Racial Cues from Unfamiliar Sources and Their Effects on Americans' Policy Preferences

Americans increasingly confront policy messages not from high-profile political figures, but from everyday citizens. Much is known about the effects of racial source cues from well-known political figures with salient racial identities. Less is known about how subtle racial cues from non-recognizable sources affect Americans' support for policies that are race-targeted and those that are not. In this paper, I conduct a randomized experiment that varies a cue of the source's racial identity and the type of policy for which the source advocates. I uncover little evidence for the hypothesis that subtle racial source cues activate racial attitudes that lead Americans to racialize policies that are (at least explicitly) race-neutral. I find instead that subtle cues of a Black vs.~White source decrease support only for race-targeted policies. I reason that two mechanisms possibly driving this effect are: (1) subtle racial source cues become salient for only race-targeted policies, thereby activating racial stereotypes for these policies but not others and (2) Black sources are perceived as less objective policy messengers when the policy explicitly aims to rectify injustices against Black Americans. More generally, the paper's overall findings suggest that subtle racial cues of who advocates for race-targeted policies matter for whether such policies can garner the public support they presumably need to come to fruition.