved the lesson rather than banning it. Results indicate that labeling a lesson as CRT leads to opposition—either agreeing with its ban or disagreeing with its approval—regardless of whether a description of the lesson is included. Subgroup analyses are suggestive of the idea that although baseline levels of support varied, this label impacts individuals across a wide array of sociodemographic and political groups.