New Study Reveals How DEI Training Increases Hostility
Authored by Josh Stevenson via the Brownstone Institute,
President Trump has recently taken decisive action against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs within the federal government by signing executive orders that dismantle these initiatives. His actions include revoking an order by Lyndon B. Johnson on affirmative action for federal contractors and placing all federal DEI staff on paid administrative leave with plans for their eventual layoff. These moves have sparked significant controversy, with critics arguing that they undo decades of progress toward racial and gender equity in federal employment, while supporters believe they restore merit-based governance.
This fulfills Trump’s campaign promise to eliminate what he describes as “radical and wasteful” DEI programs, aligning with his commitment to a colorblind, merit-based society. The controversy reflects a broader debate on the role of government in promoting diversity versus ensuring equal opportunity based solely on merit. But what does the evidence show?
The Rise of Woke Indoctrination
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives have become increasingly prevalent in workplaces, educational institutions, and other organizations across the United States. These programs’ stated goals are to foster more inclusive environments, reduce bias, and promote equity for all individuals. A key component of many DEI programs is diversity pedagogy, which often includes lectures, trainings, and educational resources designed to educate participants about their own biases and the ‘systemic nature of oppression.’
A growing body of research suggests that DEI programs, particularly those emphasizing “anti-oppressive” frameworks, have consequences that are completely opposite of their stated goals. While many might give DEI practitioners the benefit of the doubt and see these trainings as well-intentioned, that is up for debate. This study, conducted by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) and Rutgers University, investigates the potential for these programs to increase intergroup hostility and even contribute to the rise of authoritarian tendencies.
Putting DEI to the Test
The study employed an experimental design to examine the impact of different types of educational materials on participants’ attitudes and beliefs. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups:
Control Group: Exposed to neutral control materials, such as an essay on corn production.
Intervention Group: Exposed to DEI materials emphasizing systemic oppression, anti-racism, and narratives of victimization. These materials included excerpts from works by prominent DEI scholars like Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo, as well as materials used in caste sensitivity training.
Participants then evaluated scenarios designed to assess their perceptions of bias, willingness to punish perceived oppressors, support for punitive measures, and overall attitudes toward different groups.
Results
The study found that exposure to “anti-oppressive” DEI materials had several significant effects:
Increased Perception of Bias: Participants exposed to these materials were more likely to perceive prejudice and discrimination where none existed, even in neutral scenarios. For example, in a scenario involving a college admissions decision, participants exposed to DEI materials were more likely to perceive the admissions officer as racially biased against the applicant, despite the absence of any evidence of discrimination.
Promoted Punitive Attitudes: Participants exposed to these materials showed increased support for punitive measures against perceived oppressors. They were more likely to endorse measures such as suspension, public apologies, and mandatory DEI training, even when there was no evidence of wrongdoing.
Heightened Authoritarian Tendencies: The study found a correlation between exposure to these materials and increased authoritarian tendencies. Participants exposed to “anti-oppressive” DEI materials were more likely to endorse demonizing statements about perceived “oppressor” groups, reflecting a shift towards a more punitive and intolerant mindset.
Key Charts
Discussion
These findings raise significant concerns about the consequences of DEI programs. By emphasizing ‘systemic oppression’ and focusing on narratives of victimization, these programs:
Increase intergroup hostility: The heightened perception of bias and the promotion of punitive attitudes can contribute to increased mistrust and hostility between different groups.
Foster a climate of fear and suspicion: A constant focus on systemic oppression and the perception of pervasive bias can create a climate of fear and suspicion, where individuals are constantly on the lookout for signs of prejudice.
Contribute to the rise of authoritarian tendencies: The emphasis on punitive measures and the demonization of perceived “oppressors” may contribute to the rise of authoritarian tendencies, such as the suppression of dissenting views and the erosion of civil liberties.
Conclusion
This study offers valuable insights into the consequences of DEI programs. While these initiatives may be well-intentioned, they can sometimes backfire, inadvertently increasing intergroup hostility and fostering a climate of fear and suspicion. At the very least, these findings underscore the urgent need for careful consideration and rigorous evaluation of DEI efforts. More concerning, however, is the extent to which DEI culture has become toxic and counterproductive—so much so that it exacerbates the very problems it claims to resolve.
Reference
https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/Instructing-Animosity_11.13.24.pdf
Originally published on the author’s Substack
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
Posts
