Racial microaggressions and their sequelae

Spanierman, Clark, & Kim (2021) published “Reviewing Racial Microaggressions Research: Documenting targets’ experiences, harmful sequelae, and resistance strategies” in Perspectives on Psychological Science. They review microaggression literature in psychology, social work, education, and communication. Microaggression research emerged in the 1970s when Pierce who described offensive mechanisms that may explain conscious or unconscious “subtle blows [that] are delivered incessantly by White offenders in interaction with Black individuals,” labeling those offensive mechanisms as microaggressions. It was not until 2007 that Sue effectively reintroduced the term, with categories of microinsults, microinvalidations, and microassaults.

Spanierman et al. observe that: 

Racial microaggressions are micro because they arise during interpersonal (i.e., microlevel) moments between a perpetrator and a target. The term “micro” should in no way be understood as a measure of harm. Instead the micro in microaggressions is akin to the “everyday” in Essed’s (1991) everyday racism, or what she referred to as “microinjustices,” in the macrocontext of White supremacy in a racialized social system.

They proceed to review research finding that indirect, relational, and social aggression can be just as harmful as some types of physical aggression. They offer their new definition as follows:

subtle and familiar communications BIPOC targets experience during interpersonal moments when White perpetrators imply targets are inferior or discount targets’ identities, experiences, or knowledge. These microlevel, interpersonal communications transpire in the macrocontext of a White-supremacist, racialized social system.

Their literature review identifies categories of experience as pathologizing differences (e.g., second-class citizenship), denigrating and pigeonholing (e.g., stereotypes about intelligence, criminality, and exoticism), excluding and rendering invisible (e.g., where are you from?, being ignored by store clerks, and assuming universality in the experience of a group), and perpetuating color-blind racial attitudes (e.g., denying, distorting, or minimizing people’s experiences).

Next, they summarize the harmful effects of racial microaggressions as stress and anxiety, depression, general psychological distress and wellbeing, and such physiological effects as increased cortisol, poorer general health status, and various somatic symptoms (e.g., backache and nausea, poorer sleep duration or quality).

While critics have claimed that talk of microaggressions may promote a victimhood narrative, Spanierman et al. note that victims of microaggressions utilize strategies of resilience and resistance. They discuss seeking connection and support, talking to supportive mentors and friends, utilizing personal and professional support networks, and collective coping by receiving emotional support from others.

Finally, they address resistance coping or active strategies. They cite as an example the counterspaces concept which “might inform a training model in which BIPOC and their White allies role-play resistance coping in response to racial microaggressions and develop risk assessment scenarios that can be applied in real life.” They also note that humor “offers a subtle and powerful form of resistance.” Self-protective coping includes such strategies as choosing a positive outlook, picking and choosing one’s battles, exercising culturally relevant practices that reinforce pride and one’s strength. Desensitizing, avoiding, and disengaging can also support self-protection. It’s a very thorough and helpful article.