Racial Microaggressions in Everyday Life

Implications for Clinical Practice

Derald Wing Sue, Christina M. Capodilupo, Gina C. Torino, Jennifer M. Bucceri,

Aisha M. B. Holder, Kevin L. Nadal, and Marta Esquilin

Teachers College, Columbia University

Racial microaggressions are brief and commonplace daily

verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether

intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, de-

rogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward

people of color. Perpetrators of microaggressions are often

unaware that they engage in such communications when

they interact with racial/ethnic minorities. A taxonomy of

racial microaggressions in everyday life was created

through a review of the social psychological literature on

aversive racism, from formulations regarding the manifes-

tation and impact of everyday racism, and from reading

numerous personal narratives of counselors (both White

and those of color) on their racial/cultural awakening.

Microaggressions seem to appear in three forms: microas-

sault, microinsult, and microinvalidation. Almost all inter-

racial encounters are prone to microaggressions; this ar-

ticle uses the White counselor – client of color counseling

dyad to illustrate how they impair the development of a

therapeutic alliance. Suggestions regarding education and

training and research in the helping professions are dis-

cussed.

Keywords: microaggression, microassault, microinsult, mi-

croinvalidation, attributional ambiguity

lthough the civil rights movement had a signiﬁ-

cant effect on changing racial interactions in this

society, racism continues to plague the United

States (Thompson & Neville, 1999). President Clinton’s

Race Advisory Board concluded that (a) racism is one of

the most divisive forces in our society, (b) racial legacies of

the past continue to haunt current policies and practices that

create unfair disparities between minority and majority

groups, (c) racial inequities are so deeply ingrained in

American society that they are nearly invisible, and (d)

most White Americans are unaware of the advantages they

enjoy in this society and of how their attitudes and actions

unintentionally discriminate against persons of color (Ad-

visory Board to the President’s Initiative on Race, 1998).

This last conclusion is especially problematic in the mental

health professions because most graduates continue to be

White and trained primarily in Western European models

of service delivery (D. W. Sue & Sue, 2003). For that

reason, this article focuses primarily on White therapist –

client of color interactions.

Because White therapists are members of the larger

society and not immune from inheriting the racial biases of

their forebears (Burkard & Knox, 2004; D. W. Sue, 2005),

they may become victims of a cultural conditioning process

that imbues within them biases and prejudices (Abelson,

Dasgupta, Park, & Banaji, 1998; Banaji, Hardin, & Roth-

man, 1993) that discriminate against clients of color. Over

the past 20 years, calls for cultural competence in the

helping professions (American Psychological Association,

2003; D. W. Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992) have

stressed the importance of two therapist characteristics

associated with effective service delivery to racial/ethnic

minority clients: (a) awareness of oneself as a racial/cul-

tural being and of the biases, stereotypes, and assumptions

that inﬂuence worldviews and (b) awareness of the world-

views of culturally diverse clients. Achieving these two

goals is blocked, however, when White clinicians fail to

understand how issues of race inﬂuence the therapy process

and how racism potentially infects the delivery of services

to clients of color (Richardson & Molinaro, 1996). Thera-

pists who are unaware of their biases and prejudices may

unintentionally create impasses for clients of color, which

may partially explain well-documented patterns of therapy

underutilization and premature termination of therapy

among such clients (Burkard & Knox, 2004; Kearney,

Draper, & Baron, 2005). In this article, we describe and

analyze how racism in the form of racial microaggressions

is particularly problematic for therapists to identify; pro-

pose a taxonomy of racial microaggressions with potential

implications for practice, education and training, and re-

search; and use the counseling/therapy process to illustrate

how racial microaggressions can impair the therapeutic

alliance. To date, no conceptual or theoretical model of

Editor’s note. Lillian Comas-Dı´az served as the action editor for this

article before Derald Wing Sue joined the American Psychologist Edito-

rial Board as an associate editor on January 1, 2007.

Authors’ note. Derald Wing Sue, Christina M. Capodilupo, Gina C.

Torino, Jennifer M. Bucceri, Aisha M. B. Holder, Kevin L. Nadal, and

Marta Esquilin, Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology,

Teachers College, Columbia University.

Aisha M. B. Holder is now at Fordham University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to De-

rald Wing Sue, Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Box

36, Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120th Street, New

York, NY 10027. E-mail: [email protected]

271May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

Vol. 62, No. 4, 271–286 DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.62.4.271

racial microaggressions has been proposed to explain their

impact on the therapeutic process.

The Changing Face of Racism

In recent history, racism in North America has undergone

a transformation, especially after the post– civil rights era

when the conscious democratic belief in equality for groups

of color directly clashed with the long history of racism in

the society (Jones, 1997; Thompson & Neville, 1999). The

more subtle forms of racism have been labeled modern

racism (McConahay, 1986), symbolic racism (Sears, 1988),

and aversive racism (Dovidio, Gaertner, Kawakami, &

Hodson, 2002). All three explanations of contemporary

racism share commonalities. They emphasize that racism

(a) is more likely than ever to be disguised and covert and

(b) has evolved from the “old fashioned” form, in which

overt racial hatred and bigotry is consciously and publicly

displayed, to a more ambiguous and nebulous form that is

more difﬁcult to identify and acknowledge.

It appears that modern and symbolic racism are most

closely associated with political conservatives, who dis-

claim personal bigotry by strong and rigid adherence to

traditional American values (individualism, self-reliance,

hard work, etc.), whereas aversive racism is more charac-

teristic of White liberals (Dovidio & Gaertner, 1996, 2000).

Aversive racists, according to these researchers, are

strongly motivated by egalitarian values as well as antimi-

nority feelings. Their egalitarian values operate on a con-

scious level, while their antiminority feelings are less con-

scious and generally covert (DeVos & Banaji, 2005). In

some respects, these three forms of racism can be ordered

along a continuum; aversive racists are the least con-

sciously negative, followed by modern and symbolic rac-

ists, who are somewhat more prejudiced, and ﬁnally by

old-fashioned biological racists (Nelson, 2006).

Although much has been written about contemporary

forms of racism, many studies in health care (Smedley &

Smedley, 2005), education (Gordon & Johnson, 2003),

employment (Hinton, 2004), mental health (Burkard &

Knox, 2004), and other social settings (Sellers & Shelton,

2003) indicate the difﬁculty of describing and deﬁning

racial discrimination that occurs via “aversive racism” or

“implicit bias”; these types of racism are difﬁcult to iden-

tify, quantify, and rectify because of their subtle, nebulous,

and unnamed nature. Without an adequate classiﬁcation or

understanding of the dynamics of subtle racism, it will

remain invisible and potentially harmful to the well-being,

self-esteem, and standard of living of people of color (U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, 2001). Ironi-

cally, it has been proposed that the daily common experi-

ences of racial aggression that characterize aversive racism

may have signiﬁcantly more inﬂuence on racial anger,

frustration, and self-esteem than traditional overt forms of

racism (Solo´rzano, Ceja, & Yosso, 2000). Furthermore, the

invisible nature of acts of aversive racism prevents perpe-

trators from realizing and confronting (a) their own com-

plicity in creating psychological dilemmas for minorities

and (b) their role in creating disparities in employment,

health care, and education.

The Manifestation of Racial

Microaggressions

In reviewing the literature on subtle and contemporary

forms of racism, we have found the term “racial microag-

gressions” to best describe the phenomenon in its everyday

occurrence. First coined by Pierce in 1970, the term refers

to “subtle, stunning, often automatic, and non-verbal ex-

Derald Wing

Sue

Christina M.

Capodilupo

272 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

changes which are ‘put downs’” (Pierce, Carew, Pierce-

Gonzalez, & Willis, 1978, p. 66). Racial microaggressions

have also been described as “subtle insults (verbal, non-

verbal, and/or visual) directed toward people of color, often

automatically or unconsciously” (Solo´rzano et al., 2000).

Simply stated, microaggressions are brief, everyday ex-

changes that send denigrating messages to people of color

because they belong to a racial minority group. In the world

of business, the term “microinequities” is used to describe

the pattern of being overlooked, underrespected, and de-

valued because of one’s race or gender. Microaggressions

are often unconsciously delivered in the form of subtle

snubs or dismissive looks, gestures, and tones. These ex-

changes are so pervasive and automatic in daily conversa-

tions and interactions that they are often dismissed and

glossed over as being innocent and innocuous. Yet, as

indicated previously, microaggressions are detrimental to

persons of color because they impair performance in a

multitude of settings by sapping the psychic and spiritual

energy of recipients and by creating inequities (Franklin,

2004; D. W. Sue, 2004).

There is an urgent need to bring greater awareness and

understanding of how microaggressions operate, their nu-

merous manifestations in society, the type of impact they

have on people of color, the dynamic interaction between

perpetrator and target, and the educational strategies

needed to eliminate them. Our attempt to deﬁne and pro-

pose a taxonomy of microaggressions is grounded in sev-

eral lines of empirical and experiential evidence in the

professional literature and in personal narratives.

First, the work by psychologists on aversive racism

(Dovidio & Gaertner, 1996; Dovidio et al., 2002), studies

suggesting the widespread existence of dissociation be-

tween implicit and explicit social stereotyping (Abelson et

al., 1998; Banaji et al., 1993; DeVos & Banaji, 2005), the

attributional ambiguity of everyday racial discrimination

(Crocker & Major, 1989), the daily manifestations of rac-

ism in many arenas of life (Plant & Peruche, 2005; Sellers

& Shelton, 2003; Vanman, Saltz, Nathan, & Warren,

2004), and multiple similarities between microaggressive

incidents and items that comprise measures of race-related

stress/perceived discrimination toward Black Americans

(Brondolo et al., 2005; Klonoff & Landrine, 1999; Utsey &

Ponterotto, 1996) and Asian Americans (Liang, Li, & Kim,

2004) all seem to lend empirical support to the concept of

racial microaggressions. Second, numerous personal narra-

tives and brief life stories on race written by White psy-

chologists and psychologists of color provide experiential

evidence for the existence of racial microaggressions in

everyday life (American Counseling Association, 1999;

Conyne & Bemak, 2005; Ponterotto, Casas, Suzuki, &

Alexander, 2001). Our analysis of the life experiences of

these individuals and the research literature in social and

counseling psychology led us to several conclusions: (a)

The personal narratives were rich with examples and inci-

dents of racial microaggressions, (b) the formulation of

microaggressions was consistent with the research litera-

ture, and (c) racial microaggressions seemed to manifest

themselves in three distinct forms.

Forms of Racial Microaggressions

Racial microaggressions are brief and commonplace daily

verbal, behavioral, and environmental indignities, whether

intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, de-

rogatory, or negative racial slights and insults to the target

person or group. They are not limited to human encounters

alone but may also be environmental in nature, as when a

person of color is exposed to an ofﬁce setting that unin-

Gina C.

Torino

Jennifer M.

Bucceri

273May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

tentionally assails his or her racial identity (Gordon &

Johnson, 2003; D. W. Sue, 2003). For example, one’s racial

identity can be minimized or made insigniﬁcant through the

sheer exclusion of decorations or literature that represents

various racial groups. Three forms of microaggressions can

be identiﬁed: microassault, microinsult, and microinvalida-

tion.

Microassault

A microassault is an explicit racial derogation character-

ized primarily by a verbal or nonverbal attack meant to hurt

the intended victim through name-calling, avoidant behav-

ior, or purposeful discriminatory actions. Referring to

someone as “colored” or “Oriental,” using racial epithets,

discouraging interracial interactions, deliberately serving a

White patron before someone of color, and displaying a

swastika are examples. Microassaults are most similar to

what has been called “old fashioned” racism conducted on

an individual level. They are most likely to be conscious

and deliberate, although they are generally expressed in

limited “private” situations (micro) that allow the perpe-

trator some degree of anonymity. In other words, people

are likely to hold notions of minority inferiority privately

and will only display them publicly when they (a) lose

control or (b) feel relatively safe to engage in a microas-

sault. Because we have chosen to analyze the unintentional

and unconscious manifestations of microaggressions, mi-

croassaults are not the focus of our article. It is important to

note, however, that individuals can also vary in the degree

of conscious awareness they show in the use of the follow-

ing two forms of microaggressions.

Microinsult

A microinsult is characterized by communications that

convey rudeness and insensitivity and demean a person’s

racial heritage or identity. Microinsults represent subtle

snubs, frequently unknown to the perpetrator, but clearly

convey a hidden insulting message to the recipient of color.

When a White employer tells a prospective candidate of

color “I believe the most qualiﬁed person should get the

job, regardless of race” or when an employee of color is

asked “How did you get your job?”, the underlying mes-

sage from the perspective of the recipient may be twofold:

(a) People of color are not qualiﬁed, and (b) as a minority

group member, you must have obtained the position

through some afﬁrmative action or quota program and not

because of ability. Such statements are not necessarily

aggressions, but context is important. Hearing these state-

ments frequently when used against afﬁrmative action

makes the recipient likely to experience them as aggres-

sions. Microinsults can also occur nonverbally, as when a

White teacher fails to acknowledge students of color in the

classroom or when a White supervisor seems distracted

during a conversation with a Black employee by avoiding

eye contact or turning away (Hinton, 2004). In this case,

the message conveyed to persons of color is that their

contributions are unimportant.

Microinvalidation

Microinvalidations are characterized by communications

that exclude, negate, or nullify the psychological thoughts,

feelings, or experiential reality of a person of color. When

Asian Americans (born and raised in the United States) are

complimented for speaking good English or are repeatedly

asked where they were born, the effect is to negate their

U.S. American heritage and to convey that they are per-

petual foreigners. When Blacks are told that “I don’t see

color” or “We are all human beings,” the effect is to negate

their experiences as racial/cultural beings (Helms, 1992).

Aisha M. B.

Holder

Kevin L.

Nadal

274 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

When a Latino couple is given poor service at a restaurant

and shares their experience with White friends, only to be

told “Don’t be so oversensitive” or “Don’t be so petty,” the

racial experience of the couple is being nulliﬁed and its

importance is being diminished.

We have been able to identify nine categories of

microaggressions with distinct themes: alien in one’s own

land, ascription of intelligence, color blindness, criminal-

ity/assumption of criminal status, denial of individual rac-

ism, myth of meritocracy, pathologizing cultural values/

communication styles, second-class status, and environmental

invalidation. Table 1 provides samples of comments or situ-

ations that may potentially be classiﬁed as racial microaggres-

sions and their accompanying hidden assumptions and mes-

sages. Figure 1 visually presents the three large classes of

microaggressions, the classiﬁcation of the themes under each

category, and their relationship to one another.

The experience of a racial microaggression has major

implications for both the perpetrator and the target person.

It creates psychological dilemmas that unless adequately

resolved lead to increased levels of racial anger, mistrust,

and loss of self-esteem for persons of color; prevent White

people from perceiving a different racial reality; and create

impediments to harmonious race-relations (Spanierman &

Heppner, 2004; Thompson & Neville, 1999).

The Invisibility and Dynamics of

Racial Microaggressions

The following real-life incident illustrates the issues of

invisibility and the disguised problematic dynamics of ra-

cial microaggressions.

I [Derald Wing Sue, the senior author, an Asian American]

recently traveled with an African American colleague on a plane

ﬂying from New York to Boston. The plane was a small “hopper”

with a single row of seats on one side and double seats on the

other. As the plane was only sparsely populated, we were told by

the ﬂight attendant (White) that we could sit anywhere, so we sat

at the front, across the aisle from one another. This made it easy

for us to converse and provided a larger comfortable space on a

small plane for both of us. As the attendant was about to close the

hatch, three White men in suits entered the plane, were informed

they could sit anywhere, and promptly seated themselves in front

of us. Just before take-off, the attendant proceeded to close all

overhead compartments and seemed to scan the plane with her

eyes. At that point she approached us, leaned over, interrupted our

conversation, and asked if we would mind moving to the back of

the plane. She indicated that she needed to distribute weight on

the plane evenly.

Both of us (passengers of color) had similar negative reactions.

First, balancing the weight on the plane seemed reasonable, but

why were we being singled out? After all, we had boarded ﬁrst

and the three White men were the last passengers to arrive. Why

were they not being asked to move? Were we being singled out

because of our race? Was this just a random event with no racial

overtones? Were we being oversensitive and petty?

Although we complied by moving to the back of the plane, both

of us felt resentment, irritation, and anger. In light of our everyday

racial experiences, we both came to the same conclusion: The

ﬂight attendant had treated us like second-class citizens because

of our race. But this incident did not end there. While I kept

telling myself to drop the matter, I could feel my blood pressure

rising, heart beating faster, and face ﬂush with anger. When the

attendant walked back to make sure our seat belts were fastened,

I could not contain my anger any longer. Struggling to control

myself, I said to her in a forced calm voice: “Did you know that

you asked two passengers of color to step to the rear of the ‘bus’”?

For a few seconds she said nothing but looked at me with a

horriﬁed expression. Then she said in a righteously indignant

tone, “Well, I have never been accused of that! How dare you? I

don’t see color! I only asked you to move to balance the plane.

Anyway, I was only trying to give you more space and greater

privacy.”

Attempts to explain my perceptions and feelings only generated

greater defensiveness from her. For every allegation I made, she

seemed to have a rational reason for her actions. Finally, she

broke off the conversation and refused to talk about the incident

any longer. Were it not for my colleague who validated my

experiential reality, I would have left that encounter wondering

whether I was correct or incorrect in my perceptions. Neverthe-

less, for the rest of the ﬂight, I stewed over the incident and it left

a sour taste in my mouth.

The power of racial microaggressions lies in their

invisibility to the perpetrator and, oftentimes, the recipient

(D. W. Sue, 2005). Most White Americans experience

themselves as good, moral, and decent human beings who

believe in equality and democracy. Thus, they ﬁnd it dif-

ﬁcult to believe that they possess biased racial attitudes and

may engage in behaviors that are discriminatory (D. W.

Sue, 2004). Microaggressive acts can usually be explained

away by seemingly nonbiased and valid reasons. For the

recipient of a microaggression, however, there is always

the nagging question of whether it really happened

(Crocker & Major, 1989). It is difﬁcult to identify a mi-

croaggression, especially when other explanations seem

plausible. Many people of color describe a vague feeling

Marta

Esquilin

275May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

Table 1

Examples of Racial Microaggressions

Theme Microaggression Message

Alien in own land

When Asian Americans and Latino

Americans are assumed to be

foreign-born

“Where are you from?”

“Where were you born?”

“You speak good English.”

You are not American.

A person asking an Asian American to

teach them words in their native

language

You are a foreigner.

Ascription of intelligence

Assigning intelligence to a person

of color on the basis of their race

“You are a credit to your race.” People of color are generally not as

intelligent as Whites.

“You are so articulate.” It is unusual for someone of your race

to be intelligent.

Asking an Asian person to help with a

math or science problem

All Asians are intelligent and good in

math/sciences.

Color blindness

Statements that indicate that a

White person does not want to

acknowledge race

“When I look at you, I don’t see color.” Denying a person of color’s racial/

ethnic experiences.

“America is a melting pot.” Assimilate/acculturate to the

dominant culture.

“There is only one race, the human race.” Denying the individual as a racial/

cultural being.

Criminality/assumption of criminal

status

A person of color is presumed to be

dangerous, criminal, or deviant

on the basis of their race

A White man or woman clutching their

purse or checking their wallet as a

Black or Latino approaches or passes

You are a criminal.

A store owner following a customer of

color around the store

You are going to steal/ You are

poor/ You do not belong.

A White person waits to ride the next

elevator when a person of color is on it

You are dangerous.

Denial of individual racism

A statement made when Whites

deny their racial biases

“I’m not racist. I have several Black

friends.”

I am immune to racism because I

have friends of color.

“As a woman, I know what you go

through as a racial minority.”

Your racial oppression is no different

than my gender oppression. I can’t

be a racist. I’m like you.

Myth of meritocracy

Statements which assert that race

does not play a role in life

successes

“I believe the most qualified person should

get the job.”

People of color are given extra unfair

benefits because of their race.

“Everyone can succeed in this society, if

they work hard enough.”

People of color are lazy and/or

incompetent and need to work

harder.

Pathologizing cultural values/

communication styles

The notion that the values and

communication styles of the

dominant/White culture are ideal

Asking a Black person: “Why do you

have to be so loud/animated? Just calm

down.”

Assimilate to dominant culture.

To an Asian or Latino person: “Why are

you so quiet? We want to know what

you think. Be more verbal.” “Speak up

more.”

Dismissing an individual who brings up

race/culture in work/school setting

Leave your cultural baggage outside.

Second-class citizen

Occurs when a White person is

given preferential treatment as a

consumer over a person of color

Person of color mistaken for a service

worker

People of color are servants to

Whites. They couldn’t possibly

occupy high-status positions.

Having a taxi cab pass a person of color

and pick up a White passenger

You are likely to cause trouble and/

or travel to a dangerous

neighborhood.

276 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

that they have been attacked, that they have been disre-

spected, or that something is not right (Franklin, 2004; Reid

& Radhakrishnan, 2003). In some respects, people of color

may ﬁnd an overt and obvious racist act easier to handle

than microaggressions that seem vague or disguised (So-

lo´rzano et al., 2000). The above incident reveals how

microaggressions operate to create psychological dilemmas

for both the White perpetrator and the person of color. Four

such dilemmas are particularly noteworthy for everyone to

understand.

Dilemma 1: Clash of Racial Realities

The question we pose is this: Did the ﬂight attendant

engage in a microaggression or did the senior author and

his colleague simply misinterpret the action? Studies indi-

cate that the racial perceptions of people of color differ

markedly from those of Whites (Jones, 1997; Harris Poll

commissioned by the National Conference of Christians

and Jews, 1992). In most cases, White Americans tend to

believe that minorities are doing better in life, that discrim-

ination is on the decline, that racism is no longer a signif-

icant factor in the lives of people of color, and that equality

has been achieved. More important, the majority of Whites

do not view themselves as racist or capable of racist be-

havior.

Minorities, on the other hand, perceive Whites as (a)

racially insensitive, (b) unwilling to share their position and

wealth, (c) believing they are superior, (d) needing to

control everything, and (e) treating them poorly because of

their race. People of color believe these attributes are

reenacted everyday in their interpersonal interactions with

Whites, oftentimes in the form of microaggressions (Solo´r-

zano et al., 2000). For example, it was found that 96% of

African Americans reported experiencing racial discrimi-

nation in a one-year period (Klonoff & Landrine, 1999),

and many incidents involved being mistaken for a service

worker, being ignored, given poor service, treated rudely,

or experiencing strangers acting fearful or intimidated

when around them (Sellers & Shelton, 2003).

Dilemma 2: The Invisibility of Unintentional

Expressions of Bias

The interaction between the senior author and the ﬂight

attendant convinced him that she was sincere in her belief

that she had acted in good faith without racial bias. Her

actions and their meaning were invisible to her. It was clear

that she was stunned that anyone would accuse her of such

despicable actions. After all, in her mind, she acted with

only the best of intentions: to distribute the weight evenly

on the plane for safety reasons and to give two passengers

greater privacy and space. She felt betrayed that her good

intentions were being questioned. Yet considerable empir-

ical evidence exists showing that racial microaggressions

become automatic because of cultural conditioning and that

they may become connected neurologically with the pro-

cessing of emotions that surround prejudice (Abelson et al.,

1998). Several investigators have found, for example, that

law enforcement ofﬁcers in laboratory experiments will ﬁre

their guns more often at Black criminal suspects than White

ones (Plant & Peruche, 2005), and Afrocentric features

tend to result in longer prison terms (Blair, Judd, & Chap-

leau, 2004). In all cases, these law enforcement ofﬁcials

had no conscious awareness that they responded differently

on the basis of race.

Herein lies a major dilemma. How does one prove that

a microaggression has occurred? What makes our belief

that the ﬂight attendant acted in a biased manner any more

plausible than her conscious belief that it was generated for

another reason? If she did act out of hidden and uncon-

scious bias, how do we make her aware of it? Social

psychological research tends to conﬁrm the existence of

unconscious racial biases in well-intentioned Whites, that

Table 1 (continued)

Theme Microaggression Message

Second-class citizen (continued)

Occurs when a White person is

given preferential treatment as a

consumer over a person of color

(continued)

Being ignored at a store counter as

attention is given to the White customer

behind you

Whites are more valued customers

than people of color.

“You people...” Youdon’t belong. You are a lesser

being.

Environmental microaggressions

Macro-level microaggressions,

which are more apparent on

systemic and environmental levels

A college or university with buildings that

are all named after White heterosexual

upper class males

You don’t belong/You won’t succeed

here. There is only so far you can

go.

Television shows and movies that feature

predominantly White people, without

representation of people of color

You are an outsider/You don’t exist.

Overcrowding of public schools in

communities of color

People of color don’t/shouldn’t value

education.

Overabundance of liquor stores in

communities of color

People of color are deviant.

277May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

nearly everyone born and raised in the United States inher-

its the racial biases of the society, and that the most

accurate assessment about whether racist acts have oc-

curred in a particular situation is most likely to be made by

those most disempowered rather than by those who enjoy

the privileges of power (Jones, 1997; Keltner & Robinson,

1996). According to these ﬁndings, microaggressions (a)

tend to be subtle, indirect, and unintentional, (b) are most

likely to emerge not when a behavior would look prejudi-

cial, but when other rationales can be offered for prejudi-

cial behavior, and (c) occur when Whites pretend not to

notice differences, thereby justifying that “color” was not

involved in the actions taken. Color blindness is a major

form of microinvalidation because it denies the racial and

experiential reality of people of color and provides an

excuse to White people to claim that they are not preju-

diced (Helms, 1992; Neville, Lilly, Duran, Lee, & Browne,

2000). The ﬂight attendant, for example, did not realize that

her “not seeing color” invalidated both passengers’ racial

identity and experiential reality.

Dilemma 3: Perceived Minimal Harm of

Racial Microaggressions

In most cases, when individuals are confronted with their

microaggressive acts (as in the case of the ﬂight attendant),

the perpetrator usually believes that the victim has overre-

acted and is being overly sensitive and/or petty. After all,

even if it was an innocent racial blunder, microaggressions

are believed to have minimal negative impact. People of

color are told not to overreact and to simply “let it go.”

Usually, Whites consider microaggressive incidents to be

Figure 1

Categories of and Relationships Among Racial Microaggressions

Ascription of Intelligence

Alien in Own Land

Assigning a degree of intelligence to a person of

color based on their race.

Second Class Citizen

Treated as a lesser person or group.

Pathologizing cultural

values/communication styles

Notion that the values and communication styles

of people of color are abnormal.

Assumption of Criminal status

Presumed to be a criminal, dangerous, or deviant

based on race.

Belief that visible racial/ethnic minority

citizens are foreigners.

Color Blindness

Denial or pretense that a White person does not

see color or race.

Myth of Meritocracy

Statements which assert that race plays a minor

role

in life success.

Denial of Individual Racism

Denial of personal racism or one’s role in its

perpetuation.

Microinsult

(Often Unconscious)

Behavioral/verbal remarks or comments that

convey rudeness, insensitivity and demean a

person’s racial heritage or identity.

Microassault

(Often Conscious)

Explicit racial derogations characterized

primarily by a violent verbal or

nonverbal attack meant to hurt the

intended victim through name-calling,

avoidant behavior or purposeful

discriminatory actions.

Environmental

Microaggressions

(Macro-level)

Racial assaults, insults and

invalidations which are

manifested on systemic and

environmental levels.

Microinvalidation

(Often Unconscious)

Verbal comments or behaviors that

exclude, negate, or nullify the

psychological thoughts, feelings, or

experiential reality of a person of

color.

Racial Microaggressions

Commonplace verbal or behavioral indignities, whether intentional or unintentional,

which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults.

278 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

minor, and people of color are encouraged (oftentimes by

people of color as well) to not waste time or effort on them.

It is clear that old-fashioned racism unfairly disadvan-

tages people of color and that it contributes to stress,

depression, shame, and anger in its victims (Jones, 1997).

But evidence also supports the detrimental impact of more

subtle forms of racism (Chakraborty & McKenzie, 2002;

Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams, 1999). For example,

in a survey of studies examining racism and mental health,

researchers found a positive association between happiness

and life satisfaction, self-esteem, mastery of control, hy-

pertension, and discrimination (Williams, Neighbors, &

Jackson, 2003). Many of the types of everyday racism

identiﬁed by Williams and colleagues (Williams & Collins,

1995; Williams, Lavizzo-Mourey, & Warren, 1994) pro-

vide strong support for the idea that racial microaggres-

sions are not minimally harmful. One study speciﬁcally

examined microaggressions in the experiences of African

Americans and found that the cumulative effects can be

quite devastating (Solo´rzano et al., 2000). The researchers

reported that experience with microaggressions resulted in

a negative racial climate and emotions of self-doubt, frus-

tration, and isolation on the part of victims. As indicated in

the incident above, the senior author experienced consid-

erable emotional turmoil that lasted for the entire ﬂight.

When one considers that people of color are exposed con-

tinually to microaggressions and that their effects are cu-

mulative, it becomes easier to understand the psychological

toll they may take on recipients’ well-being.

We submit that covert racism in the form of microag-

gressions also has a dramatic and detrimental impact on

people of color. Although microaggressions may be seem-

ingly innocuous and insigniﬁcant, their effects can be quite

dramatic (Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002). D. W. Sue

believes that “this contemporary form of racism is many

times over more problematic, damaging, and injurious to

persons of color than overt racist acts” (D. W. Sue, 2003,

p. 48). It has been noted that the cumulative effects of racial

microaggressions may theoretically result in “diminished

mortality, augmented morbidity and ﬂattened conﬁdence”

(Pierce, 1995, p. 281). It is important to study and acknowl-

edge this form of racism in society because without docu-

mentation and analysis to better understand microaggres-

sions, the threats that they pose and the assaults that they

justify can be easily ignored or downplayed (Solo´rzano et

al., 2000). D. W. Sue (2005) has referred to this phenom-

enon as “a conspiracy of silence.”

Dilemma 4: The Catch-22 of Responding to

Microaggressions

When a microaggression occurs, the victim is usually

placed in a catch-22. The immediate reaction might be a

series of questions: Did what I think happened, really

happen? Was this a deliberate act or an unintentional

slight? How should I respond? Sit and stew on it or con-

front the person? If I bring the topic up, how do I prove it?

Is it really worth the effort? Should I just drop the matter?

These questions in one form or another have been a com-

mon, if not a universal, reaction of persons of color who

experience an attributional ambiguity (Crocker & Major,

1989).

First, the person must determine whether a microag-

gression has occurred. In that respect, people of color rely

heavily on experiential reality that is contextual in nature

and involves life experiences from a variety of situations.

When the ﬂight attendant asked the senior author and his

colleague to move, it was not the ﬁrst time that similar

requests and situations had occurred for both. In their

experience, these incidents were nonrandom events (Rid-

ley, 2005), and their perception was that the only similarity

“connecting the dots” to each and every one of these

incidents was the color of their skin. In other words, the

situation on the plane was only one of many similar inci-

dents with identical outcomes. Yet the ﬂight attendant and

most White Americans do not share these multiple experi-

ences, and they evaluate their own behaviors in the moment

through a singular event (Dovidio & Gaertner, 2000). Thus,

they fail to see a pattern of bias, are defended by a belief in

their own morality, and can in good conscience deny that

they discriminated (D. W. Sue, 2005).

Second, how one reacts to a microaggression may

have differential effects, not only on the perpetrator but on

the person of color as well. Deciding to do nothing by

sitting on one’s anger is one response that occurs frequently

in people of color. This response occurs because persons of

color may be (a) unable to determine whether a microag-

gression has occurred, (b) at a loss for how to respond, (c)

fearful of the consequences, (d) rationalizing that “it won’t

do any good anyway,” or (e) engaging in self-deception

through denial (“It didn’t happen.”). Although these expla-

nations for nonresponse may hold some validity for the

person of color, we submit that not doing anything has the

potential to result in psychological harm. It may mean a

denial of one’s experiential reality, dealing with a loss of

integrity, or experiencing pent-up anger and frustration

likely to take psychological and physical tolls.

Third, responding with anger and striking back (per-

haps a normal and healthy reaction) is likely to engender

negative consequences for persons of color as well. They

are likely to be accused of being racially oversensitive or

paranoid or told that their emotional outbursts conﬁrm

stereotypes about minorities. In the case of Black males, for

example, protesting may lend credence to the belief that

they are hostile, angry, impulsive, and prone to violence

(Jones, 1997). In this case, the person of color might feel

better after venting, but the outcome results in greater

hostility by Whites toward minorities. Further, while the

person of color may feel better in the immediate moment

by relieving pent-up emotions, the reality is that the general

situation has not been changed. In essence, the catch-22

means you are “damned if you do, and damned if you

don’t.” What is lacking is research that points to adaptive

ways of handling microaggressions by people of color and

suggestions of how to increase the awareness and sensitiv-

ity of Whites to microaggressions so that they accept re-

sponsibility for their behaviors and for changing them

(Solo´rzano et al., 2000).

279May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

Racial Microaggressions as a Barrier

to Clinical Practice

In a broad sense, counseling and psychotherapy can be

characterized as the formation of a deeply personal rela-

tionship between a helping professional and a client that

involves appropriate and accurate interpersonal interac-

tions and communications. For effective therapy to occur,

some form of positive coalition must develop between the

parties involved (D. W. Sue & Sue, 2003). Many have

referred to this as the “working relationship,” the “thera-

peutic alliance,” or the “establishment of rapport” (D. W.

Sue & Sue, 2003). A strong therapeutic relationship is often

enhanced when clients perceive therapists as credible

(trustworthy and expert) and themselves as understood and

positively regarded by their therapists (Strong & Schmidt,

1970). Helping professionals are trained to listen, to show

empathic concern, to be objective, to value the client’s

integrity, to communicate understanding, and to use their

professional knowledge and skills to aid clients to solve

problems (Grencavage & Norcross, 1990).

As a therapeutic team, therapist and client are better

prepared to venture into problematic areas that the client

might hesitate to face alone. Research suggests that the

therapeutic alliance is one of the major common factors of

any helping relationship and is correlated with successful

outcome (Lui & Pope-Davis, 2005; Martin, Garske, &

Davis, 2000). More important, however, are ﬁndings that a

client’s perception of an accepting and positive relationship

is a better predictor of successful outcome than is a similar

perception by the counselor (Horvath & Symonds, 1991).

Thus, when clients do not perceive their therapists as

trustworthy and when they feel misunderstood and under-

valued, therapeutic success is less likely to occur. Often-

times, the telltale signs of a failed therapeutic relationship

may result in clients being less likely to self-disclose,

terminating prematurely, or failing to return for scheduled

visits (Burkard & Knox, 2004; Kearney, Draper, & Baron,

2005).

Although the task of establishing an effective thera-

peutic relationship applies to the entire helping spectrum,

working with clients who differ from the therapist in race,

ethnicity, culture, and sexual orientation poses special chal-

lenges. White therapists who are products of their cultural

conditioning may be prone to engage in racial microag-

gressions (Locke & Kiselica, 1999). Thus, the therapeutic

alliance is likely to be weakened or terminated when clients

of color perceive White therapists as biased, prejudiced, or

unlikely to understand them as racial/cultural beings. That

racism can potentially infect the therapeutic process when

working with clients of color has been a common concern

voiced by the President’s Commission on Mental Health

(1978) and the Surgeon General’s Report on Mental

Health: Culture, Race and Ethnicity (U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services, 2001). It has been postulated

that therapist bias might partially account for the low

utilization of mental health services and premature termi-

nation of therapy sessions by African American, Native

American, Asian American, and Latino/Hispanic American

clients (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,

2001).

Yet research also reveals that most people in our

nation believe in democracy, fairness, and strong human-

istic values that condemn racism and the inequities that it

engenders (Dovidio et al., 2002). Such a statement is ar-

guably truer for mental health professionals, whose goals

are to help rather than hinder or hurt clients of color. Both

the American Psychological Association and the American

Counseling Association have attempted to confront the

biases of the profession by passing multicultural guidelines

or standards that denounce prejudice and discrimination in

the delivery of mental health services to clients of color

(American Psychological Association, 2003; D. W. Sue et

al., 1992). Like most people in society, counselors and

therapists experience themselves as fair and decent indi-

viduals who would never consciously and deliberately en-

gage in racist acts toward clients of color. Sadly, it is often

pointed out that when clinician and client differ from one

another along racial lines, however, the relationship may

serve as a microcosm for the troubled race relations in the

United States. While many would like to believe that

racism is no longer a major problem and that the good

intentions of the helping profession have built safeguards

against prejudice and discrimination, the reality is that they

continue to be manifested through the therapeutic process

(Utsey, Gernat, & Hammar, 2005). This is not to suggest,

however, that positive changes in race relations have not

occurred. Yet, as in many other interactions, microaggres-

sions are equally likely to occur in therapeutic transactions

(Ridley, 2005).

The Manifestation of Racial

Microaggressions in

Counseling/Therapy

Microaggressions become meaningful in the context of

clinical practice, as relational dynamics and the human

condition are central aspects of this ﬁeld. The often unin-

tentional and unconscious nature of microaggressions (Di-

lemma 2: Invisibility) poses the biggest challenge to the

majority of White mental health professionals, who believe

that they are just, unbiased, and nonracist. Further, mental

health professionals are in a position of power, which

renders them less likely to accurately assess (Dilemma 1:

Conﬂict of Racial Realities) whether racist acts have oc-

curred in their sessions. Thus, the harm they perpetrate

against their clients of color is either unknown or mini-

mized (Dilemma 3: Minimal Harm). Microaggressions not

only oppress and harm, but they place clients of color in the

unenviable position of a catch-22 (Dilemma 4).

In clinical practice, microaggressions are likely to go

unrecognized by White clinicians who are unintentionally

and unconsciously expressing bias. As a result, therapists

must make a concerted effort to identify and monitor mi-

croaggressions within the therapeutic context. This process

is reminiscent of the importance of becoming aware of

potential transference and countertransference issues be-

tween therapist and client and how they may unintention-

280 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

ally interfere with effective therapy (Woodhouse, Schlosser,

Crook, Ligiero, & Gelso, 2003). The inherent power dy-

namic in the therapeutic relationship further complicates

this issue, as therapists are in a position of power to make

diagnoses and inﬂuence the course of treatment. The power

dynamic between therapist and client also effects the

catch-22 of responding to microaggressions because clients

may be less likely to confront their therapists and more

likely to question their own perceptions in the event of a

microaggression.

Table 2 provides a few examples of microaggressions

in counseling practice under each of the nine categories

identiﬁed earlier. Under Color Blindness, for example, a

client of color stresses the importance of racial experiences

only to have the therapist reply, “We are all unique. We are

all individuals.” or “We are all human beings or the same

under the skin.” These colorblind statements, which were

intended to be supportive, to be sympathetic, and to convey

an ability to understand, may leave the client feeling mis-

understood, negated, invalidated, and unimportant (espe-

cially if racial identity is important to the client). Moreover

these statements presume that the therapist is capable of

not seeing race and impose a deﬁnition of racial reality on

the client (Neville et al., 2000).

Under Denial of Individual Racism, a common re-

sponse by Whites to people of color is that they can

understand and relate to experiences of racism. In Table 2,

under this category, we provide the following anecdote: A

client of color expresses hesitancy in discussing racial

issues with his White female therapist. She replies, “I

understand. As a woman, I face discrimination too.” The

message is that the therapist believes her gender oppression

is no different from the client’s experiences of racial/ethnic

oppression. This response is problematic because such at-

tempts by the therapist to explain how he or she can

understand a person of color’s experience with racism may

be perceived by the client as an attempt to minimize the

importance of his or her racial identity, to avoid acknowl-

edging the therapist’s racial biases, or to communicate a

discomfort with discussing racial issues. Furthermore, the

therapist excuses himself or herself from any blame or fault

in perpetuating racism and the power of racism. This fail-

ure to acknowledge the signiﬁcance of racism within and

outside of the therapy session contributes to the breakdown

of the alliance between therapist and client. A therapist’s

willingness to discuss racial matters is of central impor-

tance in creating a therapeutic alliance with clients of color

(Cardemil & Battle, 2003).

Under the category “Alien in Own Land,” many Asian

Americans and Latino/Hispanic Americans report that they

are commonly seen as perpetual foreigners. For example, a

female Asian American client arrives for her ﬁrst therapy

session. Her therapist asks her where she is from, and when

told “Philadelphia,” the therapist further probes by asking

where she was born. In this case, the therapist has assumed

that the Asian American client is not from the United States

and has imposed through the use of the second question the

idea that she must be a foreigner. Immediately, a barrier is

created in the helping relationship because the client feels

invalidated by the therapist (she is perceived as a foreigner,

not a U.S. citizen). Unfortunately, the Asian American

client is unlikely to question her therapist or point out the

bias because of the power dynamic, which causes her to

harbor resentment and ill feelings toward the therapist.

We contend that clients of color are at increased risk

of not continuing in the counseling/therapy session when

such microaggressions occur. Worse yet, they will not

receive the help they need and may leave the session

feeling worse than when they ﬁrst sought counseling. Be-

cause it is unlikely that clinicians intentionally create hos-

tile and unwelcoming environments for their ethnic minor-

ity clients, it can be assumed that these biases are being

expressed through microaggressions. Therapists can con-

vey their bias to their ethnic minority clients in myriad

ways, such as by minimizing symptoms for Asian Ameri-

cans on the basis of a false belief in the “model” minority

(D. W. Sue & Sue, 2003) or by placing greater emphasis on

symptoms such as paranoid delusions and substance abuse

in Native Americans and Africans Americans, who are

believed to suffer from these afﬂictions (U.S. Department

of Health and Human Services, 2001).

Last, White counselors and therapists can impose and

value their own cultural worldview while devaluing and

pathologizing the cultural values of their ethnic minority

clients. Previous research has shown that pathologizing

clients’ cultural values has been a major determinant of

clients of color discontinuing psychotherapy (S. Sue, Fu-

jino, Hu, & Takeuchi, 1991). Many clients of color may

feel misunderstood by their therapists because of a lack of

cultural understanding. Asian American or Latino Ameri-

can clients who enter therapy to discuss family issues such

as feeling obligated, stressed, or overwhelmed with excess

family responsibilities may be encouraged by therapists to

speak out against their families or to make decisions re-

gardless of family support or expectations. Therapists may

be unaware that they may be directly invalidating cultural

respect for authority and imposing an individualistic view

over a collectivist one.

Future Directions in the

Understanding of Racial

Microaggressions

With respect to racism, D. W. Sue (2004, p. 762) has stated

that the greatest challenge society and the mental health

professions face is “making the ‘invisible’ visible.” That

can only be accomplished when people are willing to

openly and honestly engage in a dialogue about race and

racism. In that respect, the education and training of mental

health professionals must incorporate issues of race and

culture. One would ordinarily expect that mental health

professionals would be more willing than most to dialogue

on this topic, but studies suggest that White clinicians

receive minimal or no practicum or supervision experi-

ences that address race and are uncomfortable broaching

the topic (Knox, Burkard, Johnson, Suzuki, & Ponterotto,

2003). Many White trainees in therapy dyads experience

anxiety in the form of poor articulation, faltering and/or

281May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

Table 2

Examples of Racial Microaggressions in Therapeutic Practice

Theme Microaggression Message

Alien in own land

When Asian Americans and

Latino Americans are

assumed to be foreign-born

A White client does not want to work with an Asian

American therapist because “she will not

understand my problem.”

You are not American.

A White therapist tells an American-born Latino

client that he/she should seek a Spanish-speaking

therapist.

Ascription of intelligence

Assigning a degree of

intelligence to a person of

color on the basis of their

race

A school counselor reacts with surprise when an

Asian American student had trouble on the math

portion of a standardized test.

All Asians are smart and good at

math.

A career counselor asking a Black or Latino student,

“Do you think you’re ready for college?”

It is unusual for people of color to

succeed.

Color blindness

Statements which indicate that

a White person does not

want to acknowledge race

A therapist says “I think you are being too

paranoid. We should emphasize similarities, not

people’s differences” when a client of color

attempts to discuss her feelings about being the

only person of color at her job and feeling

alienated and dismissed by her co-workers.

Race and culture are not

important variables that affect

people’s lives.

A client of color expresses concern in discussing

racial issues with her therapist. Her therapist

replies with, “When I see you, I don’t see color.”

Your racial experiences are not

valid.

Criminality/assumption of

criminal status

A person of color is presumed

to be dangerous, criminal,

or deviant on the basis of

their race

When a Black client shares that she was accused of

stealing from work, the therapist encourages the

client to explore how she might have contributed

to her employer’s mistrust of her.

You are a criminal.

A therapist takes great care to ask all substance

abuse questions in an intake with a Native

American client, and is suspicious of the client’s

nonexistent history with substances.

You are deviant.

Denial of individual racism

A statement made when

Whites renounce their

racial biases

A client of color asks his or her therapist about how

race affects their working relationship. The

therapist replies, “Race does not affect the way I

treat you.”

Your racial/ethnic experience is

not important.

A client of color expresses hesitancy in discussing

racial issues with his White female therapist. She

replies “I understand. As a woman, I face

discrimination also.”

Your racial oppression is no

different than my gender

oppression.

Myth of meritocracy

Statements which assert that

race does not play a role in

succeeding in career

advancement or education.

A school counselor tells a Black student that “if you

work hard, you can succeed like everyone else.”

A career counselor is working with a client of color

who is concerned about not being promoted at

work despite being qualified. The counselor

suggests, “Maybe if you work harder you can

succeed like your peers.”

People of color are lazy and/or

incompetent and need to work

harder. If you don’t succeed,

you have only yourself to

blame (blaming the victim).

Pathologizing cultural values/

communication styles

The notion that the values and

communication styles of the

dominant/White culture are

ideal

A Black client is loud, emotional, and

confrontational in a counseling session. The

therapist diagnoses her with borderline

personality disorder.

Assimilate to dominant culture.

A client of Asian or Native American descent has

trouble maintaining eye contact with his therapist.

The therapist diagnoses him with a social anxiety

disorder.

Advising a client, “Do you really think your problem

stems from racism?”

Leave your cultural baggage

outside.

282 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

trembling voices, and mispronunciation of words when

directly engaged in discussions about race (Utsey et al.,

2005). It is interesting that such nonverbal behaviors also

serve as a form of racial microaggression. When helping

professionals have difﬁculty addressing race issues, they

cut off an avenue for clients of color to explore matters of

bias, discrimination, and prejudice.

Education and Training and Racial

Microaggressions

It is clear that mental health training programs must support

trainees in overcoming their fears and their resistance to

talking about race by fostering safe and productive learning

environments (Sanchez-Hucles & Jones, 2005). It is im-

portant that training programs be structured and facilitated

in a manner that promotes inquiry and allows trainees to

experience discomfort and vulnerability (Young & Davis-

Russell, 2002). Trainees need to be challenged to explore

their own racial identities and their feelings about other

racial groups. The prerequisite for cultural competence has

always been racial self-awareness. This is equally true for

understanding how microaggressions, especially those of

the therapist, inﬂuence the therapeutic process. This level

of self-awareness brings to the surface possible prejudices

and biases that inform racial microaggressions. A ﬁrst step

for therapists who want to integrate an understanding of

racism’s mental health effects into the conceptualization of

psychological functioning is to undergo a process of learn-

ing and critical self-examination of racism and its impact

on one’s life and the lives of others (Thompson & Neville,

1999). For White clinicians, it means addressing the ques-

tion “What does it mean to be White?” and being fully

cognizant of their own White racial identity development

and how it may intrude on people of color (Helms, 1992,

1995). In addition, it has been suggested that articulating a

personal theory of reality and of therapeutic change in the

context of an environment of racism is one way to begin

integrating knowledge of racism with the practice of psy-

chotherapy (Thompson & Neville, 1999). Education and

training must aid White clinicians to achieve the following:

(a) increase their ability to identify racial microaggressions

in general and in themselves in particular; (b) understand

how racial microaggressions, including their own, detri-

mentally impact clients of color; and (c) accept responsi-

bility for taking corrective actions to overcome racial bi-

ases.

Research on Racial Microaggressions

A major obstacle to understanding racial microaggressions

is that research is in a nascent state. Researchers continue

to omit subtle racism and microaggressions from their

research agendas, and this absence conveys the notion that

covert forms of racism are not as valid or as important as

racist events that can be quantiﬁed and “proven.” In fact,

omitting microaggressions from studies on racism on the

basis of a belief that they are less harmful encourages the

profession to “look the other way.” Moreover, the fact that

psychological research has continued to inadequately ad-

dress race and ethnicity (Delgado-Romero, Rowland, &

Galvin, 2005) is in itself a microaggression. Pursuing a line

of research examining how cross-racial dyadic composi-

tions impact the process and outcome of counselor/client

interactions would be a tremendous contribution to the ﬁeld

of counseling and clinical psychology. Helms and Cook

(1999) noted that racial consciousness is a critical consid-

eration in determining White therapists’ ability to operate

effectively in cross-racial dyads.

For mental health purposes, it would be useful to

explore the coping mechanisms used by people of color to

stave off the negative effects of microaggressions. The fact

that people of color have had to face daily microaggres-

sions and have continued to maintain their dignity in the

face of such hostility is a testament to their resiliency

(D. W. Sue, 2003). What coping strategies have been found

to serve them well? A greater understanding of responses to

microaggressions, both in the long term and the short term,

and of the coping strategies employed would be beneﬁcial

in arming children of color for the life they will face. Such

research is necessary because without documentation and

analysis to help better understand microaggressions, the

threats that they pose and the assaults that they justify can

be easily ignored or downplayed (Solo´rzano et al., 2000).

Table 2 (continued)

Theme Microaggression Message

Second-class citizen

Occurs when a White person

is given preferential

treatment as a consumer

over a person of color

A counselor limits the amount of long-term

therapy to provide at a college

counseling center; she chooses all

White clients over clients of color.

Whites are more valued than people of

color.

Clients of color are not welcomed or

acknowledged by receptionists.

White clients are more valued than clients

of color.

Environmental microaggressions

Macro-level microaggressions,

which are more apparent

on a systemic level

A waiting room office has pictures of

American presidents.

You don’t belong/Only white people can

succeed.

Every counselor at a mental health clinic is

White.

You are an outsider/You don’t exist.

283May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

Studying the long-term impact that microaggressions have

on mental health functioning, self-esteem, self-concept,

and racial identity development appears crucial to docu-

menting the harm microaggressions inﬂict on people of

color. The taxonomy of microaggressions proposed here

may make it easier to explore other social psychological

questions as well.

First, it is highly probable that microaggressions vary

in their severity and impact. As indicated, a microassault

does not evoke a guessing game because the intent of the

perpetrator is clear. However, the racist intent of microin-

sults and microinvalidations is less clear and presents dif-

ferent dilemmas for people of color. Some questions to

ponder include the following: (a) Are the three forms of

racial microaggressions equal in impact? Are some themes

and their hidden messages more problematic than others?

Although all expressions may take a psychological toll,

some are obviously experienced as more harmful and se-

vere than others. (b) Is there a relationship between forms

of racial microaggressions and racial identity development?

Recent research and formulations on White racial identity

development and the psychosocial costs of racism to

Whites (Helms, 1995; Spanierman, Armstrong, Poteat, &

Beer, 2006) imply that forms of racial microaggressions

may be associated with certain statuses or trait clusters. (c)

Finally, is it possible that different racial/ethnic groups are

more likely to encounter certain forms of racial microag-

gressions than others? A preliminary study suggests that

Asian Americans are prone to be victims of microinvali-

dations with themes that revolve around “alien in one’s

own land” (D. W. Sue, Bucceri, Lin, Nadal, & Torino,

2007) rather than microinsults with themes of “criminal-

ity.” Is it possible that Blacks are more likely to be sub-

jected to the latter than to the former? What about Latinos

and American Indians?

Second, the challenge in conducting research aimed at

understanding microaggressions involves measurement.

Adequate assessment tools need to be created to effectively

explore the new and burgeoning ﬁeld of microaggression

research. Although there are several promising race-related

stress and discrimination measures, such as the Perceived

Ethnic Discrimination Questionnaire (PEDQ; Brondolo

et al., 2005), the Color-Blind Racial Attitude Scale

(COBRAS; Neville et al., 2000), the Index of Race Related

Stress (IRRS; Utsey & Ponterotto, 1996), and the Schedule

of Racist Events (SRE; Klonoff & Landrine, 1999), none of

them is directly aimed at distinguishing between categories

of racial microaggressions or their intentional or uninten-

tional nature. The PEDQ uses four subscales that broadly

measure stigmatization, harassment, workplace discrimina-

tion, and social exclusion; the COBRAS is speciﬁc to a

person’s minimization of race and racism; the IRRS uses

Jones’s (1997) framework to measure individual, institu-

tional, and societal racism; and the SRE is aimed at mea-

suring frequency of racist incidents. All contain examples

of racial microaggressions that support our taxonomy, but

none makes conceptual distinctions that allow for categor-

ical measurements of this phenomenon. It seems impera-

tive that speciﬁc instruments be developed to aid in under-

standing the causes, consequences, manifestations, and

elimination of racial microaggressions.

Conclusion

Nearly all interracial encounters are prone to the manifes-

tation of racial microaggressions. We have chosen mainly

to address the therapeutic relationship, but racial microag-

gressions are potentially present whenever human interac-

tions involve participants who differ in race and culture

(teaching, supervising, training, administering, evaluating,

etc.). We have purposely chosen to concentrate on racial

microaggressions, but it is important to acknowledge other

types of microaggressions as well. Gender, sexual orienta-

tion, and disability microaggressions may have equally

powerful and potentially detrimental effects on women,

gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals, and

disability groups. Further, racial microaggressions are not

limited to White–Black, White–Latino, or White–Person of

Color interactions. Interethnic racial microaggressions oc-

cur between people of color as well. In the area of coun-

seling and therapy, for example, research may also prove

beneﬁcial in understanding cross-racial dyads in which the

therapist is a person of color and the client is White or in

which both therapist and client are persons of color. Inves-

tigating these combinations of cross-racial dyads would be

useful, because it is clear that no racial/ethnic group is

immune from inheriting the racial biases of the society

(D. W. Sue, 2003). We encourage future research in these

two areas because all forms of microaggressions have

detrimental consequences.

REFERENCES

Abelson, R. P., Dasgupta, N., Park, J., & Banaji, M. R. (1998). Percep-

tions of the collective other. Personality and Social Psychology Review,

2, 243–250.

Advisory Board to the President’s Initiative on Race. (1998). One Amer-

ica in the 21st century: Forging a new future. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Ofﬁce.

American Counseling Association. (1999). Racism: Healing its effects.

Alexandria, VA: Author.

American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural

education, training, research, practice, and organizational change for

psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 377– 402.

Banaji, M. R., Hardin, C., & Rothman, A. J. (1993). Implicit stereotyping

in person judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65,

272–281.

Blair, I. V., Judd, C. M., & Chapleau, K. M. (2004). The inﬂuence of

afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing. Psychological Sci-

ence, 15, 674 – 679.

Brondolo, E., Kelly, K. P., Coakley, V., Gordon, T., Thompson, S., &

Levy, E. (2005). The Perceived Ethnic Discrimination Questionnaire:

Development and preliminary validation of a community version. Jour-

nal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 335–365.

Burkard, A. W., & Knox, S. (2004). Effect of therapist color-blindness on

empathy and attributions in cross-cultural counseling. Journal of Coun-

seling Psychology, 51, 387–397.

Cardemil, E. V., & Battle, C. L. (2003). Guess who’s coming to therapy?

Getting comfortable with conversations about race and ethnicity in

psychotherapy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34,

278 –286.

Chakraborty, A., & McKenzie, K. (2002). Does racial discrimination

cause mental illness? British Journal of Psychiatry, 180, 475– 477.

Clark, R., Anderson, N. B., Clark, V. R., & Williams, D. R. (1999).

284 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

Racism as a stressor for African Americans. American Psychologist, 54,

805– 816.

Conyne, R. K., & Bemak, F. (2005). Journeys to professional excellence:

Lessons from leading counselor educators and practitioners. Alexan-

dria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The

self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96, 608 –

630.

Delgado-Romero, E. A., Rowland, M., & Galvan, N. (2005). The con-

tinuing and evolving challenge of race and ethnicity in empirical

counseling and counseling psychology research: A reply. Counseling

Psychologist, 33, 559 –564.

DeVos, T., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). American ⫽ White? Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 447–466.

Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1996). Afﬁrmative action, unintentional

racial biases, and intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 52,

51–75.

Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2000). Aversive racism and selective

decisions: 1989 –1999. Psychological Science, 11, 315–319.

Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Kawakami, K., & Hodson, G. (2002). Why

can’t we all just get along? Interpersonal biases and interracial distrust.

Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 8, 88 –102.

Franklin, A. J. (2004). From brotherhood to manhood: How Black men

rescue their relationships and dreams from the invisibility syndrome.

Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Gordon, J., & Johnson, M. (2003). Race, speech, and hostile educational

environment: What color is free speech? Journal of Social Philosophy,

34, 414 – 436.

Grencavage, L. M., & Norcross, J. C. (1990). Where are the commonal-

ities among the therapeutic common factors? Professional Psychology:

Research and Practice, 21, 372–378.

Helms, J. E. (1992). A race is a nice thing to have: A guide to being a

white person or understanding the white persons in your life. Topeka,

KS: Content Communications.

Helms, J. E. (1995). An update of Helms’s White and people of color

racial identity models. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, &

C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp.

181–191). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Helms, J. E., & Cook, D. (1999). Using race and culture in counseling

and psychotherapy: Theory and process. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn

& Bacon.

Hinton, E. L. (2004, March/April). Microinequities: When small slights

lead to huge problems in the workplace. DiversityInc. (Available at

http://www.magazine.org/content/ﬁles/Microinequities.pdf)

Horvath, A. O., & Symonds, B. D. (1991). Relationship between working

alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of

Counseling Psychology, 38, 139 –149.

Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.). Washington, DC:

McGraw-Hill.

Kearney, L. K., Draper, M., & Baron, A. (2005). Counseling utilization by

ethnic minority college students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minor-

ity Psychology, 11, 272–285.

Keltner, D., & Robinson, R. J. (1996). Extremism, power, and imagined

basis of social conﬂict. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5,

101–105.

Klonoff, E. A., & Landrine, H. (1999). Cross-validation of the Schedule

of Racist Events. Journal of Black Psychology, 25, 231–254.

Knox, S., Burkard, A. W., Johnson, A. J., Suzuki, L. A., & Ponterotto,

J. G. (2003). African American and European American therapists’

experiences of addressing race in cross-racial psychotherapy dyads.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 466– 481.

Liang, C. T. H., Li, L. C., & Kim, B. S. K. (2004). The Asian American

Racism-Related Stress Inventory: Development, factor analysis, reli-

ability, and validity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 103–114.

Locke, D. C., & Kiselica, M. S. (1999). Pedagogy of possibilities: Teach-

ing about racism in multicultural counseling courses. Journal of Coun-

seling and Development, 77, 80 – 86.

Lui, W. M., & Pope-Davis, D. B. (2005). The working alliance, therapy

ruptures and impasses, and counseling competence: Implications for

counselor training and education. In R. T. Carter (Ed.), Handbook of

racial-cultural psychology and counseling (pp. 148 –167). Hoboken,

NJ: Wiley.

Martin, D. J., Garske, J. P., & Davis, M. K. (2000). Relations of the

therapeutic alliance with outcome and other variables: A meta-analytic

review. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 66, 832– 837.

McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the Modern

Racism Scale. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice,

discrimination and racism (pp. 91–126). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

National Conference of Christians and Jews. (1992). Taking America’s

pulse: A summary report of the National Conference Survey on Inter-

Group Relations. New York: Author. (Available at http://eric.ed.gov/

ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/23/84/59.pdf)

Nelson, T. D. (2006). The psychology of prejudice. Boston: Pearson.

Neville, H. A., Lilly, R. L., Duran, G., Lee, R., & Browne, L. (2000).

Construction and initial validation of the Color Blind Racial Attitudes

Scale (COBRAS). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 59 –70.

Pierce, C. (1995). Stress analogs of racism and sexism: Terrorism, torture,

and disaster. In C. Willie, P. Rieker, B. Kramer, & B. Brown (Eds.),

Mental health, racism, and sexism (pp. 277–293). Pittsburgh, PA:

University of Pittsburgh Press.

Pierce, C., Carew, J., Pierce-Gonzalez, D., & Willis, D. (1978). An

experiment in racism: TV commercials. In C. Pierce (Ed.), Television

and education (pp. 62– 88). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Plant, E. A., & Peruche, B. M. (2005). The consequences of race for police

ofﬁcers’ responses to criminal suspects. Psychological Science, 16,

180 –183.

Ponterotto, J. G., Casas, J. M., Suzuki, L. A., & Alexander, C. M. (2001).

Handbook of multicultural counseling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

President’s Commission on Mental Health. (1978). Report of the Presi-

dent’s Commission on Mental Health. Washington, DC: U.S. Govern-

ment Printing Ofﬁce.

Reid, L. D., & Radhakrishnan, P. (2003). Race matters: The relations

between race and general campus climate. Cultural Diversity and

Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9, 263–275.

Richardson, T. Q., & Molinaro, K. L. (1996). White counselor self-

awareness: A prerequisite for multicultural competence. Journal of

Counseling & Development, 74, 238 –242.

Ridley, C. R. (2005). Overcoming unintentional racism in counseling and

therapy (2nd ed.). Thousand, Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sanchez-Hucles, J., & Jones, N. (2005). Breaking the silence around race

in training, practice, and research. Counseling Psychologist, 33, 547–

558.

Sears, D. O. (1988). Symbolic racism. In P. A. Katz & D. A. Taylor

(Eds.), Eliminating racism: Proﬁles in controversy (pp. 53– 84). New

York: Plenum.

Sellers, R. M., & Shelton, J. N. (2003). The role of racial identity in

perceived racial discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-

chology, 84, 1070 –1092.

Smedley, A., & Smedley, B. D. (2005). Race as biology is ﬁction, racism

as a social problem is real. American Psychologist, 60, 16 –26.

Solo´rzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000, Winter). Critical race theory,

racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of

African American college students. Journal of Negro Education, 69,

60 –73.

Spanierman, L. B., Armstrong, P. I., Poteat, V. P., & Beer, A. M. (2006).

Psychosocial Costs of Racism to Whites: Exploring patterns through

cluster analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 434 – 441.

Spanierman, L. B., & Heppner, M. J. (2004). Psychosocial Costs of

Racism to Whites Scale (PCRW): Construction and initial validation.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 249–262.

Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group

image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In M.

Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp.

379 – 440). New York: Academic Press.

Strong, S. R., & Schmidt, L. D. (1970). Expertness and inﬂuence in

counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 17, 81– 87.

Sue, D. W. (2003). Overcoming our racism: The journey to liberation.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sue, D. W. (2004). Whiteness and ethnocentric monoculturalism: Making

the “invisible” visible. American Psychologist, 59, 759 –769.

Sue, D. W. (2005). Racism and the conspiracy of silence. Counseling

Psychologist, 33, 100 –114.

Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992). Multicultural

285May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist

competencies/standards: A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling

& Development, 70, 477– 486.

Sue, D. W., Bucceri, J., Lin, A. I., Nadal, K. L., & Torino, G. C. (2007).

Racial microaggressions and the Asian American experience. Cultural

Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 72– 81.

Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2003). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory

and practice (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.

Sue, S., Fujino, D. C., Hu, L., & Takeuchi, D. (1991). Community mental

health services for ethnic minority groups: A test of the cultural re-

sponsiveness hypothesis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychol-

ogy, 59, 533–540.

Thompson, C. E., & Neville, H. A. (1999). Racism, mental health, and

mental health practice. Counseling Psychologist, 27, 155–223.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). Mental health:

Culture, race, and ethnicity—A supplement to Mental Health: A Report

of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Admin-

istration, Center for Mental Health Services.

Utsey, S. O., Gernat, C. A., & Hammar, L. (2005). Examining White

counselor trainees’ reactions to racial issues in counseling and super-

vision dyads. Counseling Psychologist, 33, 449– 478.

Utsey, S. O., & Ponterotto, J. G. (1996). Development and validation of

the Index of Race-Related Stress (IRRS). Journal of Counseling Psy-

chology, 43, 490 –502.

Vanman, E. J., Saltz, J. L., Nathan, L. R., & Warren, J. A. (2004). Racial

discrimination by low-prejudiced Whites. Psychological Science, 15,

711–719.

Williams, D. R., & Collins, C. (1995). US socioeconomic and racial

differences in health: Patterns and explanations. Annual Review of

Sociology, 21, 349 –386.

Williams, D. R., Lavizzo-Mourey, R., & Warren, R. C. (1994). The

concept of race and health status in America. Public Health Reports,

109, 26 – 41.

Williams, D. R., Neighbors, H. W., & Jackson, J. S. (2003). Racial/ethnic

discrimination and health: Findings from community studies. American

Journal of Public Health, 93, 200–208.

Woodhouse, S. S., Schlosser, L. Z., Crook, R. E., Ligiero, D. P., & Gelso,

C. J. (2003). Client attachment to therapist: Relations to transference

and client recollections of parental caregiving. Journal of Counseling

Psychology, 50, 395– 408.

Young, G., & Davis-Russell, E. (2002). The vicissitudes of cultural

competence: Dealing with difﬁcult classroom dialogue. In E. Davis-

Russell (Ed.), The California School of Professional Psychology hand-

book of multicultural education, research, intervention, and training

(pp. 37–53). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

MAIL TO:

Name

Address

City State Zip

APA Member #

AMPA17

Check enclosed (make payable to APA)

Charge my: VISA MasterCard American

Express

Cardholder Name

etaD .pxE.oN draC

Signature (Required for Charge)

BILLING ADDRESS:

Street

City State Zip

Daytime Phone

E-mail

ORDER FORM

Start my 2007 subscription to American Psychologist!

ISSN: 0003-066X

___ $249.00,

INDIVIDUAL NONMEMBER ___________

___ $649.00,

INSTITUTION ___________

In DC add 5.75% / In MD add 5% sales tax _______

TOTAL AMOUNT ENCLOSED $ _______

Subscription orders must be prepaid. (Subscriptions are on

a calendar year basis only.) Allow 4-6 weeks for delivery of

the first issue. Call for international subscription rates.

SEND THIS ORDER FORM TO:

American Psychological Association

Subscriptions

750 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20002-4242

Or call 800-374-2721, fax 202-336-5568.

TDD/TTY 202-336-6123.

For subscription information, e-mail:

[email protected]

286 May–June 2007

●

American Psychologist