{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0215962441314554, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008763693270735524, 'mean_word_length': 5.417670682730924, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What helps you hurts me: Researchers should consider how symbolic racism might affect attitudes toward basic income

In discussing universal basic income (UBI) in their focal article, Huffmeier and Zacher (2021) note the importance of investigating predictors of support or opposition to such programs. The authors note that as the discussion of UBI continues, “it will be important to use rigorous research methods to examine individual and higher level reactions to the proposal and actual introduction of a BI, as well as individual and contextual factors that moderate these effects” (p. 42). Although the authors discuss several theories in organizational research related to fairness, such as procedural justice and equity theory, we believe there may be additional factors to consider as well. In particular, we believe that attitudes toward disadvantaged groups and minority groups may lead individuals to oppose the program even if they might benefit from the program individually. Universal basic income, depending on how it is designed, has the potential to benefit every citizen. In that way, the program would be similar to other government programs that have historically been implemented. Accordingly, to understand whether this program will be successful, it may beneficial to examine whether other similar programs have also been successful. We were reminded of Heather McGhee’s recent book The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together (2021). In the book, McGhee examines the community swimming pools that were created in the early part of the 20th century and then later destroyed or abandoned when they were required to racially integrate. This historical example demonstrates that people may act against their own interests if they feel that government programs benefit individuals they find undesirable. As researchers in the field of industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology, these findings surprised us. However, researchers in other fields have already explored how racism may affect attitudes on government spending. One concept that may be particularly useful is symbolic racism. Symbolic racism refers to a belief system that maintains four specific ideas: that Black individuals no longer face discrimination, that Black individuals face disadvantages that are due to a lack of work ethic, that Black individuals are overly demanding in their desire for equality, and—most relevantly—that Black individuals do not deserve government assistance (Sears & Henry, 2003). Researchers have found that symbolic racism predicts more positive attitudes toward more punitive policing policies that may disadvantage minority groups (Green et al., 2006). Jaccoby (1994) found that symbolic racism in particular was a strong predictor of negative attitudes toward government spending, particularly on social programs. Sears and Henry (2003) also found that symbolic racism was a strong predictor of opposition to government spending on minority groups specifically, beyond what was predicted by other prejudices or what was predicted by general individualism. Other researchers have also found that beliefs about the work ethic of Black individuals