Holding racist attitudes predicts increased psychological distress over time

New research published in the journal Comprehensive Psychiatry challenges the common belief that mental illness is a primary driver of racist attitudes. The findings suggest that the relationship actually works in the opposite direction, with prejudiced beliefs predicting an increase in psychological distress over time. The study also highlights social connectedness as a significant factor, indicating that a lack of social connection may fuel both prejudice and mental health struggles.

Psychologists and social scientists have historically sought to understand the roots of extreme prejudice. A frequent explanation in both academic literature and media coverage is that racism is a symptom of poor mental health. This narrative often surfaces after events of mass violence, where the perpetrator’s actions are attributed to psychological instability rather than ideological conviction. For example, counterterrorism strategies frequently list mental health issues as a key risk factor for radicalization.

Tegan Cruwys, a researcher at the School of Medicine and Psychology at The Australian National University, led a team to investigate the validity of this assumption. The researchers argued that attributing racism to mental illness is problematic for several reasons. It has poor predictive power and risks stigmatizing people with mental health disorders who are not prejudiced.

The research team sought to test the reverse possibility. They wanted to see if holding racist views might actually be toxic to the person holding them. They also hypothesized that a third variable, such as social isolation, might be the true cause of both prejudiced attitudes and psychological decline.

To test these ideas, the researchers analyzed data from three separate longitudinal studies conducted in Australia. Longitudinal studies involve surveying the same group of people at multiple points in time. This design allows scientists to observe which changes occur first and provides better evidence for the direction of cause and effect than one-time surveys. Each of the three studies was large, nationally representative, and spanned a period of approximately six months.

The first study took place during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. It included 2,361 adults. The researchers measured racism using an adapted scale that assessed social distancing preferences. Participants were asked how much physical distance they would prefer to keep from members of various ethnic outgroups compared to their own family or friends. They also rated their feelings toward these groups on a “warmth” thermometer.

Psychological distress was measured using a standard clinical tool that assesses symptoms of depression and anxiety. Social connectedness was evaluated by asking participants how often they felt lonely or left out.

The second study was conducted in 2023 leading up to the Australian Indigenous Voice referendum. This was a national vote on whether to recognize Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the constitution. The sample included 3,860 participants.

In this study, racism was measured by asking participants to rate how they believed Indigenous peoples were treated in Australia. Scores indicating a belief that Indigenous people receive “special treatment” were interpreted as indicative of prejudice. Psychological distress was measured using a five-item screening questionnaire often used to detect mental ill-health in the general population. Social connectedness was operationalized as the level of trust participants placed in institutions such as the government, police, and scientists.

The third study also occurred during the Voice referendum period and included 2,424 non-Indigenous Australians. The team measured attitudes using a specific scale designed to gauge views on Indigenous Australians. Psychological well-being was assessed using a five-item survey from the World Health Organization. In this dataset, social connectedness was defined by how strongly participants identified with various social groups, including their family, neighborhood, and country.

The results from all three studies showed a consistent pattern. When the researchers looked at the data from a single point in time, the link between racism and psychological distress was weak and inconsistent. This lack of a strong immediate connection suggests that simply having a mental health condition does not automatically make a person more likely to hold racist views.

However, the longitudinal analysis revealed a different story. In all three datasets, an increase in racist beliefs consistently preceded and predicted an increase in psychological distress. In the first study, participants whose racist attitudes intensified over the six months were more likely to experience worsening anxiety and depression. In the third study, psychological distress increased markedly over time only among those participants who held higher levels of racist attitudes.

The second study provided a nuanced view of this trend. During the timeframe of the second study, psychological distress was generally declining across the population. However, this improvement was not evenly shared. Participants who reported the lowest levels of racism showed the steepest decline in distress. In contrast, those with the highest levels of racism experienced a much more modest improvement in their mental health.

The researchers also tested the reverse pathway to see if psychological distress predicted a later increase in racism. The evidence for this was mixed. While two of the studies showed some association, it was not consistent across all contexts. In the third study, psychological distress did not predict any change in racist attitudes over time.

A key component of the study was the investigation of social connectedness. The analysis showed that social connection served as a protective factor against both racism and psychological distress. In the first study, participants who felt less socially connected over time saw increases in both racist attitudes and mental health symptoms.

In fact, when the researchers statistically accounted for the role of social connectedness, the direct link between racism and distress often disappeared or weakened. This suggests that the feeling of being excluded or alienated may be a “common cause” that drives people toward both prejudice and poor mental health.

The researchers propose that prejudiced attitudes may be psychologically harmful because they are inherently threatening. Racism often involves viewing other groups as a danger to one’s own safety, culture, or resources. Living with this constant sense of threat can induce a state of hypervigilance and anxiety that erodes mental well-being over time.

These findings have implications for how society addresses both prejudice and mental health. The results challenge the idea that treating mental illness will automatically reduce racism or extremism. Instead, the study suggests that prejudice itself is a risk factor for mental decline. It implies that interventions designed to foster social connection and community inclusion could have a dual benefit. By helping people feel more connected to society, it may be possible to simultaneously improve mental health outcomes and reduce the prevalence of prejudiced attitudes.

There are limitations to this research that should be noted. The measures of racism varied across the three studies to fit the specific social context of the time. This makes it difficult to compare the absolute levels of prejudice between the different samples. Additionally, the study relied on self-reported data, which can be influenced by a participant’s desire to present themselves in a favorable light. The research was conducted in Australia, so the specific social dynamics may differ in other countries or cultural contexts.

It is also important to avoid interpreting these findings as an explanation for violent extremism. The study surveyed the general population rather than radicalized individuals or members of hate groups. While prejudice is a predictor of radicalization, the psychological dynamics of violent offenders may differ from those of the general public.

Future research is needed to determine if these patterns hold true for other forms of prejudice, such as sexism or homophobia. The researchers also suggest that future studies should test whether practical interventions that boost social connectedness can effectively interrupt the cycle of prejudice and distress. The study indicates that mental health is not a fixed trait but is responsive to our social attitudes and our sense of belonging.

The study, “What goes around comes around? Holding racist attitudes predicts increased psychological distress over time,” was authored by Tegan Cruwys, Olivia Evans, Michael J. Platow, Iain Walker, Katherine J. Reynolds, Christienne Javier, Catherine Haslam, S. Alexander Haslam, and Hema Preya Selvanathan.