Allies for Life? Lessons From White Scholars of Multicultural Psychology

Participants and Recruitment

Data Sources

Procedures

Eleven interviews were conducted via telephone or Skype, and one was conducted in person at the participant’s home. Interviews lasted between 1 and 3 hours; each was audiorecorded. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and identifying information, except for interviewee gender, was removed from the transcript. Code numbers were used to refer to the participants during the remainder of the investigation.

Data Analysis

Domain 1: Conceptualization of Multicultural Psychology and Social Justice

Typically, participants described multicultural psychology as broad and inclusive of many social identity groups. At the same time, participants expressed concern that a broad definition could be used to deflect attention from racial oppression. Variantly, participants noted that individuals exist in cultural contexts as a central tenet of multicultural psychology. Another variant category emphasized how oppression and privilege affect individual experiences. In this category, participants focused on the particular context of oppression and privilege, often linking this to intersecting social identity groups. Variantly, participants conceptualized multicultural psychology as central to all aspects of psychology, “cutting across everything that we do [teaching, research, and practice].” One participant, however, referred to it as a “specialty area.”

When sharing their conceptualization of social justice, two typical categories emerged. Typically, participants described social justice as “promoting the basic rights and dignity of all people,” ensuring access to societal resources and fostering equity. They also described social justice as involving a behavioral component that advocates for social change (e.g., locally in communities or professionally to change organizations). This second activist-oriented category also involved an understanding that social justice is linked to broader roles for counseling psychologists including that of change agents who address systems-level interventions.

Domain 2: Professional Experiences Related to Multicultural Psychology

Because we sought to examine scholars of multicultural psychology, it is not surprising that all participants portrayed scholarship as one of their primary professional involvements in this area. One participant explained that he always has tried to include “some kind of cultural variable” in his empirical research. Likewise, several reported that they address power, privilege, and oppression in their writing. Others described their contributions to theory development, such as assisting with the multicultural counseling competence tripartite model. Yet another participant noted that she is attuned to the social and political implications of science, which never is value free. Similarly, a male participant explained how he used research and writing to challenge the White standard that is considered normative and to implement diverse ways to define mental health. One participant contrasted scholarly pursuits with on-the-ground activism, stating:

My research and writing focuses in this area, very often with culturally diverse teams. So if writing can have any impact I’ll do it that way. So, part of it is indirect. I’m not really marching. . . . I’m probably too lazy and I feel too exhausted to go that far so I’ll participate a little bit but I’m not at the level of those folks who really, literally, march in the streets.

Reflecting broadly on their careers, participants explained that they try to be “responsible scholar[s]” whose work addresses overcoming racism and promoting social justice.

A second general category pertained to teaching and mentoring students of color and White allies as key professional experiences. Participants expressed a love of teaching, and most taught multicultural counseling and infused content designed to enhance students’ multicultural competence into all of their courses. Disabusing students of the idea that multicultural competence is a specialty rather than a core competence was a major objective for one respondent. Another explained that he seeks to create classroom environments that encourage students to be honest about their assumptions and biases. Another reported his teaching and mentoring were linked inextricably to research. Thus, throughout his career he sought to train students to conduct high quality research that could have an impact beyond the individual to include societal systems. With regard to multicultural teaching, one scholar referred to “ripple effects,” where meaningful interactions around racial issues facilitate growth in others. Most referred to mentoring both students of color and White allies as their biggest contribution to the field. They expressed joy in “launching students’ careers” and were proud of their former students’ contributions to multicultural psychology.

A typical category referred to participants’ service and leadership roles in university and other professional settings. For instance, many spoke of influencing admissions criteria, such as downplaying standardized test scores and emphasizing community engagement. They sought to increase representation of students of color in their programs. As chair of his department, one participant initiated curricular (e.g., developing a multicultural minor) and environmental changes (e.g., fostering discussion of racial issues among colleagues). Participants also chaired key university committees, such as affirmative action and search committees, where they sought to recruit and retain faculty of color. In editorial roles, participants pursued the following: raising social justice issues, incorporating prior research conducted by people of color, and diversifying journal editorial boards. As an ally, one scholar filed official discrimination complaints at his university. He, and others, described these roles as extremely challenging, which we explain in more detail in the domain about challenges.

The second typical category referred to clinical practice and consulting. Participants, for example, addressed equity issues in schools and hospital settings. Participants also consulted with other counseling psychology training programs to facilitate greater attention to diversity and equity. Some served as expert witnesses in court cases, and one reported that he uses his clinical practice as a means to share and implement diverse ways of defining psychological well-being.

Domain 3: Experiences Related to Multicultural Psychology Outside of the Primary Professional Role

Variantly, participants engaged in political activism at local, state, and national levels. Some, for example, had been involved in antiwar protests and the civil rights movement of the 1960s; one reported that her work has been grounded in a radical feminism ever since. Another variant category pertained to community activism, such as writing letters and making phone calls to politicians. Others were involved in formal community advocacy, such as labor union organizing and working with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Several interviewees discussed not having as much time as they would like to engage in community activism. The third variant category referred to school-based prevention and intervention. For example, two participants explained that they became involved in their children’s schools to enhance multicultural sensitivity and understanding. The final variant category referred to the idea that social justice is integral to participants’ personal as well as professional lives. One participant declared that multicultural psychology and social justice “permeates everything I do.” Another explained:

I became an active member in antiracism work with a group of women on campus as well as with my own counseling center. These were all things that made me realize that it couldn’t be a professional component without a personal component. And, I was involved in this group of women against racism and even though it was not oriented towards the profession, it was a combination of community and university women, it just helped me cement that if I was going to be effective in this area, I really needed to make it personal, more than I already had.

Domain 4: Origins of Interest and Commitment

All participants described their childhood or family background as the genesis of their multicultural work. Several described parental influences, such as parents who modeled pacifist, feminist, and activist stances. Two participants from immigrant families learned the importance of being bilingual and bicultural early in life. Some reported coming from a long line of “political liberals” or the influence of the broader sociopolitical context (e.g., growing up during the 1960s civil rights movement) as providing the impetus for their interest in multicultural psychology. Others founded the roots of their multicultural work in the social justice orientation of their families’ religious congregations (e.g., Quaker, Catholic, etc.). In those cases, participants described clergy as early role models. Several noted meaningful early childhood interactions with people of color through athletics or other venues. One remembered his father’s racist attitudes, coupled with his mother’s openness and acknowledgment that all people are equal; he attributed the roots of his exploration and interest to fight racism to his mother’s influence.

A typical category pertained to participants’ experiences with intolerance and discrimination at a young age. These participants described situations where they felt like an outsider. Some spoke of experiencing childhood victimization or bullying based on their social group identities. They experienced stigma on the basis of their working class status or religion (i.e., one was perceived to be Jewish even though he was not). Finally, one participant described how having a son with a developmental disability heightened his awareness of discrimination and injustice.

Another typical category was higher education. Participants described both their undergraduate and graduate programs as strong influences in developing their multicultural foci. Several emphasized the important role of people of color who were peers, mentors, supervisors, and faculty in this context; two participants mentioned the role of White racial justice allies. Participants referenced their graduate multicultural counseling course as an important influence in the development of their multicultural work. Finally, one participant described how working at a women’s center during her graduate program facilitated important commitments to addressing power and privilege.

The variant category involved geographical contexts. For example, participants described the shift in their worldviews when they moved from predominantly White environments to more diverse settings, even in the same state. In another example, a participant explained how moving to Europe as a young child, although difficult at the time, ultimately was empowering in developing a bilingual and bicultural identity.

Domain 5: Critical Incidents Related to One’s Commitment to the Work

Typically, participants declared that experiences with conflict were crucial to maintaining their commitments to multicultural psychology. In particular, they described how witnessing racial injustice promoted action to fight racial oppression. One interviewee explained how seeing faculty being denied tenure on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation motivated his active involvement in appeals processes. Another participant described how a secretary in her department had called campus police when an African American undergraduate male simply was waiting outside her office for a meeting with her. Because she cared about the student, this experience was particularly powerful. Others described how some conflicts were necessary and could foster greater trust. Reflecting on an exchange during a Division 17 meeting, one participant stated:

I said [to my colleague of color], “I was worried, that all of my internalized racism, which I know I walk around with, because we all do, would cause me to say or do something stupid, that would hurt you and would ruin our trust and ruin our relationship. And, I was terrified to have that fight with you. . . .” We processed this whole thing. It really, really ended up being a good thing, because it cemented our relationship in ways that . . . might not have happened otherwise. And, now, when we work together on antiracism stuff or any kind of diversity-related stuff, we know we are on the same page.

This example describes how working through conflicts might enhance cross-racial relationships.

A variant category in the critical incident domain was international experiences. For example, working with Aboriginal peoples in Australia helped raise one participant’s awareness of his ethnocentric worldview. Another recalled his move to Europe during childhood. Although challenging at first, due to not knowing the language or culture, he developed ethnocultural empathy and ultimately became empowered by his bicultural experiences.

Participants also variantly described critical incidents during their graduate training. One explained his reaction to reading the first edition of Counseling the Culturally Different (Sue, 1981). He stated, “[It] shook me to my core . . . I had no idea when I read the book that it would change my life.” Another described how his program’s multicultural emphasis was serendipitous and promoted his self-awareness, which in turn set the course for his entire career.

Variantly, participants expressed that interactions with students and colleagues of color played a critical role in their commitments to multicultural psychology. One interviewee explained how students of color challenged him to do research with them in minority communities. Another described an incident where she missed a teachable moment on race during one of her lectures. After a student pointed out her error, she remembered “crying for most of the rest of the day.” This incident touched the participant deeply and compelled her to look at herself differently. Only then, did she begin to see what aspects of herself she needed to confront.

Discussing the critical role of colleagues of color in their commitment to multicultural psychology, one male participant explained:

Without their support I don’t know if I would have had the courage to pursue—I don’t know if I would have been able to work through my own guilt, as a White guy, getting tenured and promotions offered off of multicultural research. . . . I really needed the affirmation of people of color to stay. . . . And in fact, you know, I felt more support from my colleagues of color [than from my White colleagues].

Another male participant was feeling defeated and considered changing research directions when, serendipitously, a female colleague of color sitting next to him on an airline flight to a conference told him that he was doing things that are important. He described this interaction as “a defining moment in my career,” enabling his persistence in multicultural psychology.

Domain 6: Understanding Whiteness

All participants reported that acknowledging their own White privilege was an essential element of understanding Whiteness. Although some acknowledged particular unearned privileges (e.g., having access to campus administrators, boarding a plane without identification, and speaking aloud before thinking through answers), others discussed their struggles to become aware. Several had placed themselves intentionally in environments where they were the numerical racial minority to remind themselves that they operate mainly in privileged spaces. One participant explained how White privilege has been an impediment to learning about the experiences of people of color. Another discussed how acknowledging her unearned racial privilege has allowed her to live a “more authentic life with more genuine relationships.” Several have considered ways to use their White privilege to dismantle racial injustice. These participants declared their responsibility to do so, considering they may have greater credibility than people of color in addressing racial issues with other White people.

Typically, participants understood Whiteness in relation to their other social group identities. One scholar explained how all of her identities are “constantly coming in and out of focus, sometimes in a singular way or sometimes in an integrated way, but it depends on the [context].” Some observed intersections with other privileged social group identities, such as being male. One stated, for example:

I think it’s the intersection of being White and male . . . there’s privilege that comes with being male . . . having access to people in administrative positions . . . the process of getting in leadership positions. . . . Even just social access and many times a lot of things get done in the social context. And so being White and being male, that’s very big.

In contrast, others emphasized links between Whiteness and marginalized identities, such as being a woman, a lesbian, or from a lower social class status. One participant observed how being a woman reduced some of her White privilege. Another explained how growing up in a poor family focused his attention on class privilege and oppression more so than racial privilege:

I grew up in a poor family. We lived in trailers and garages. . . . I didn’t ever think I’d ever go to college, although I took college prep type courses ‘cause I was a good student, but . . . I knew I was a poor kid from the wrong side of the tracks. And so, it was kind of a surprise to me to hear that this [oppression] was done along racial grounds. As I got older . . . I realized, yeah, there is a whole form of discrimination here that is based on just skin color.

Several participants discussed how they understood their Whiteness in conjunction with their ethnic identities (e.g., French-Canadian or Italian-American); sometimes there was tension between these two identities. In sum, participants recognized the differential and fluid experience of White privilege based on other social group identities and immediate social context.

The second typical category reflected acknowledging one’s own racism in the context of developing a healthy White identity. One participant, for example, discussed the process of shifting the gaze from people of color to examining oneself as the oppressor. Another explained that he had to work consistently to understand Whiteness, which was upsetting at times because it involves acknowledging one’s own racism. Another recognized his earlier “dysconsciousness about racism,” and his work to overcome his defensive reactions to being criticized as racist. Yet another described himself as a “racist in recovery.” Similarly, one participant explained that White people will express racist perspectives, often unintentionally. Referring to his concept of “recovery skills,” he stated, “The trick is not to do a perfect job but to recover after you’ve said or done the wrong thing.” Finally, a participant noted having “racist cobwebs in my mind that are part of being socialized in a racist system. . . . It’s critical [to] change the wiring.” He added that White individuals in the United States must become fully aware of the tribal land on which they live as another mechanism of becoming aware of racism. In sum, these scholars were not afraid to examine their own racism and acknowledge their continued struggle against powerful racist socialization.

In a variant category, two participants emphasized that Whiteness is a social construction rather than a biological reality. Moreover, they acknowledged that race has important social and political features even when it has no scientific viability.

Domain 7: Impact of Whiteness on One’s Professional Work

Typically, participants described how they used their White privilege in ways to reach and teach other White individuals about racism. As one scholar said:

There is a responsibility to ally with other Whites in helping them understand. I think as a White person sometimes I can reach a White audience in a way that a person of color might not. . . . They may not have their defensive wall up. . . . My Whiteness is a pipeline for reaching other Whites particularly about our racism.

Similarly, another explained that her Whiteness creates a sense of responsibility to do what is “just,” “right,” and “moral” to address racial oppression. She, and others, felt strongly that allies carry more weight with some audiences because they are not the immediate targets of the prejudice they are trying to dismantle. One participant stated, “My Whiteness affords me some flexibility . . . to bring up issues of race and ethnicity without being accused of having an agenda or ‘chip on my shoulder.’” Several mentioned how they disclosed struggles with their own racial identity with their White students, particularly when they made mistakes, to normalize the process and encourage risk-taking. Others discussed how their Whiteness prompted them to investigate empirically the pervasive impact of White privilege on society. Regardless of their approach, participants felt a sense of responsibility to fight racism within their own communities.

Participants typically discussed credibility concerns among communities of color. Some faced skepticism about their motivation to engage in multicultural work, which made them feel uncomfortable. One participant stated, “Wherever you go, you’ve got no credibility in any group no matter what you’ve done in the past. So, you basically have to prove yourself again and again and again and again. And sometimes you don’t succeed.” He referred to this process as “negotiating Whiteness.” Another reflected on the 1993 issue of TCP that questioned whether Whites had a right to do multicultural research. He stated a resounding “Yes,” and framed this in terms of mentoring future researchers of color. At the same time, some participants described credibility concerns with students of color. One acknowledged that students of color are justified in wanting to learn from faculty of color.

Variantly, participants described how their Whiteness influenced their involvement in organizations designed for people of color. One explained how he felt locked out of certain experiences years earlier, such as editing a journal that focused on minority concerns or delivering keynote addresses at multicultural conferences, as he perceived these opportunities to be reserved for people of color. In contrast, another participant reported feeling fortunate to be welcomed into organizations that were run by and served people of color. She proceeded thoughtfully and respectfully during her interactions in these organizations. Elaborating, she described her role generally as a supporting one, but agreed to leadership roles when asked to do so.

Domain 8: Challenges Associated With Multicultural Work

All participants reported challenges with White colleagues. One described his frustration with the traditional White male dominance in counseling psychology in the 1960s and reflected on his decision to remove himself from Division 17 until scholars of color were elected as presidents. This scholar and others have continued to struggle with White colleagues who ignore systemic oppression in their work. One participant emphasized “responsible disobedience” (i.e., following one’s values and making waves rather than following the rules and compromising one’s integrity). Several participants noted that their White colleagues questioned the scientific value of multicultural research, which instead was perceived as political or “radical.” One participant reflected on being accused of focusing too much on cultural issues during his journal editorship. Another participant, who was active in affirmative action efforts on campus, said that he was “perceived [by White colleagues] as wanting lower standards.” Two scholars reported having been accused of doing multicultural work for self-serving reasons, such as to make money or to capitalize on “a hot topic.”

Participants reported various strategies to deal with feeling devalued, dismissed, and rejected by other White individuals. One participant reported he simply accepts the fact that not everyone will like him and he has to keep trying in spite of that. He works hard to maintain a level of empathy for White people who show signs of racism. When challenged by White colleagues who may be further along in their social justice advocacy, one participant explained that she has to remind herself that she is doing her best, even when she makes mistakes.

Typically, participants reported experiencing challenges with people of color. One explained, “Minorities were asking why I was stepping on their turf.” At the same time, these White multicultural scholars doubted themselves and questioned whether they had a right to enter communities of color. These participants relayed “credibility concerns” in which colleagues of color made assumptions about their motivation to engage in multicultural research. One explained how it took a long time to prove herself before she was trusted. She described the process as both “honoring” and “terrifying” because of her fear of making mistakes. One participant explained her greatest challenge thus far has been working with particular colleagues of color who are highly religious and espouse an antigay stance. Another recalled a public incident in which she inadvertently likened African Americans to alcoholics on welfare. She felt humiliated and misunderstood, but ultimately learned much from the experience. Participants also described challenges with students of color. One interviewee, for example, explained that in some cases his relationships with students of color were severed when he provided critical feedback.

Participants typically discussed the challenging emotional nature of multicultural work. Several reported feeling sadness and hopelessness when “other White people in charge” overturned their efforts. After a harsh administrative response to his discrimination complaints, one participant experienced stress and anxiety over the uncertainty about his future at his university. Several discussed feelings of White guilt, especially linked to recognizing their unearned privilege. One explained that the work is “exhausting,” and when she takes a short break she feels guilty for not doing more. In response to what she described as the “overwhelming” nature of multicultural work, she asked herself “Why didn’t I go into botany?” Many participants feared rejection and ridicule for making mistakes of a racist nature. One hoped that her colleagues of color would forgive her when she makes such mistakes. Most participants framed these “emotional costs” as minor in comparison to what their colleagues of color have experienced (and continue to experience) on a daily basis.

Domain 9: Sources of Support and Rewards of Multicultural Work

All participants cited the critical support of mentors, role models, and Division 17. Many discussed the support and encouragement that they received from mentors and colleagues of color. One participant explained that affirmation from colleagues of color was an important asset in establishing credibility. Another explained how a colleague of color and her partner both served as crucial role models who helped him understand the ramifications of racial oppression. He attributed a great deal of his personal growth to this couple. Some participants discussed White role models who supported their development as multicultural scholars, with one referring to another participant by name. Several discussed how they were honored to see themselves as “part of a long historical legacy of individuals who have forged peace, justice, and equality.” These scholars attributed their multicultural understanding to those researchers of color who came before them and broke barriers. Several participants reported feeling a sense of connection to a larger community of people dedicated to racial justice. One reflected, “I just can’t accentuate enough how healing and wonderful it is to know that there’s this whole other world of beautiful people out there that I now can consider my brothers and sisters.”

Typically, participants reported that multicultural work itself is intrinsically rewarding. One participant captured the sentiment of several stating, “[The work] inspires me to be a better version of myself.” Similarly, others discussed enhanced authenticity and greater personal growth as intrinsic rewards of social justice work. A number of scholars identified a love of learning as another benefit. For example, one participant explained that she “loves learning about lives that are different from hers and the process of discovering how they are similar.” One participant described eloquently that, although multicultural work is difficult, there is a “redemptive quality to it that is tied to Dr. King’s philosophy . . . an ethic of love.”

In another typical category, participants reported that working with students was one of the most rewarding aspects of the work. Several felt validated when White students in their courses “finally get it!” Others described how meaningful it is when students of color tell them they appreciate that a professor finally has acknowledged what their life has been like. Participants described how rewarding it has been to feel like they are making a difference among the next generation of students developing multicultural competence. One explained how this idea of the next generation brings him hope when he becomes depressed about broader issues in the university, throughout the country, and across the globe. Several participants reported remaining close with former students and continuing to learn from them.

Variantly, participants described the supportive role of their family members. For example, one described an “unusual sense of gratification and empowerment” through his work with his daughter’s elementary school to promote peace and racial justice. Another explained how his family background provides support. To be true to his ancestors, he reflected, he must look inward and work toward making the world a better place. Finally, one participant expressed delight that she has had a positive influence on her own family with regard to fostering antiracist beliefs.

Domain 10: Recommendations for the Next Generation of White Counseling Psychologists

The multicultural scholars offered important recommendations for the next generation. Typically, participants discussed the importance of establishing meaningful cross-racial relationships. “To earn their stripes,” as one stated, White students must show a genuine interest and authentic concern for people of color. Another urged students to “stop hanging out with people that are clones of yourself and [instead] seek out populations that see the world in a quite different way than you do.” Several respondents explained how cross-racial relationships allow White individuals to learn from the perspectives of people of color and confront their own racism. They emphasized the importance of truly listening to different perspectives.

The second typical category concerned taking risks and making mistakes. One noted the need to overcome the fear of rejection, ridicule, or being misunderstood. They emphasized having courage to engage in difficult and sensitive conversations around multicultural issues. These participants advised White students to “struggle” with these issues and engage in the process of racial self-reflection even when painful. They urged other White individuals to remain nondefensive and humble. One emphasized a need for patience and practice, stating:

And there’s no reason why you should be totally multiculturally competent, which is impossible anyway. . . . But we become more sensitive and more aware as we go. So get involved, talk with people, don’t set up unrealistic expectations that you’re going to be this Olympic skier . . . before you’ve ever gone down the hill, or even bought your skis.

Another explained the unfortunate reality that academic settings foster attitudes of knowing rather than admitting we do not know. Thus, he urged students to “reduce academic defenses and be honest about what you don’t know.” The overarching message was that taking risks and making mistakes are integral parts of the process without which students will not receive many of the joys that can be found in multicultural psychology.

Participants typically recommended that White students develop a healthy White racial identity. They suggested that students develop their own White racial identity model based on the literature and anchored in their own personal experiences. Some participants also emphasized the importance of becoming aware of the dynamics of privilege and power and how they impact their relationships. One recommended that students be honest about racial privilege and acknowledge how it differs from other kinds of privilege so as not to foster color-blind racial attitudes. Relatedly, participants urged White trainees to acknowledge their own racism. Specifically, they recommended writing in journals or class papers, reflecting with other White people, and seeking feedback from people of color. Others mentioned specific behaviors in which students could engage, such as attending a program at an African American community center.

In the final typical category, participants recommended that White trainees and junior faculty engage in self-care when doing multicultural work. One participant stated:

At the personal level, White allies and advocates need to take care of themselves physically and spiritually . . . a bonding force that connects us all. I think it’s very important for allies to work together, not just to critique each other’s work, but to provide a unique level of support.

Another scholar emphasized how crucial it is to have hope, even when things feel hopeless and overwhelming. Participants recommended seeking role models or mentors and to extend their support networks beyond that of their home programs to find people in whom they can trust and confide. One scholar recommended reading as much as possible to learn about the social, political, and historical experiences of people of color; the same participant said that it is absolutely necessary to cross cultural boundaries to bring the readings to life. Finally, one participant asserted that “White mentors have a responsibility to do this kind of work and mentor White students, rather than leaving this to people of color.”

Variantly, participants urged White trainees to continually work to develop multicultural competence in their professional work. One participant discussed the need to conduct empirical research on how cultural issues affect the counseling process. Another participant encouraged students to think carefully about their research that is not explicitly multicultural. He explained that they must see the multicultural components and learn to apply them. One interviewee recommended one of his books, which provides students and faculty with examples of experiential exercises to enhance multicultural self-awareness. Several scholars advocated for a process-oriented rather than a fixed-goal approach to developing such competence. One described the nature of multicultural competence as aspirational—we never arrive.

The second variant category that emerged involved engaging in advocacy. One scholar argued for a scientist-practitioner-advocacy model of training. She contended that there are untapped opportunities to contribute to social change through advocacy work in consultation, involvement in organizations, and clinical work (e.g., pro bono or low-cost services). Participants who expressed this domain urged the profession to take a stronger social justice stance. As one participant powerfully expressed:

I think it’s pathetic that we’re not doing a better job of putting more of a social justice slant into what we do. . . . Leona Tyler who was one of the giants of our profession in the middle of the 20^th century was also a radical social activist. I mean, there have been so many people along the way that have brought those values into our profession and, you know, we sit around now and . . . do research that’s detached from society . . . and we basically give [our students] skills so that they can set up private practices for rich people. You know, we don’t teach them the most basic things that they need to know in order to actually be in the world and bring psychology into the part of society that could benefit from psychology most. That’s what bothers me. That makes me really sad. It makes me really angry. So, there is a whole entire piece of this that is about attention to training new generations of psychologists that we are not taking seriously . . . And if we’re not doing it in counseling psychology, who the hell else is going to do it?

Evolving Understanding of Roles and Responsibilities of White Multicultural Scholars

One overarching theme that was evident across several domains was an evolving understanding of the roles and responsibilities of White multicultural scholars in the field. Certain reflections remained anchored in those roles highlighted in the initial TCP major contribution (Casas & San Miguel, 1993; Helms, 1993; Mio & Iwamasa, 1993; Parham, 1993; Sue, 1993). For example, earlier discussions focused on how White scholars could contribute to multicultural research. This too, was expressed prominently by our participants when describing their scholarship (Domain 2). Additionally, our participants pointed to their teaching, mentoring, and clinical work as major facets of their identity and experiences as multicultural psychologists. Importantly, they applied a multicultural lens to frame these roles. For example, they pointed to moments when they felt responsible to use their privilege as White scholars to call out instances of racial injustice when serving on academic committees, and infuse coverage of multicultural issues—including discussions of Whiteness—as part of the standard course material that they taught in their courses. In this way, participants framed their roles through a lens that acknowledged their Whiteness and its influence on how they perceived and approached their roles. This aligns with calls from scholars of color for White scholars to be mindful of how their racial identity influences their work in this area (Helms, 1993).

At the same time, participants illuminated more expansive roles and responsibilities as White multicultural psychologists that historically have been given less emphasis. These expanded roles were evident in categories capturing work outside their primary professional role (Domain 3). A number of scholars noted their advocacy in schools or their larger communities, as well as in politics. These expanded roles align with how these scholars envisioned multicultural psychology and social justice as broad, inclusive, and action oriented (Domain 1). Nevertheless, whereas more traditional roles were mentioned with general or typical frequency (Domain 2), more expansive roles were mentioned only with variant frequency (Domain 3), and scholars noted personal and professional barriers to their engagement in these roles.

Understanding Whiteness and its Influence on Scholarship

Scholars of color have underscored the need for White scholars to “look inward” as part of their work in multicultural psychology (Helms, 1993; Sue, 1993). Our findings identified multiple domains in which participants described how they came to understand their White identity and its influence on their scholarship. Most scholars described the origins of their self-reflection and initial understanding of race and interest in multicultural scholarship as beginning in childhood (Domain 4). These reports can be tied to the broader literature on ally identity development, which indicates that early life experiences influence dominant group members’ motivation and commitment to acting as allies (Duhigg, Rostosky, Gray, & Wimsatt, 2010; Roades & Mio, 2000). Still, given that multiculturalism is a major pillar in counseling psychology, it also is critical for researchers to identify how to engage other White scholars who may not have had such experiences in this area of work. Indeed, participants also highlighted critical incidents in their graduate training that led them to enter muticultural psychology (Domain 5).

Growing from their initial awareness and reflection on race and racism in their early development, most scholars expressed a deep and complex current level of understanding of their Whiteness (Domain 6). For example, in line with Helms’ (1993) call for White scholars to recognize how their racial identity development affects their work, the participants pointed to the importance of developing a healthy White identity and acknowledging their White privilege. Of note, scholars did not simply passively acknowledge their White privilege; rather, they used this privilege purposefully to reach out to other White individuals to challenge racial injustice (Domain 7). This particular way of using privilege to dismantle systems of inequity has been highlighted by other scholars and in other studies (e.g., Case, 2012; Kivel, 2011). Several of our participants further adopted an intersectional lens to understand their racial identity as it interacted with their other social or cultural identities (e.g., sexual orientation, gender, and religion; Domain 6). Notably, scholars’ attention to their intersecting identities—whether marginalized (e.g., lesbian) or dominant (e.g., male)—was not done to minimize their racial identity or privilege, but rather to come to a more nuanced understanding of their racial identity as part of their overall sense of self, or as part of perspective-taking when reflecting on their own experiences of discrimination (Domain 4). Intersectionality has received more attention in research with the aim of highlighting the unique needs, strengths, and experiences of individuals with multiple marginalized identities (Lee, Rosen, & Burns, 2013; Meyer, 2010) or combined marginalized and privileged identities (Kleiman, Spanierman, & Smith, 2015). Building on this, our findings underscore the importance of conducting intersectional research to capture the experiences of those with multiple privileged identities. Doing so could be especially helpful to identify best practices for fostering healthy White racial identities among White multicultural psychologists, which many participants recommended (Domain 10), and for encouraging their work as allies.

Balancing Expertise With Humility

Many reflections across the domains captured how scholars used their expertise to speak out as White allies against racial injustice, used their White privilege to deconstruct structural racism, and engaged in various forms of advocacy (e.g., Domains 2, 3, and 7). This was paired with calls for showing humility and earning the trust of their colleagues of color. For instance, many of the participants recognized that they needed to prove to scholars of color their genuine investment in, and commitment to, muticultural psychology (Domain 7). Similarly, some participants felt that they should carefully consider whether or when to take on leadership roles in racial or ethnic minority psychological organizations and APA divisions. A number of scholars recalled humbling experiences during which they recognized their privilege, biases, or prejudices. Some of these experiences occurred during their graduate training (Domain 5), whereas others occurred at later points in their career (Domain 8). This interconnection between expertise and humility in some ways connects with the concept of cultural humility, which emphasizes continual self-reflection and involves the process of building competence while actively working to counter inequality (Hook, Davis, Owen, Worthington, & Utsey, 2013; Tervalon & Murray-García, 1998).

As another example of balancing expertise with humility, our participants reflected heavily on their mentoring role with students of color. Participants described their mentoring style as emphasizing mutuality and reciprocal learning with their mentees. This approach matches earlier calls for White multicultural scholars to be mindful of how they mentor students of color to avoid adopting paternalistic approaches (Casas & San Miguel, 1993; Sue, 1993). In addition to discussing their mentorship of students of color, our participants also addressed the importance of White multicultural psychologists mentoring the next generation of White racial justice allies. Although a large amount of empirical research has been conducted on multicultural counseling competence and associated factors (Tao, Owen, Pace, & Imel, 2015; Worthington, Soth-McNett, & Moreno, 2007), more attention is needed to identify the most effective ways of mentoring White trainees to promote such competence in their research and practice.

Leaning Into, not Avoiding, Challenges and Growth

Scholars noted various challenges that they faced in their work as White multicultural scholars. For example, they noted conflicts that arose when calling out discrimination (Domain 5). Many scholars also referenced that it was necessary to have difficult dialogues with other White scholars and scholars of color and to talk about difficult subjects, as well as to work through conflicts (Domain 8). A major theme in their descriptions of these challenges was their willingness to engage rather than avoid. Although they recalled that these moments were at times painful or humbling, they also underscored that these moments fostered personal and professional growth, led to progress, strengthened their resolve, and prompted deeper relationships with their colleagues. Scholars often pointed to the need for authenticity, struggling together in mutual support, and being able to work through misunderstandings and disagreements. In fact, many of these qualities represent necessary foundations for having productive and positive intergroup dialogues (Dessel & Rogge, 2008; Sorensen, Nagda, Gurin, & Maxwell, 2009). Further, they can be tied back to the original calls in TCP for such collaborations to build trust, mutuality, and understanding (Atkinson, 1993; Casas & San Miguel, 1993; Mio & Iwamasa, 1993; Parham, 1993; Pedersen, 1993; Ponterotto, 1993; Sue, 1993). Given the simultaneous importance and difficulty of these dialogues, one of the main recommendations among participants was for White trainees and psychologists to take risks (Domain 10). Furthermore, they urged the next generation of professionals to establish meaningful cross-racial relationships to grow and to acknowledge the inevitability of making mistakes (Domain 10). Thus, findings highlight the need for research on how counseling psychologists can best facilitate difficult dialogues, and how these can be incorporated into training.

Paired with these challenges were a range of supports and rewards that participants linked to their work (Domain 9). As professional sources of support, scholars pointed to their mentors, other role models in the field, and their affiliation with APA Division 17. Some scholars also spoke of their family as an important support in their work. This could be linked to their work that extended beyond their formal professional role, such as their community activism (Domain 3). As a recommendation connected to these points, scholars emphasized the importance of self-care when engaging in work that could be both professionally and personally challenging (Domain 10). Many scholars pointed to their relationships with students through teaching, research, and mentoring as sources of pride. These scholars referenced the ongoing importance of training future generations who would aspire to engage in multicultural scholarship.

Strengths, Limitations, and Future Directions

Through our interviews with White multicultural scholars, our findings offer a contemporary addition to longstanding formal and informal discussions regarding how White counseling psychologists can actively and responsibly serve as scholars of multicultural psychology. By focusing on White scholars nominated by leading scholars of color, this afforded a rare opportunity to learn from their collective experiences and to gain a deeper understanding of the roles, responsibilities, sources of inspiration, critical incidents, challenges, and rewards that White counseling psychologists may experience as they engage in this area of work. In contrast to the White scholars in the 1990s’ symposium, our sample was diverse along other social identities (e.g., gender and sexual orientation). We also noted differences with regard to religious affiliation and geographic location in the United States. Finally, although some of our findings reaffirmed the points made by scholars in the initial TCP major contribution, other findings captured new ideas that warrant further research and discussion in our field.

We note several limitations to our study. Notwithstanding the benefits of interviewing White scholars nominated by scholars of color, there could be other types of experiences among the broader population of White scholars that we were unable to document. As such, future research should consider the experiences of younger scholars, those who may have reservations about work in this area, and those who do multicultural work in other fields of psychology (e.g., social and community). Similarly, although our sample size was within the recommended range for CQR (Hill, 2012), future research is needed to consider the scope of transferability of our findings across larger samples. Finally, although some of our participants were licensed practitioners, all participants had their primary professional affiliation within academia. Future research should consider whether White multicultural psychologists with affiliations in different settings report other roles and experiences not documented in this study.

These findings carry implications for future research and training. Because our findings point to an evolving understanding of the roles and responsibilities of White multicultural scholars, this suggests the need for a comprehensive conceptual model. For example, the scientist-practitioner model may miss many of the responsibilities and experiences highlighted by our participants as part of their work as multicultural scholars. Indeed, professional training and identity models that are inclusive of social justice advocacy have been proposed (Flores et al., 2014; Goodman et al., 2004; Mallinckrodt, Miles, & Levy, 2014). These models could be beneficial for training White students to develop and utilize a multicultural lens in their professional work. Finally, there is a need for research to develop and evaluate programs and interventions that raise awareness of White privilege, foster a healthy White racial identity, facilitate difficult dialogues, and promote mutual and supportive cross-racial relationships. These are all tied to recommendations made by the scholars in our study and highlighted as critical to their commitment to this work. As members of a dominant and privileged group in society, White counseling psychologists have a responsibility to contribute to scholarship that addresses issues of racial and ethnic diversity and advocates for social justice. Building on the current study, ongoing efforts are needed to ensure that such work continues and is informed by research that highlights best practices for White scholars in counseling psychology and related fields.