The current research examined the impact of perceived social norms of confronting interpersonal prejudice on White people’s perceived barriers and intentions to confront prejudice. The present research (Ntotal = 1,057) manipulated injunctive (Study 1) and descriptive (Studies 1–3) social norms of confronting prejudice via group consensus information and group behavior. Across studies, descriptive confronting norms facilitated perceptions of fewer anticipated social costs (Studies 1, 3) and greater social benefits (Studies 1–3) relative to the absence of a confronting norm (Studies 2–3) or an injunctive norm of confronting prejudice (Study 1). While social norms of prejudice confrontation did not directly impact White people’s intentions to confront prejudice (Study 1–3) or a specific instance of anti-Asian bias (Studies 2, 3), social norms did indirectly elicit greater intentions to confront prejudice through expectations of reduced social costs and increased social benefits (Studies 1, 2, 3).
AltN. P.ChaneyK. E.ShihM. J. (2019). “But that was meant to be a compliment!”: Evaluative costs of confronting positive racial stereotypes. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(5), 655–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218756493
2.
Álvarez-BenjumeaA. (2025). Social norms and the expression of prejudice: How the norm changes. Current Opinion in Psychology, 62, Article 101974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2024.101974
3.
Ashburn-NardoL.BlancharJ. C.PeterssonJ.MorrisK. A.GoodwinS. A. (2014). Do you say something when it’s your boss? The role of perpetrator power in prejudice confrontation. Journal of Social Issues, 70(4), 615–636. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12082
4.
Ashburn-NardoL.KarimM. F. A. (2019). The CPR model: Decisions involved in confronting prejudiced responses. In MallettR. K.MonteithM. J. (Eds.), Confronting prejudice and discrimination (pp. 29–47). Academic Press.
5.
Ashburn-NardoL.MorrisK. A.GoodwinS. A. (2008). The confronting prejudiced responses (CPR) model: Applying CPR in organizations. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(3), 332–342. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.34251671
6.
BašicZ.FalkA.KosseF. (2020). The development of egalitarian norm enforcement in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 179, 667–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2019.03.014
7.
BlanchardF. A.CrandallC. S.BrighamJ. C.VaughnL. A. (1994). Condemning and condoning racism: A social context approach to interracial settings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(6), 993–997. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.6.993
8.
BurnsM. D.GranzE. L. (2023). “Sincere White people, work in conjunction with us”: Racial minorities’ perceptions of White ally sincerity and perceptions of ally efforts. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26(2), 453–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211059699
9.
ChaneyK. E.ChasteenA. L. (2023). Do beliefs that older adults are inflexible serve as a barrier to racial equality?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 50(8), 1151–1166. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231159767
10.
ChaneyK. E.O’DeaC. J.Pereira-JorgeI. (2025). From confronted to confronter? Examining the enduring effects of prejudice confrontations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 28(4), 908–930. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302241309872
11.
ChaneyK. E.SanchezD. T. (2018). The endurance of interpersonal confrontations as a prejudice reduction strategy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(3), 418–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217741344
12.
ChaneyK. E.SanchezD. T. (2022). Prejudice confrontation styles: A validated and reliable measure of how people confront prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(5), 1333–1352. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211005841
13.
ChaneyK. E.SanchezD. T.RemediosJ. D. (2016). Organizational identity safety cue transfers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(11), 1564–1576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216665096
14.
ChaneyK. E.YoungD. M.SanchezD. T. (2015). Confrontation’s health outcomes and promotion of egalitarianism (C-HOPE) framework. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 1(4), 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000042
15.
ChuC.Ashburn-NardoL. (2022). Black Americans’ perspectives on ally confrontations of racial prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 101, Article 104337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104337
16.
CialdiniR. B.DemaineL. J.SagarinB. J.BarrettD. W.RhoadsK.WinterP. L. (2006). Managing social norms for persuasive impact. Social Influence, 1(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510500181459
17.
CialdiniR. B.RenoR. R.KallgrenC. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
18.
CialdiniR. B.TrostM. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In GilbertD. T.FiskeS. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 151–192). McGraw-Hill.
19.
CrandallC. S.EshlemanA. (2003). A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological bulletin, 129(3), 414–446. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414
20.
CrandallC. S.EshlemanA.O’BrienL. (2002). Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: The struggle for internalization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(3), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.3.359
21.
CzoppA. M. (2019). The consequences of confronting prejudice. In MallettR. K.MonteithM. J. (Eds.), Confronting prejudice and discrimination (pp. 201–221). Academic Press.
22.
CzoppA. M.MonteithM. J. (2003). Confronting prejudice (literally): Reactions to confrontations of racial and gender bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(4), 532–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202250923
23.
CzoppA. M.MonteithM. J.MarkA. Y. (2006). Standing up for a change: Reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 784–803. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.784
24.
De SouzaL.SchmaderT. (2022). The misjudgment of men: Does pluralistic ignorance inhibit allyship?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(2), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000362
DickterC. L.KittelJ. A.GyurovskiI. I. (2012). Perceptions of non-target confronters in response to racist and heterosexist remarks. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(1), 112–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.855
27.
DickterC. L.NewtonV. A. (2013). To confront or not to confront: Non-targets’ evaluations of and responses to racist comments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(S2), E262–E275. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12022
28.
DouglasB. D.HolleyK.IsenbergN.KennedyK. R.BrauerM. (2024). Social sanctions in response to injunctive norm violations. Current Opinion in Psychology, 59, Article 101850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2024.101850
29.
DuckittJ.SibleyC. G. (2007). Right wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 21(2), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.614
30.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
31.
GoodJ. J.Moss-RacusinC. A.SanchezD. T. (2012). When do we confront? Perceptions of costs and benefits predict confronting discrimination on behalf of the self and others. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36(2), 210–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684312440958
32.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
33.
HildebrandL. K.JusufC. C.MonteithM. J. (2020). Ally confrontations as identity-safety cues for marginalized individuals. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(6), 1318–1333. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2692
34.
HurdN. M.TrawalterS.JakubowA.JohnsonH. E.BillingsleyJ. T. (2022). Online racial discrimination and the role of White bystanders. American Psychologist, 77(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000603
35.
HyersL. L. (2007). Resisting prejudice every day: Exploring women’s assertive responses to anti-Black racism, anti-Semitism, heterosexism, and sexism. Sex Roles, 56, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9142-8
36.
KaiserC. R.MillerC. T. (2001). Stop complaining! The social costs of making attributions to discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 254–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201272010
37.
KaiserC. R.MillerC. T. (2003). Derogating the victim: The interpersonal consequences of blaming events on discrimination. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6(3), 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302030063001
KawakamiK.DunnE.KarmaliF.DovidioJ. F. (2009). Mispredicting affective and behavioral responses to racism. Science, 323(5911), 276–278. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1164951
40.
LeeM. H. J.MontgomeryJ. M.LaiC. K. (2024). America’s racial framework of superiority and Americanness embedded in natural language. PNAS Nexus, 3(1), Article pgad485. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad485
41.
LeeR. T.PerezA. D.BoykinC. M.Mendoza-DentonR. (2019). On the prevalence of racial discrimination in the United States. PLoS One, 14(1), Article e0210698. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210698
42.
LiA. H.NolandE. S.MonteithM. J. (2024). Following prejudiced behavior, confrontation restores local anti-bias social norms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 51(2), 2389–2404. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241229006
43.
MaD. S.CorrellJ.WittenbrinkB. (2015). The Chicago Face Database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1122–1135. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5
44.
MatiasJ. N. (2019). Preventing harassment and increasing group participation through social norms in 2,190 online science discussions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 116(20), 9785–9789. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1813486116
45.
MauduyM.PrioloD.MargasN.SénémeaudC. (2022). When combining injunctive and descriptive norms strengthens the hypocrisy effect: A test in the field of discrimination. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 989599. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.989599
46.
MeyersC.LeonA.WilliamsA. (2020). Aggressive confrontation shapes perceptions and attitudes toward racist content online. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 23(6), 845–862. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220935974
47.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldañaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
48.
MonteithM. J.DeneenN. E.ToomanG. D. (1996). The effect of social norm activation on the expression of opinions concerning gay men and Blacks. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 18(3), 267–288. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp1803_2
49.
MungerK. (2017). Tweetment effects on the tweeted: Experimentally reducing racist harassment. Political Behavior, 39, 629–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-016-9373-5
50.
MurrarS.CampbellM. R.BrauerM. (2020). Exposure to peers’ pro-diversity attitudes increases inclusion and reduces the achievement gap. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(9), 889–897. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0899-5
51.
NelsonJ. K.DunnK. M.ParadiesY. (2011). Bystander anti-racism: A review of the literature. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 11(1), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2011.01274.x
52.
OfosuE. K.ChambersM. K.ChenJ. M.HehmanE. (2019). Same-sex marriage legalization associated with reduced implicit and explicit antigay bias. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 116(18), 8846–8851. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1806000116
53.
OswaldF.StevensS. M.KrukM.MurphyC. I.MatsickJ. L. (2022). Signaling sizeism: An assessment of body size-based threat and safety cues. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 22(1), 378–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12301
54.
PaluckE. L.ShepherdH. (2012). The salience of social referents: A field experiment on collective norms and harassment behavior in a school social network. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(6), 899–915. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030015
55.
ParkH. S.SmithS. W. (2007). Distinctiveness and influence of subjective norms, personal descriptive and injunctive norms, and societal descriptive and injunctive norms on behavioral intent: A case of two behaviors critical to organ donation. Human Communication Research, 33(2), 194–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00296.x
56.
PerkinsH.CraigD. W. (2002). A multifaceted social norms approach to reduce high-risk drinking: Lessons from Hobart and Williams Smith colleges. U.S. Department of Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED470573
RasinskiH. M.CzoppA. M. (2010). The effect of target status on witnesses’ reactions to confrontations of bias. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32(1), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973530903539754
59.
RatcliffJ. J.AndrusT.MillerA. K.OlowuF.CapellupoJ. (2023). When potential allies and targets do (and do not) confront anti-Asian prejudice: Reactions to blatant and subtle prejudice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(23–24), 11890–11913. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231188057
60.
RattanA.DweckC. S. (2010). Who confronts prejudice? The role of implicit theories in the motivation to confront prejudice. Psychological Science, 21(7), 952–959. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610374740
61.
RimalR. N.LapinskiM. K.CookR. J.RealK. (2005). Moving toward a theory of normative influences: How perceived benefits and similarity moderate the impact of descriptive norms on behaviors. Journal of Health Communication, 10(5), 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730591009880
62.
SanchezD. T.ChaneyK. E.ManuelS. K.WiltonL. S.RemediosJ. D. (2017). Stigma by prejudice transfer: Racism threatens White women and sexism threatens men of color. Psychological Science, 28(4), 445–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616686218
63.
SanchezD. T.HimmelsteinM. S.YoungD. M.AlbujaA. F.GarciaJ. A. (2016). Confronting as autonomy promotion: Speaking up against discrimination and psychological well-being in racial minorities. Journal of Health Psychology, 21(9), 1999–2007. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105315569619
64.
SchultzJ. R.MaddoxK. B. (2013). Shooting the messenger to spite the message? Exploring reactions to claims of racial bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(3), 346–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212475223
65.
SechristG. B. (2010). Making attributions to and plans to confront gender discrimination: The role of optimism. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(7), 1678–1707. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00635.x
66.
SheltonJ. N.RichesonJ. A.SalvatoreJ.HillD. M. (2006). Silence is not golden: The intrapersonal consequences of not confronting prejudice. In LevinS.van LaarC. (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality (pp. 79–96). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410617057
67.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (2001). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge University Press.
68.
SiegelA. A.BadaanV. (2020). # No2Sectarianism: Experimental approaches to reducing sectarian hate speech online. American Political Science Review, 114(3), 837–855. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055420000283
69.
SommersS. R.NortonM. I. (2006). Lay theories about White racists: What constitutes racism (and what doesn’t). Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9(1), 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206059881
70.
SwimJ. K.HyersL. L. (1999). Excuse me—what did you just say?!: Women’s public and private responses to sexist remarks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 68–88. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1370
71.
TankardM. E.PaluckE. L. (2016). Norm perception as a vehicle for social change. Social Issues and Policy Review, 10(1), 181–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12022
72.
TankardM. E.PaluckE. L. (2017). The effect of a Supreme Court decision regarding gay marriage on social norms and personal attitudes. Psychological Science, 28(9), 1334–1344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617709594
73.
ThaiM.NylundJ. L. (2024). What are they in it for? Marginalised group members’ perceptions of allies differ depending on the costs and rewards associated with their allyship. British Journal of Social Psychology, 63(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12670
74.
ViscusiW. K.HuberJ.BellJ. (2011). Promoting recycling: Private values, social norms, and economic incentives. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, 101(3), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.3.65
75.
WesselJ. L.LemayE. P.Jr.BarthS. E. (2023). You(r behaviors) are racist: Responses to prejudice confrontations depend on confrontation focus. Journal of Business and Psychology, 38(1), 109–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09811-5
76.
WilliamsM. J.EberhardtJ. L. (2008). Biological conceptions of race and the motivation to cross racial boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(6), 1033. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.1033
ZapataJ.SulikJ.von WulffenC.DeroyO. (2024). Bystanders’ collective responses set the norm against hate speech. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02761-8
79.
ZitekE. M.HeblM. R. (2007). The role of social norm clarity in the influenced expression of prejudice over time. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(6), 867–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.10.010
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
