Microaggressions: Misconceptions, Politics, and New Science

By Monnica Williams, Muna Osman, and Simranjeet Saini

Racism has a long history around the world. It is only recently that we have seen slight decreases in overt expressions of racism in the U.S. and Canada, although this progress was significantly curtailed with the recent Trump presidency and the resulting rise of blatant racial prejudice.

Despite historical fluctuations in overt racism, subtle racism has remained consistent and pervasive in the everyday lives of individuals of color. Black Harvard psychiatrist Dr. Chester Pierce (1970) first coined the term “microaggression” in the late 1960s to describe subtle racism and discrimination targeted primarily at African Americans. Since then, there has been a concerted, empirical, and scientific effort to advance our academic understanding of microaggressions, with new questions stimulating further research. Publications on this topic are found globally in academic books, chapters, and peer-reviewed papers.

Racial microaggressions are “brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to people of color because they belong to a racial minority group” (Sue et al., 2007, p. 273), although the concept has expanded to include other marginalized groups as well. The subtle nature of these microaggressions ensure they are not always obvious, difficult to interpret, and thus often dismissed as harmless. Yet research confirms that, like overt racism, microaggressions are linked to many adverse psychological and health-related effects.

Despite the growing interdisciplinary literature, microaggressions have been widely misunderstood by both the general public and scientific community. These misconceptions are rooted in anxieties surrounding social change and inaccurate understandings of microaggression research. For example, in an article forthcoming in the conservative legal journal Texas Review of Law & Politics, authors Edward Cantau and Lee Jussim assert that researchers have not conducted enough studies to establish microaggressions as a real construct and that no one really knows how to define them. These are unfortunately common misconceptions that we will clarify here.

How do we know what behaviors are microaggressions?

As covert expressions of racism, microaggressions understandably existed long before the term “microaggressions” was conceived. As such, this research is grounded in decades of accumulated research on racism and prejudice. As in any refined scientific discipline, prior foundational knowledge is essential before evaluating more nuanced concepts. In opposition to this evidence and with a limited knowledge base, Cantau and Lee speculated that researchers “have not provided sound scientific bases for labeling [behaviors] as microaggressions.” However, a closer search of the scientific literature reveals that over 32 published peer-reviewed studies on racial microaggressions were able to clearly identify specific microaggressive behaviors and statements, as well as larger categories of microaggressions (Williams, Skinta, & Martin-Willett, 2021).

Consistent with scientifically accurate standards and sound psychometrics, a series of incremental qualitative and quantitative studies established the validity of microaggression scales for use in psychological studies. These findings were further supported and verified across international research teams and large diverse samples (e.g., Doharty, 2019; Ong et al., 2013; Poolokasingham, 2014; Willis, 2015). With foundational knowledge about how racism works and a thorough review of existing studies, the evidence is strong.

Are microaggressions very common or are they infrequent events?

Data from academic institutions and the general public highly suggests that microaggressions are common. For example, a national survey of 759 medical students determined that “61% experienced at least one microaggression weekly." With race being one of the highest reasons, experiencing microaggressions frequently was correlated with negative mental health outcomes. In a community sample of 845 Black Canadians, Cenat and colleagues (2021) found that 4 in 10 participants were targeted by everyday racial discrimination at least once a week. Suárez-Orozco and colleagues (2015) conducted an observational study of microaggressions in classrooms at three different US community colleges, documenting 51 instances of microaggressions across 60 of the classrooms observed.

Essed (2002) uses the term “everyday racism” to describe the concept of racial microaggressions, noting that “everyday racism is racism, but not all racism is everyday racism.” This indicates that although expressions of racism are often known to be blatantly impudent and discriminatory occurrences against racial and ethnic groups, most occur as subtle events. Offenders may equate a microaggression with a mild insult instead of an act of racism. It may therefore often be difficult for victims to promptly identify it as such, and thus provoke a nuanced understanding and set of emotions regarding this event.

Are microaggressions a part of Critical Race Theory?

Racial microaggressions are different from the concept of Critical Race Theory (CRT), which is one of many approaches used in law and sociology to explain racial inequality. CRT is not a movement, nor does it make policy prescriptions; rather, it is a way of looking at the world. The basic tenets of CRT maintain that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex and often subtle social and institutional forces, rather than intentional malice by individuals.

Microaggression Essential Reads

How White Supremacy Is Built Into Societies

Crazy Rich, Multicultural, Asians

In September 2020, conservative lawmakers and activists started using the term “Critical Race Theory” as “a catchall phrase for nearly any examination of systemic racism,” which conflates these conceptually distinct constructs. Earlier this year, bills were introduced in several Republican-controlled US legislatures to restrict teaching about racism in what was branded as “Critical Race Theory.” As of late, any concern focused on issues of racial justice is being labeled as “CRT.” The concept of microaggressions did not evolve out of CRT; microaggressions were coined before 1970, whereas CRT did not start to form until the mid-1970s. However, microaggressions can be used to help explain the mechanisms by which social systems uphold racial disparities.

Advancing the science

Although research has conclusively determined that microaggressions are real and cause both psychological and physical harm to communities of color, some detractors have called the concept of microaggressions anti-scientific, or worse yet, a political ploy. There is still much research needed to understand the manner in which the harm from microaggressions can be eliminated or mitigated, but there is no debate among informed scholars regarding the veracity of the concept.

To further this important work, we are pleased to announce a special journal issue of Perspectives on Psychological Science dedicated to this very topic, which underscores the solid backbone of research behind this important concept. Across 11 peer-reviewed articles by expert scholars, this special issue further refines the shared language about differing forms of racism, organizes the nomological network of existing evidence, provides a theoretical and empirically-grounded taxonomy of microaggressions, and explicitly refutes conceptual arguments discounting the existence of microaggressions.

The growth of this literature only speaks to the research interest and vitality of this topic, now generating many such special issues and sections in top journals. We remain confident that this interdisciplinary research area will continue to develop and mature. Fully establishing the validity of a construct is an ongoing process, and we welcome diverse researchers to challenge and share critical questions to further refine this work. Together, we can reduce the widespread nature of microaggressions and work to advance racial justice.