African-American Stereotypes in Advertising and its Effects on Society
Grace E. Curry
Savannah State University
Abstract: Advertising aims to adapt to the ever-changing consumer perceptions of all races, sexes, ethnicities and
attitudes of consumers worldwide. Yet to date there are still advertisements that portray persons of color in either
a stereotypical manner or as background to European Americans. For instance, there are two different
commercials for the same product that depicts an African American and European American family having
dinner. In the commercial with the African American family, only the mother is having dinner with her kids.
However, in the commercial with the European American family, the mother and father are having dinner with
their kids. This research study explores and investigates the role of advertising in targeting African American
consumers through stereotypes and further examines the following questions. What affects do today’s commercial
advertisements have on race relations?
•
•
•
Do the stereotypes project the true feelings of African American population?
Are these types of stereotypical advertisements harmful to the self-esteem of people of color, and how do
these perceptions affect different ethnicities including gender?
Should advertisers be held responsible for the continued perpetuation of the stereotypes?
Keywords: Stereotypes, minorities, race, gender, advertisement
INTRODUCTION
The racial and ethnic composition of America has changed considerable from a decade ago. And this
composition is going to continue to change decades into the future. With the influx of immigrants from
all over the globe, America is becoming browner. Yet, it does not seem as though many advertisers are
paying close attention to this undeniable fact. Although the representation of ethnic groups in
advertisements have increased in recent years (Zinkhan et al, 1988), it is still not enough. There are still
less representation of people of color in television and magazine advertisements. And when people of
color are represented there is a hint of covert stereotyping.
Stereotyping is a psychological categorization of specific social groups held by the general public which
influences decision making and information processing tasks (Gaertner and McLaughlin, 1983;
Bodenhausen, 1988; Greenwald and Banaji, 1995). Stereotyping has a negative association with a
particular culture or race. However, there is such a term as positive stereotyping. Positive stereotypes
point out the “positive” attributes of a culture or ethic group e.g., Asian are great at math, AfricanAmericans are better at sports, or the “Latin Lover.” However, positive stereotypes are just as damaging
as “negative stereotypes.” For example, if Asians are smarter at math, does that man that blacks and
whites are not? Additionally, when saying that African Americans are better at sports, does that mean
they don’t have the mental capacities to be intelligent? And “positive stereotypes” can cause
unnecessary stress to the persons who are trying to live up to them. Stereotypes as a whole are
dangerous because they lump one group of people unfairly into a specific category.
African Americans currently face the same stereotypes from times passed. Many African Americans in
television advertisements are seen, but not heard. However, when they are heard they share the
advertisement with a white counterpart. This is noteworthy; television advertisements merit particular
attention because they are key components of television, and because as Entman and Rojecki (2000)
contended, they are “indicators of the culture’s racial heartbeat” (p. 162), representing both cultural
norms but also having the potential to improve racial relations (Henderson and Baldasty, 2003).
Advertisers may not realize how important of a role they play when it comes to stereotyping African
Americans, and are not intentionally producing stereotypical advertisements. Their goal is to get
information out about a product or service to their market segment. But advertisers need to pay attention
to who they are marketing to, and let their market segment assist with determining if a particular print or
commercial may be perceived as stereotypical, especially if the market segmentation is African
American. Advertisers have a strong influence on shaping the perceptions of people, based on the how
characters in the advertisements are portrayed. Furthermore, advertisements have the ability to either
help eradicate the negative perceptions of African-Americans, or they can facilitate pervasive
stereotypes, which may increase racism. There is also more at risk.
Negative stereotypes of African American in advertising, may affect the self-esteem of African
Americans. The continuation of minimal representation or negative depictions of oneself reflected in
media may cause many African Americans to question their self-worth and importance to society. More
importantly, these destructive images or lack thereof affect African American children exponentially,
since African American children watch considerably more television than Caucasian children
(Slaughter, 2003). It is also important to note that children cannot fully differentiate what is fact and
what is fiction when watching television. Advertisers must realize that more is at stake than selling a
product or service. There are also social responsibilities to contend with.
Currently, African Americans have the purchasing power of approximately $910 billion, and this figure
is expected to increase to $1.2 trillion by the year 2012. The buying power of African Americans is
further reason why advertisers must revisit how they are targeting their markets. Not only is nonstereotypical advertising a matter of social responsibility, but it can quite possibly affect the bottom line.
It is also apparent that advertisers are not acknowledging the changing demographics when it comes to
targeting African Americans. In this research study the stereotyping of African American in
advertisements will be explored. This stereotyping not only affects African Americans, but all
Americans as a whole. The goal of this research is to examine how advertising stereotypes propagate
racism, its effects on society and determine if advertisers share a responsibility in the perpetuation of
stereotypes or if they are simply providing Americans with what they want.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Stereotypes
Gaertner and McLaughlin (1983), Bodenhausen (1988), Greenwald and Banaji (1995), as stated earlier,
have defined stereotyping is as a psychological categorization of specific social groups held by general
public which influences decision making and information processing tasks. Stereotyping has been
further dichotomized into polarized appraisal theory (Linville, 1982; Linville and Jones, 1980) or in-
group bias theory (Brewer, 1979; Wilder, 1981). These theories assume that people categorized
individuals on whether they belong to the in-group or out-group (Qualls and Moore, 1990). In-groups
are those that look like the persons doing the categorization and out-group are those that look dissimilar
to the person doing the categorization.
Figure 1: African Americans in marginal roles (1924 & 2011)
African American stereotypes have been studied for many decades. Shuey et al. reported that .6% of
African Americans were in advertisements, 95.3 % of the time they were represented as unskilled
laborers, entertainers or athletes (1953). Kern-Foxworth expressed that people of color are frequently
not present; when they are, it is often in marginal or stereotypical roles (1994). One may wonder how
the absence of African Americans my lead to stereotypes. One explanation is dominant group ideology.
Hirschman (1993, 537), defines ideology as a widely shared “system of beliefs that emanate from the
promulgate” a certain world view and that ideology is one means by which dominant groups sustain and
dominate their power over other groups. It is possible to communicate dominant group ideology through
media. Duckitt states that media can communicate racial prejudice in a number of ways, including
omission (i.e., ignoring the existence of African Americans), stereotyping and showing African
Americans in disproportionate number of “bad” or low status roles (1992). As Bristor et al. stated, it is
important to bring attention to these types of covert and possible unintentional negative portrayals of
African Americans in order to readdress race-based inequalities (1995).
Additionally, racism in advertising is reflected by low minority visibility and the use of certain
stereotypes. When referring to advertisements for television, Bristol et al. reported that only 17% of
African Americans were featured in minor roles (1995). However, Taylor and Lee found consolatory
gains in the frequency of African Americans (11% of ads used African American models), as well as
improvements in role portrayals and products advertised. However, these gains may not be enough.
Although the frequency of African Americans appearing in print ads has increased, there still is an
imbalance of positive portrayals. As compared to Caucasian Americans, African Americans are
portrayed more as minimum wage workers or single mothers in advertisements. There should be a rise
in the number of African-Americans being portrayed as professionals, at least to the same extent as
Caucasian Americans. Bandura opines that media is an important environmental influence on human
functioning and the way character roles are portrayed on television influences how viewers interpret and
respond to characters (1977, 1986, and 2002). All images of African Americans can shape and
strengthen postulations of those who have limited interactions with them. And if more negative
portrayals are presented via advertisements, stereotypes of African Americans will persist. In order to
prevent these negative assumptions, Bristor et al. suggests African Americans should be portrayed in
roles other than successful athletes, but also in high status roles, such as managers and other professional
(1995).
Most importantly, the consideration of African American seeing these advertisements must be taken into
account. Advertisement that portray African Americans negatively or maintain stereotypes may also
affect the self-esteem of African Americans. Another apprehension that should be expressed is the
possible loss of revenue advertisers may undergo from the African American community. African
Americans, like any other population, are more likely to purchase products or services from companies
that have persons in advertisements that look like them. Whittler and Dimeo (1991) suggest that
advertisers cannot afford to offend African Americans by not including them in their commercial
messages. African American buying power has increased 166% from 1990-2007 compared to a 124% in
White buying power (Selig Center, 2007). Therefore, it also seems plausible that the commercial
messages should not contain any negative stereotypes. African Americans are brand loyal, demonstrate a
high propensity for big ticket purchases, and prefer to support companies that embrace diversity (Miller
& Kemp, 2005).
The purpose of this paper is to examine exactly what type damage may come about due to advertising
stereotypes of African Americans. Additionally, this research will answer the following questions:
•
Do the stereotypes project the true feelings of the African American population?
•
Are these types of stereotypical advertisements harmful to the self-esteem of people of color and
how do these perceptions affect different ethnicities including gender?
•
Should advertisers be held responsible for the continued perpetuation of the stereotypes?
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Ad Evoked
Feelings
Stereotypes
Attitude
towards Ad
Attitude
towards Brands
Figure: 2: Stereotypes Conceptual Framework
Purchase
Intentions
Nearly 70% of African Americans are concerned with how they are portrayed in advertising (Beasty,
2005) and almost 60% believe that print and television advertisements are intended for solely for white
people (Mueller, 2008). The Stereotypes Hypothesis Model expounds upon the relationship between
stereotypes, ad evoked feelings, attitudes towards ads, attitudes towards brands and purchase intentions.
Figure 2 demonstrates the conceptual framework.
The conceptualization is that there is a direct
relationship of stereotypes with ad evoked feelings, attitude towards the ad, and attitude towards the
brand, which all will affect current or future intentions to purchase a product.
Figure 3: African Americans portrayed in over-exaggerated roles in 1940 and 2011
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A sample of 72 students from a Historically Black College University (HBCU) was surveyed for the
purpose of this research. Out of the 72 students surveyed 60% were women and 81.9% were African
American, and 9.7% were Caucasian American. Ten health and fashion magazines (Seventeen, Shape,
Men’s Health, Women’s Health, Oprah, Allure, Elle, Details, Lucky, and Cosmopolitan) were
examined, which resulted in 60 advertisements. Table 1 below provides details of the sample.
Table 1: Gender, Age and Ethnicity of the Sample
Gender
Frequency Percent
Cumulative
Valid Percent Percent
29
40.3
40.3
40.3
Female 43
59.7
59.7
100.0
Total
100.0
100.0
Valid Male
72
Age
Frequency Percent
Cumulative
Valid Percent Percent
Valid 21 - 25 50
69.4
69.4
69.4
26 - 30 14
19.4
19.4
88.9
31 - 35 6
8.3
8.3
97.2
36 - 40 2
2.8
2.8
100.0
Total
100.0
100.0
72
Ethnicity
Valid
Frequency Percent
Cumulative
Valid Percent Percent
African American
59
81.9
84.3
84.3
White (Caucasian)
7
9.7
10.0
94.3
Asian
1
1.4
1.4
95.7
Native Hawaiian or 1
other Pacific Islander
1.4
1.4
97.1
Other
2
2.8
2.9
100.0
70
2
72
97.2
2.8
100.0
100.0
Total
Missing System
Total
Qualitative Stage – 60 ads/stimuli were presented to a panel of 21 students and five faculty members.
The purpose of this qualitative stage was to determine which ads contained negative stereotypical
portrayals of African Americans. The occurrences of negative stereotypical portrayals were counted and
gave rise to five ads/stimuli that were nominated – one of an African American male portrayed in a
marginal role, two of African-American women in erotic roles, and two of African-American women in
over-exaggerated portrayals.
Quantitative Stage – These five ads were formulated into an online survey to measure attitudes and
behaviors amongst males and females. Seventy-two students participated in the survey, in random
order. The population at a HBCU is mostly homogenous with parallel socio-demographic backgrounds.
Gender and was included as a cataloging question. The findings from this research were indiscriminate
for males versus females.
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
A one-way analysis of variance was conducted to explore the impact of positive and negative cultural
meanings on gender, as shown in Table 2. Figure 4 shows the cultural ad-interpretation differences
between males and females. Stereotypes generate different responses amongst males and females, as
shown in Table 2 and Figure 4.
Figure 2: Gender Based cultural ad-interpretation differences
Table 2: ANOVA
Sum of Squares df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Does the ad provide a
Between Groups
different but POSITIVE
Within Groups
meaning when applied to
different (your) culture/sub- Total
culture?
3.691
1
3.691
3.226
.077
78.956
69
1.144
82.648
70
Does the ad provide a
Between Groups
different but NEGATIVE
Within Groups
meaning when applied to
different (your) culture/sub- Total
culture?
11.726
1
11.726
13.436
.000
60.218
69
.873
71.944
70
View the ad again, at least
view it 3 more times – on
repeated viewings, do you
encounter different
POSITIVE messages?
Between Groups
7.290
1
7.290
8.029
.006
Within Groups
62.654
69
.908
Total
69.944
70
View the ad again, at least
view it 3 more times – on
repeated viewings, do you
encounter different but
NEGATIVE messages?
Between Groups
11.060
1
11.060
13.201
.001
Within Groups
57.813
69
.838
Total
68.873
70
Table 3 provides the male and female ad-interpretation differences in detail as below.
Table 3: Cultural Ad-Interpretation Differences by Gender
Gender
Does the ad provide a
different but POSITIVE
meaning when applied to
different (your)
culture/sub-culture?
Does the ad provide a
different but NEGATIVE
meaning when applied to
different (your)
culture/sub-culture?
Male
Female
Male
Female
View the ad again, at least Male
view it 3 more times – on
repeated viewings, do you
encounter different
Female
POSITIVE messages?
Statistic
Std. Error
Mean
2.3448
.18752
Skewness
.122
.434
Kurtosis
-1.022
.845
Mean
1.8810
.17109
Skewness
.922
.365
Kurtosis
-.578
.717
Mean
2.4828
.17631
Skewness
.187
.434
Kurtosis
-.788
.845
Mean
3.3095
.14252
Skewness
-1.064
.365
Kurtosis
-.011
.717
Mean
2.4138
.16843
Skewness
.275
.434
Kurtosis
-.562
.845
Mean
1.7619
.15168
Skewness
1.156
.365
View the ad again, at least Male
view it 3 more times – on
repeated viewings, do you
encounter different but
Female
NEGATIVE messages?
Kurtosis
.312
.717
Mean
2.4828
.18316
Skewness
.291
.434
Kurtosis
-.906
.845
Mean
3.2857
.13324
Skewness
-.843
.365
Kurtosis
-.442
.717
A two-tailed correlation was performed for the ad-evoked feelings, as shown in Table 4, along with the
exploratory factor analysis. Factor Analysis is presented as Table 5.
Table 4: Correlation Analysis for Ad-Evoked Feelings
•Worried
Pearson
____carefree
Correlation
Worried
Insulted______honor Indifferent___ Irritated______pl Depressed__ Regretful__
_carefree
ed
1
.806
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
71
•Nervous
Pearson
.898
_____calm
Correlation
**
.742
**
eased
.812
**
___cheerful __rejoicing
.766
**
.849
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
71
71
71
71
71
.768
**
.737
**
.748
**
.738
**
.783
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
71
Contemplative Pearson
___impulsive
**
_interested
.762
**
.765
**
.747
**
.753
**
.754
**
.655
**
**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
71
Critical
Pearson
.768
___accepting
Correlation
**
.742
**
.689
**
.739
**
.687
**
.660
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
71
Cautious____ Pearson
adventurous
**
.836
**
.780
**
.727
**
.745
**
.740
**
.803
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
71
**
**
Dubious_____ Pearson
confident
**
.780
**
.800
**
.791
**
.797
**
.759
**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
71
•Pessimistic__ Pearson
_hopeful
.831
.806
.000
.000
71
**
.869
.000
71
**
.848
.000
71
**
.885
.000
71
**
.906
71
**
.768
**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
71
Callous____
Pearson
.728
affectionate
Correlation
**
.784
**
.708
**
.794
**
.833
**
.670
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
71
Bad_______
Pearson
.796
good
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
71
Sad___happy Pearson
.862
**
.914
**
.000
.844
**
.000
71
**
.685
.673
**
.000
71
**
.883
.807
**
.000
71
**
.876
.821
**
.000
71
**
.730
**
71
**
.822
**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
71
1
.772
Insulted_____ Pearson
honored
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
71
**
.923
**
.876
**
.774
**
.742
71
**
.772
**
.000
.000
.000
.000
71
71
71
71
1
.815
**
.843
**
.777
**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
71
Irritated_____ Pearson
pleased
**
Correlation
Indifferent___ Pearson
_interested
.806
.812
.000
71
**
.923
71
**
.815
**
.000
.000
71
71
1
.904
.000
71
**
.803
**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
Unemotional_ Pearson
__sentimental Correlation
.749
**
.743
**
.833
71
**
.772
**
.000
.000
71
71
.826
**
.837
**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
71
Depressed__c Pearson
heerful
.000
71
**
.876
.000
71
**
.843
71
**
.904
**
.000
.000
71
71
1
.833
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
Regretful____r Pearson
ejoicing
.766
.000
.849
**
.774
**
.777
**
.803
.000
71
**
.833
71
**
1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
N
71
71
71
71
71
Table 5: Rotated Component Matrix
Component
1
2
3
4
5
•Worried _______carefree
.361
.666
.300
.327
.408
•Nervous ________calm
.273
.632
.297
.322
.499
•Contemplative____impulsive .387
.237
.296
.743
.313
•Critical ________accepting
.411
.293
.214
.219
.772
•Cautious______adventurous .311
.570
.332
.633
.133
•Dubious________ confident .357
.410
.446
.576
.260
•Pessimistic_______hopeful
.625
.229
.471
.370
.378
•Callous______affectionate
.658
.128
.298
.431
.415
•Bad___________good
.270
.377
.186
.297
.797
•Sad____________happy
.610
.612
.209
.336
.180
•Insulted_________honored
.693
.393
.357
.265
.266
•Indifferent______interested
.315
.231
.753
.299
.365
`•Irritated_________pleased .664
.342
.478
.216
.285
•Unemotional___sentimental .306
.413
.694
.429
•Depressed______cheerful
.663
.297
.565
.243
.205
•Regretful______rejoicing
.371
.650
.556
.152
.188
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 12 iterations.
71
**
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
.905
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square
1825.812
df
120
Sig.
.000
RESEARCH FINDINGS
After conducting the research, it was found that women viewed the advertisements depicting AfricanAmericans as having a more negative cultural meaning and less positive cultural meaning than men, as
shown in Table 1. After viewing the ads multiple times, women were least likely to see positive cultural
meaning in the advertisement than men.
However, upon further viewing women perceived more
negative meaning from the advertisements. This means that stereotypes disturb women more than men.
Positive meanings from an advertisement and brand may lead to brand interest and an optimistic intent
to purchase. However, advertisements that represent brands that are perceived as having negative
meaning will not lead to positive intentions to purchase. Also, with regard to ad-evoked feelings of
regret, depression, irritation, indifference, insult and worried feelings, women were found to be more
affected than men with the presence of negative stereotypes, as illustrated in Table 6 below.
Table 6: Effect of Ad-Evoked Feelings on Gender
Gender
Regretful______rejoicing
Female
Male
Statistic
Mean
4.1724
.29806
Skewness
-.078
.434
Kurtosis
-.670
.845
3.4762
.29165
.289
.365
-.761
.717
4.1724
.30621
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
•Depressed____cheerful
Female
Std. Error
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
Male
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
•Irritated_______pleased
Female
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
Male
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
•Indifferent_____interested
Female
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
Male
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
•Insulted______honored
Female
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
Male
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
•Worried _____carefree
Female
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
Male
Mean
Skewness
Kurtosis
.064
.434
-.631
.845
3.4048
.29328
.322
.365
-.765
.717
4.0690
.33635
.200
.434
-.847
.845
3.1905
.32374
.567
.365
-.909
.717
4.0000
.34024
.262
.434
-.861
.845
3.6190
.28299
.149
.365
-.882
.717
3.6897
.34421
.201
.434
-.964
.845
3.1190
.31642
.705
.365
-.727
.717
4.3103
.31429
.043
.434
-.731
.845
3.3810
.32502
.471
.365
-1.037
.717
CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of this study is to examine the types of damage that may come about due to advertising
stereotypes of African Americans. The proposed ‘stereotypes’ conceptual model may be accepted to
explain that perceived stereotypes affect African Americans feelings about an advertisement, which
leads to attitudes about the brand and intentions to purchase a product.
The research findings from this study are significant with the respect to the use of positive/negative
synchronic polysemy and positive/negative diachronic polysemy to determine positive intent of
purchase. There are a few limitations with this research that should be discussed. First, a convenient
sample of 72 students from a Historically Black College University was surveyed and the majority of the
students were African American. Therefore, the sample size was not representative. Second, there were
limitations with the advertisements chosen. Out of the five selected advertisements, four were portrayals
of women. And full depictions of all possible African American stereotypes were not examined.
These finding reflect similar results from previous research. African Americans are aware and affected
by negative portrayal in advertisement and yet advertisers still use them. One reason may be that those
making decisions about the advertisements are not African Americans and may not see the
advertisements as stereotypical portrayals. Another indication is that African-Americans are seen as a
homogenous group that only responds to broad advertisements. Implications from this study
demonstrate that more realistic advertisements of African Americans in roles other stereotypical
depictions are needed. For instance, more advertisements of African Americans as managers, bank
tellers, teachers, and doctors, etc., are necessary to reflect more accurate portrayals of the group. Future
research may focus on the reasons why women are affected by stereotypical portrayals in advertisements
more than men. Additionally, more research should be conducted determine why advertisers continue to
use stereotypical advertisements of African Americans.
REFERENCES
Bailey, A. A., (2006). A year in the life of the African-American male in advertising. Journal of
Advertising. 35(1), 83-104.
Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory. Oxford, England: Prentice-Hall, 1977, Print.
Brewer, M. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational
analysis. Psychology Bulletin. 86(2), 307-324.
Bristor, J. M., Lee, R. G., Hunt, M. R., (1995). Race and ideology: African American images in
television advertising. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 14(1), 48-59.
Duckitt, J. The Social Psychology of Prejudice. New York: Praeger Press. 1992.
Entman, R., Rojecki, A. (2000). The Black image in the white mind: Media and race in America.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gaertner, S. L., McLaughlin, J. P., (1983). Racial stereotypes: associations and ascriptions of positive
and negative characteristics. Social Psychology. 56, 5-18
Greenwald, A. G. and Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitues, self-esteem, and
stereotypes. Psychology Review. 102, 4-27.
Henderson, J. J., Baldasty, G. J. (2003). Race, advertising, and prime-time television. The Howard
Journal of Communications. 14(2), 97-112.
Hirschman, E. C. (1993). Ideology in consumer research, 1980 and 1990: A marxist and feminist
critique. Journal of Consumer Research. 19, 537-555.
Hollerbach, K. L., (2009). The impact of market segmentation on African-American frequency,
centrality and status in television advertising. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 53(4), 599614.
Linville, P. W. (1982). The complexity-extremity effect and age-based stereotyping. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 42(2), 193-211.
Linville, P. W., Jones E. (1980). Polarized appraisal of out-group members. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. 38(5), 689-703.
Maher, J. K., Herbst, K. C., Childs, N. M., Finn, S. (2008). Racial stereotypes in children’s television
commercials. Journal of Advertising Research. 48(1), 80-93.
Mastro, D. E., Stern, S. R., (2003). Representations of race in television commercials: A content analysis
of prime-time advertising. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 47(4), 638-637.
Messineo, M. J. (2008). Does advertising on black entertainment television portray more positive gender
representations compared to broadcast networks? Sex Roles. 59(9/10), 752-764.
Millard, J. E., Grant, P. R. (2006). The stereotypes of Black and White women in fashion magazine
photographs: The pose of model and the impression she creates. Sex Roles. 54(9/10), 659-673.
Miller, P., & Kemp, H. (2005). What’s black about it? Ithaca, NY: Paramount Market Publishing, Inc.
Qualls, W. J., & Moore, D. J., (1990). Stereotyping effects on consumers’ evaluation of advertising:
Impact of racial differences between actors and viewers. Psychology & Marketing. 7(2), 135-151.
Selig Center (2007). The multicultural economy 2007. Atlanta, GA: University of Georgia Press.
Shuey, A. M., King, A., & Griffith, B. (1953). Stereotyping Negroes and Whites: An analysis of
magazine pictures. Public Opinion Quarterly. 17(Summer), 281-287.
Slaughter, E. “Survey of Children’s Health and Obesity in America.” Prevention Magazine, 2003.
Stevenson, T. H., & Swayne, L. E., (1999). The Portrayal of African-Americans in business-to-business
direct mail: A benchmark study. Journal of Advertising. 28(3), 25-35.
Taylor, C. R., & Lee, J. Y. (1995). Portrayals of African-American, Hispanic, and Asian Americans in
magazine advertising. American Behavioral Scientist. 38(4), 608-621.
Watson, S., Dejong, P. E., & Slack, J. L., (2009). Impact of racial attitudes on consumers’ evaluation of
Black character advertisements: Does spokesperson skin color make a difference? Communication
Research Reports. 26(2), 91-104.
Whittler, T. E. (1991). The effects of actors’ race in commercial advertisement: Review and extension.
Journal of Advertising. 20(1), 54-60.
Wilder, D. A. (1981). Perceiving Persons As Group: Categorization and Intergroup Relations. In D.L.
Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive Process in Stereotyping in Intergroup Behavior. Hillsdale, N. J.
Zinkhan, G., Qualls, W. J., & Biswas, A. (1988). The racial composition of domestic advertising: A
longitudinal analysis of blacks in magazines and television. Working Paper, University of Houston.
The purpose of this study was to examine the types of damage that may come about due to advertising
stereotypes of African-Americans.