African American Adolescent Girls’ Beliefs About Skin Tone and Colorism

Abstract

Colorism is a pervasive system of inequality shown to negatively affect psychosocial and economic outcomes among African American adults. Among African American women and girls in particular, the social and psychological implications of colorist practices can be severe. The present study aimed to better understand African American girls’ understanding of this phenomenon during adolescence. Using a phenomenological approach, interviews and focus groups were conducted with African American girls (N = 30) in order to determine which colorist messages are perceived and potentially internalized as communal beliefs. Iterative coding and subsequent thematic analysis revealed three primary themes and four subthemes: (a) Skin tone and attractiveness (Subthemes: Light skin as beautiful; Dark skin as unattractive), (b) Skin tone and social standing and education level (Subthemes: Dark skin as lower class; Light skin as higher class), and (c) Skin tone and personality/behavioral traits. Findings revealed that African American girls reported contemporary colorism biases similar to those found among African American women, suggesting temporal and generational continuity.

Keywords

skin tone bias Black girls culture colorist beliefs colorism

Skin tone, or more specifically society’s construction of the meaning of and treatment associated with skin tone, has important psychological implications for individuals’ lived experiences (Burton et al., 2010; Norwood, 2014). In 1983, Alice Walker coined the term colorism, also known as skin tone bias (Adams et al., 2016; Norwood, 2014) and racial phenotypicality bias (Maddox & Gray, 2002). Colorism is an interracial (i.e., across groups) and intraracial (i.e., within groups) system of inequality based on skin tone, hair texture, and/or facial features (R. E. Hall, 2010; Wilder, 2010). Though present globally across multiple ethnic groups (Dixon & Telles, 2017), research suggests that colorism within the African American community tends to manifest in two forms: (a) discrimination against persons with typical West-African physical features (i.e., darker skin, wider noses, and thicker lips) and (b) preferential treatment of persons with typical Eurocentric physical features (i.e., lighter skin, narrower noses, and thinner lips; Maddox & Gray, 2002). Affecting both light-skinned and dark-skinned African Americans, colorism spans a broad spectrum of bias (including stereotypes, prejudices, and disparagement; Adams et al., 2016) that is implicitly and explicitly endorsed (Russell-Cole et al., 2013). These manifestations of colorism have also been referred to as colorist practices and/or colorist messages, and the attitudes involving colorism have been referred to as colorist beliefs, colorist perceptions, and/or colorist ideologies (Keith & Monroe, 2016; Maxwell et al., 2016; Wilder & Cain, 2011).

Among African American women and girls, in particular, the social and psychological implications of colorist practices can be severe (J. C. Hall, 2017). For example, in Dark Girls and Light Girls, a two-part documentary series, dark-skinned and light-skinned African American women vividly describe experiencing overt discrimination because of their skin tones (Berry & Duke, 2011; Duke, 2015). Such mistreatment and marginalization not only engendered emotional and psychological trauma, but were especially impactful during adolescence. Similar to other ethnic groups, African American girls can experience negative social and psychological outcomes as a result of colorist practices and perceptions (Blake et al., 2017; Hunter, 2005; Keith & Herring, 1991; Landor et al., 2013; Wilder, 2010). An expanding body of literature has found that colorism can negatively affect psychological well-being (J. C. Hall, 2017), physical health (Monk, 2015), sexual health (Townsend et al., 2010), educational attainment (Allen et al., 2000; Hunter, 2002), incarceration rates, and treatment in the criminal justice system (Blair et al., 2004; Eberhardt et al., 2006).

Although previous studies have explored issues related to colorism among youth (Breland-Noble, 2013a; Hannon et al., 2013), more contemporary studies are needed to better understand how African American girls interpret and experience societal evaluations of skin tone during adolescence. By exploring how adolescent girls perceive their social environments, we gain better insight into the continuity and transmission of colorist beliefs and practices. Thus, the purpose of the current study was to examine, through qualitative inquiry, what colorist messages are relayed to African American girls as communal beliefs. As adolescence lends itself to a developmental period in which attitudes, behaviors, and identities are malleable (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2018), achieving a richer understanding of colorism through the lens of African American girls is an essential step in developing effective educational tools for inoculating youth against colorist ideologies. For clarity, the terms colorism and skin tone bias are used interchangeably.

Sociohistorical Context of Colorism Among African Americans

Broadly speaking, skin tone biases within the African American community were first conceived during the era and sociohistorical context of North American enslavement (Frost, 1990). In this environment, sexual abuse of enslaved African women on the part of White male slave traders and owners occurred; Africans and Europeans first began to intermix in the Americas (Reiss, 1997). This miscegenation gave rise to a multicolored American society of generations of mixed raced people with varied skin tones and facial features (Frazier, 1957).

The offspring of White slave owners, as a result of the “one drop” rule, were still considered to be enslaved individuals. Notwithstanding, the treatment and privileges they received differed significantly from that of enslaved African Americans with darker skin (Frost, 1990). Such separation, in conjunction with disparate treatment, reinforced a hierarchical system in which persons with light skin were treated as superior to dark skin. Thus, laying the foundation for contemporary intragroup conflict and mistrust. For example, even in the 1940s Blacks showed a significant preference for lighter skin individuals (Drake & Cayton, 1945). However, the 1960s ushered in a movement in which “blackness” was a symbol of pride and strength, rather than a source of embarrassment (Hughes & Hertel, 1990; Hunter, 2005). In the decades of the 1990s and 2000s, examinations of skin tone biases indicated that cultural preferences had again returned toward lighter and Eurocentric characteristics (i.e., lighter skin, narrower noses, and thinner lips; Maddox & Gray, 2002; J. C. Hall, 2017).

Contemporary Colorism

Social media has made clear the contemporary relevance of colorism as exemplified in the use of skin tone-related hashtags among young African Americans users. For example, in January 2020, #darkskin was tagged to over 2.2 million Instagram posts and #lightskin was tagged to over 1.1 million posts. Additionally, #teamdarkskin had over 351,000 posts and #teamlightskin had over 363,000 Instagram posts. Although skin tone-related hashtags have been used as preference indicators, which can lead to the denigration of the nonpreferred group, #darkskin and #lightskin have also be tagged to “selfies” as expressions of pride. Nonetheless, their frequent use among African Americans within the new millennium explicitly illustrates the contemporary relevance and perpetuation of colorist dialogues, social evaluations, and preferences. As African American teens (34%) report going online “almost constantly” and at higher rates than Hispanic teens (32%) and White teens (19%; Lenhart, 2015), manifestations of colorism on social media platforms are a serious concern. In fact, recent research has indicated that social media can have negative effects on African American adolescents based on race-related online experiences (Lozada & Tynes, 2017).

Transgenerational Teachings of Colorism

In both lay and academic literature, African American women have recounted familial exclusion as a result of too fair or too dark skin (Coard et al., 2001; Hunter, 2005; Russell et al., 1992). Wilder and Cain (2011) found colorism to exist in varying degrees within Black families. Interviewing 26 African American women between the ages of 18 and 40 years about the influence of family on subscriptions to colorist ideologies, the authors concluded that, through modeling and overt methods of socialization, Black families served as the point of origin for colorist ideologies. Of particular note was the identification of maternal figures (i.e., grandmothers, aunts, and mothers) as the primary disseminators of skin tone biases. Specifically, women learned to “associate negativity with darkness and to equate goodness with lightness” from maternal figures (Wilder & Cain, 2011, p. 586).

Studies of familial influences on colorist ideologies are important for two primary reasons. One, they offer evidence that the family can socialize African American girls to skin tone preferences (Wilder & Cain, 2011). And two, they demonstrate a basic requirement of colorist ideologies: perpetuation. This generational transmission implies that the hierarchical system of skin tone biases can be socially modeled and taught (Coard et al., 2001; Hunter, 2005). To this point, the transgenerational teachings of light skin superiority and dark skin inferiority have been critical to the endurance of colorist practices (J. C. Hall, 2017; Hunter, 2005). How African Americans have perceived and evaluated skin tone in the past has, in multiple respects, carried over into the present, and women and girls seem to be most affected.

The Gendered Effects of Colorism

Intersectional explorations of colorism indicate that skin tone and gender render skin tone bias more pronounced for African American girls/women than boys/men (Hill, 2002; Hunter, 2005; Keith, 2009; Thompson & Keith, 2001). One explanation for this difference is that girls and women are often objectified and subjected to rigid and idealized standards of beauty, including a globalized preference for light skin (Dixon & Telles, 2017; Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). With less imposed standards of beauty, men may not experience the same emotional distress associated with falling short of the favorable complexion (Keith, 2009). For this reason, researchers have coined the term gendered colorism. It is defined as the sociocultural phenomenon by which perceptions of skin tone differentially impact the lives of African American women and girls than African American men and boys (Collins, 2004; Hill, 2002; Hunter, 2005, 2007). For instance, in comparison with African American women with light skin, African American women with dark skin have reported more distressed social and relational dynamics (e.g., bullying and less social capital), lower expectations in family socialization practices (e.g., intrafamilial discrimination), and less favorable socioeconomic factors (e.g., wage discrepancies; Coard et al., 2001; Hagiwara et al., 2013; J. C. Hall, 2017; Hill, 2002). J. C. Hall (2017) found “it is quite common for black women to experience and recognize some form of gendered colorism” (p. 77). After conducting focus groups with 67 African American women, J. C. Hall (2017) also concluded that gendered colorism had a deleterious effect on the psychosocial outcomes of participants.

Prior research (Hunter, 2005; Russell-Cole et al., 2013; Tharps, 2016) has also showed that colorist beliefs can affect the degree to which African American women perceive and appraise their bodies. For example, Bond and Cash (1992) found that African American women idealized lightness, and that among participants who desired a different complexion, being lighter was favored more than being darker. Additionally, most of the women believed Black men found light skin to be more attractive than dark skin. Building on this work, Falconer and Neville (2000) found higher levels of skin tone dissatisfaction to be positively associated with greater body image dissatisfaction among Black college women.

Because global examinations of colorism have revealed unfavorable perceptions of dark skin (Dixon & Telles, 2017), many studies have presumed that dark-skinned women are dissatisfied with their skin tone (J. C. Hall, 2017). However, Coard et al. (2001) presented a contradictory picture when they found skin tone satisfaction was higher among dark-skinned women than light-skinned women. More recently, Maxwell et al. (2014) found skin tone was not associated with skin tone satisfaction. Hagiwara et al. (2013) have also highlighted the variability of colorism experiences. Their findings revealed that being on either end of the color spectrum (i.e., being very light or very dark) can have equally negative consequences, as very light skin individuals can endure intraracial exclusion. Such differences in findings underscore the complexity of skin tone issues.

According to extant research, skin tone biases can impinge upon important social interactions within the African American community—interactions that can undermine identity development as well as positive behavioral health outcomes. Notwithstanding, it is difficult to determine if the skin tone-related messages that drove the aforementioned outcomes among adults (e.g., Coard et al., 2001; Hagiwara et al., 2013; J. C. Hall, 2017) are consistent with or divergent from those being relayed to African American adolescent girls. Has the content of colorist messages shifted in recent decades, or are the same stereotypes ubiquitously endorsed? Moreover, how are African American girls negotiating this historical cultural phenomenon? In addressing these lines of inquiry, specifically through an investigation of the unique perceptions and experiences of impressionable African American girls, the current study sought to better gauge the continuity and/or evolution of colorist messages.

Why African American Girls?

Understanding transmission and potential internalization of colorist messages among African American girls is important as research and anecdotal accounts have linked experiences with colorism to several adverse social, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes. These include low self-worth (Golden, 2004; Wilder & Cain, 2011), negative self-perceptions (Golden, 2004; Wilder, 2010), substance abuse (Wallace et al., 2011), and body modification via skin bleaching (Glenn, 2008). Existing studies have provided support for the influence of gendered colorism on girls’ experiences and outcomes (Breland-Noble, 2013b). For example, Stephens and Few (2007) delineated eight scripts with which African American women identify—the Diva, Gold Digger, Freak, Dyke, Gangster Bitch, Sister Savior, Earth Mother, and Baby Mama. Although personality traits have primarily defined these scripts, they have also been assumed to possess a certain skin tone (Stephens & Few, 2007). For example, African American women who are considered “Divas” are considered highly confident, demand to be worshipped, and are pretty in the mainstream sense—long hair, a slender build, and light to medium skin tone (Stephens & Few, 2007). On the opposite end of the spectrum is the Earth Mother script, which is described as a woman in tune with her ethnicity; thus, their skin tone is expected to vary. When asked to reveal their opinions of the scripts, young African American boys and girls reported the Diva to be the preferred mate of males and the Earth Mother, more often associated with dark skin, to be less preferred and unattractive to males (Stephens & Few, 2007).

Other research has provided evidence of gendered colorism. African American girls with lighter skin reported receiving higher quality parenting than girls with darker skin (Landor et al., 2013). In addition, in a nationally representative sample of adolescents, dark skin African American girls were twice as likely to be suspended from school than White girls. The latter finding was particularly noteworthy, as there was no difference in suspensions for light skin African American and White girls (Blake et al., 2017). Using the same representative sample, Ryabov (2013) found that dark skin African American girls, compared with light skin African American girls, experienced lower odds of going to college and lower odds of getting a full-time job, suggesting colorism may affect both education and labor market debuts. As this small body of literature highlights, colorism can have ill effects on African American girls’ social and psychological outcomes. Nonetheless, additional research, specifically from a qualitative perspective, is needed to achieve a deeper understanding of how African American girls perceive colorist messages.

Theoretical Framework

Tenets from two theories, including social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) and intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989), are particularly helpful for conceptualizing how African American girls receive, transmit, understand, and internalize colorist messages. First, social cognitive theory, (Bandura, 1986) posits that individuals acquire knowledge that is internalized into their working schema about a particular topic by observing other individuals and interacting with external media influences within the context of social interactions and experiences. Thus, it is conceivable that the external environment (e.g., caregivers, peers, and media) provides messages to youth about skin tone that are internalized into their schema and its associated meaning for an African American boy or girl. These notions are examined in the present study with regard to African American girls.

Additionally, considering the gendered nature of colorism and in focusing on African American girls’ internalized beliefs regarding skin tone, it is useful to employ an intersectional approach. Intersectionality theory provides scholars with a comprehensive analytical approach for conceptualizing and interrogating the interconnectedness of socially constructed identities as they concurrently form the lived experiences of individuals and groups. Crenshaw (1989) specifically emphasized that among Black women, intersectionality is greater than the sum of race (or racism) alone and sex (or sexism) alone. Instead it captures the intertwined lived experiences and ideas that collectively comprise the holistic self. In other words, conceptualizing lived experiences via discrete categories of identities, such as gender or race, fails to capture the singular multidimensional lived experience of an individual who is shaped by intersecting systems of inequity and experiences of oppression.

Thus, applying these theoretical frameworks in the present study, we asked African American girls about their perceptions of skin tone for African American dark skin girls and boys and African American light skin girls and boys, to better understand their intersectional internalized ideas about skin tone biases. We used indirect questioning to assess what girls believed others thought about light and dark skin Black boys and girls in order to depersonalize the response structure in interviews. The goal was to reduce response bias and the subjective influence of individualized factors. This strategy of indirect questioning is recommended for adolescents, as it facilitates discussions of sensitive and potentially stigmatizing subject matters, under which colorism falls (Borgers et al., 2003; de Leeuw, 2011).

Current Study

To date, limited research has examined dissemination of colorist messages among African American girls (Conrad et al., 2009; Russell-Cole et al., 2013; Stephens & Few, 2007). Although we understand skin tone perceptions can influence how girls feel about themselves, more systematic and qualitative explorations in this area are needed, particularly among youth. The purpose of this article was to fill this void in the literature. As part of a larger qualitative study that explored perceptions of colorism among African American girls, this study specifically focused on the skin tone-related messages transmitted to African American girls. As noted, guided by social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) and intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989), we examined the degree to which such colorist messages are understood and evaluated. Furthermore, we used a phenomenological approach, which focuses on exploring commonalities in lived experiences of phenomena (Padgett, 2009). This type of inquiry allows researchers to explore and describe participant experiences and related context in an effort to arrive at a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under study (Padgett, 2009).

Method

Participants

Nine semistructured individual interviews and five semistructured focus groups were conducted with 30 African American adolescent girls between the ages of 12 to 16 years (M = 13.3, SD = 1.2) in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Thirty percentage (n = 9) of the participants were 12 years old, approximately 37% (n = 11) of participants were 13 years old, 20% (n = 6) were 14 years old, approximately 7% (n = 2) were 15 years old, and around 7% (n = 2) were 16 years old. This age group was chosen because this developmental period is when identity becomes more salient and integrated (Belgrave, 2009). Moreover, we chose to focus on girls because research indicates colorism is more pronounced for girls and women (Hill, 2002; Hunter, 2005; Keith, 2009; Thompson & Keith, 2001).

Protocol of Focus Groups and Interviews

Questions related to this study’s goal (e.g., what colorist messages do girls receive?) included the following: (a) What do people think about light skin Black girls? (b) What do people think about dark skin Black girls? (c) What do people think about light skin Black boys? and (d) What do people think about dark skin Black boys? Each question was neutral in tone, and points of clarification and prompts were used to better understand participant responses. In cases where participants seemed to confuse racism with colorism, definitions and examples of colorism were provided to ensure participants understood the meaning of the questions.

Scientific Rigor

To strengthen the rigor of the study, Burrell and Morgan’s (1979) recommended methods were employed: (a) an interview script was used, (b) the questions and interviewer were as objective and nonintrusive as possible, (c) the questions were based on a priori theory, and (d) the interviewer, an African American young adult woman, was similar to participants (i.e., gender and race). Additionally, the rigor of the study was enhanced via use of two types of qualitative data (e.g., individual interviews and focus groups). Using both data collection strategies can improve the quality and depth of inquiry, provide richer data, and assist researchers with garnering a fuller understanding of phenomenon under study (Lambert & Loiselle, 2008). In addition, the authors of this study (3 African American women and 1 Latinx woman) engaged in reflective conversations related to the phenomena under exploration so as to critically examine and challenge biases and assumptions prior to and during the writing of this article.

Procedure

The university’s institutional review board approved this study. Data were collected in 2013. Participants were recruited from community-based organizations that serve or work with African American girls (e.g., Boys and Girls Clubs). Visits were made to each community organization to distribute flyers and consent and assent forms. Liaisons, who worked with girls at each organization and/or who were responsible for programming, were asked to inform girls about the study, to distribute flyers and forms, and to refer girls to the researcher for questions. Communication with liaisons via e-mails, telephone calls, and in-person visits was ongoing until a sufficient number of participants were recruited. Flyers included information about topics to be discussed, compensation, and investigator contact information. After obtaining consent from parents and assent from girls, interviews and focus groups were held at various community organization’s sites.

If individuals were interested, they were given a flyer and consent form for their parents/guardians to sign and return to the liaison. When four or more girls at a given location expressed interest and returned consent and assent forms, the researcher scheduled a focus group. Interviews were scheduled when three or fewer girls at a given location expressed interest. Girls received $10 cash and a small gift bag of personal care items for participating. Light refreshments were also provided.

All focus groups and interviews were recorded and conducted in private rooms or areas. On arrival, the purpose of the study was explained and participants were asked if they had questions prior to preceding. They then completed a demographic data form with questions about age, grade, and affiliated organizations. An African American adult woman in her mid-20s, conducted all interviews and focus groups. A trained note taker, also an African American young adult woman, was present for each focus group and interview.

At the beginning of each focus group and interview, the importance of confidentiality was stressed and girls were asked to choose a pseudonym to protect their identities. Each group collaboratively established ground rules (e.g., “wait your turn to speak,” and “do not make fun of other girls’ responses”). After ensuring an understanding of group rules, the focus group/interview began. If at any point a participant broke a ground rule (e.g., interpreted a speaker or used a name other than a pseudonym), the facilitators would stop the discussion and remind the group to return to ground rules that they agreed on. Focus groups lasted between 35 and 50 minutes and interviews lasted between 15 and 25 minutes.

Primary Data Analysis

The interviewer and trained research assistants conducted preliminary analyses and a systematic review of the data at the end of each data collection session. This process included the following: (a) reviewing audio recordings, (b) identifying and comparing emerging themes, and (c) documenting potential changes to questions and/or a need for further exploration. Through this process, we were able to make comparisons across data, develop additional questions for alternative lines of inquiry, and recognize when saturation had been reached. According to Charmaz (2006), “categories are ‘saturated’ when gathering fresh data no longer sparks new theoretical insights” (p. 113). After the ninth session, no new information about skin tone perceptions emerged and saturation was reached. At this point, all data were transcribed.

Transcribing

African American women researchers and research assistants ranging in age from 19 to 26 years transcribed, coded, and analyzed the data. The four trained research assistants, were undergraduate students, three who self-identified as Brown and one who identified as light skinned. They transcribed audio recordings of focus group and interview data using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) guidelines. All transcriptions underwent a verification process. After transcription, a different research assistant verified the accuracy of the transcription. Changes were made if discrepancies existed. Finally, the primary researcher, self-identified as dark Brown skinned, listened to and reviewed all transcriptions for accuracy. Once data were transcribed, data were uploaded into ATLAS.ti, a qualitative data analysis software program.

Coding

Once uploaded into ATLAS.ti, transcribed data were carefully coded using line-by-line coding and a coding paradigm. The primary researcher initiated the process with “open coding,” which is an examination of the text for salient and supported categories of information (Charmaz, 2006). Examples of open codes for this study include “light skin,” “dark skin,” “pretty,” “attractive,” “ghetto,” and “loud.” The next phase, “selective coding,” involved classifying prior codes under broader conceptual categories. During this step, the primary investigator worked with a colleague (self-identified as a Brown skinned African American woman) who assisted in the data collection process as a note taker, to revisit, collapse, and exclude codes based on similarity (e.g., “light skin women are attractive,” “dark skin girls and boys are ghetto and poor”). From this process, several new categories emerged through either elimination and/or mergers. At the final stage of “theoretical or axial coding,” the primary investigator and colleague determined how each category was related to one another and the overarching themes.

Results

Results of thematic analyses revealed three themes and four subthemes related to skin tone-related messages: (a) Skin tone and attractiveness (Subthemes: Light skin as beautiful; Dark skin as unattractive); (b) Skin tone and social standing and education level (Subthemes: Dark skin as lower class; Light skin as higher class); and (c) Skin tone and personality/behavioral traits.

Theme A: Skin Tone and Attractiveness

The most consistent theme observed across all focus groups and interviews was the belief that lighter skin people were more beautiful. Among these girls, there was a clear dichotomized perception that light skin equated to prettiness and handsomeness and conversely, dark skin paralleled ugliness and defectiveness.

Subtheme 1: Light skin is beautiful

Through their observations of others, many participants (n = 23; 76%) held the belief that light skin girls and boys were viewed as attractive, flawless, and/or perfectly beautiful. Responding to the question of what people say about light skin girls, one participant stated, “They look at skin color and say the light skin girls are prettier than the dark skin girls.” This sentiment, which was expressed across several other focus groups, was also laden with fascination. “[People are] like ‘Oh she has a beautiful skin color. She’s so flawless” (15-year old, speaking in general about light skin girls). “Most people love light-skinned people. It’s like they love them, they’re so fascinated” (13-year old). Sarcastically, one participant answered the question with a dramatic performance, [Acting as if she is overwhelmed] “‘Oh SHE’S SO PRETTY! Oh my Gosh! Oh my GOSH! She is soooo pretty!’” (12-year old). With rivaling exaggeration, one participant screamed, “‘OMG, they are the prettiest people on EARTH!!’” (13-year old). Such demonstrations from both participants alluded to the frequency with which they each encountered messages that light skin was superior as well as their annoyance with the social appraisals. The belief that lighter skin was perceived more attractive also extended to males. When asked why people preferred light skin guys, one participant reasoned, “Cause they might be perfect” (14-year old), and another proclaimed, “ummm . . . they’re always cuter” (14-year old).

Subtheme 2: Dark skin is unattractive

Participants were adamant that light skin was perceived as more attractive and held an equally strong stance that dark skin was unappealing. This subtheme was mentioned by 20 (67%) of the 30 participants. When participants were asked what people say about dark-skinned Black girls, there were comparable responses across participants. “That they are ugly” (15-year old). “ . . . that they’re unattractive” (13-year old). As one 16-year old put it, “I guess being dark, you got a lot of flaws.” Voicing her frustrations with these assessments, one girl stated, “I just don’t get it. How like light girls, everyone likes them. They adore them. When it comes to dark skin girls, everybody is just like ‘YUCK! EWW!’” (12-year old). In a similar tone, another participant shared a story of someone claiming she was too dark skinned to see at night, an account, she stated, “will stick with me for life” (15-year old).

Although many skin tone-related messages about the unattractiveness of darker complexion largely pertained to girls and women, the evaluation of dark skin as unappealing transcended gender, in that dark skin boys were also described as inferior in terms of attractiveness. When asked why some girls do not like dark-skinned guys, one participant responded, “They probably just think they aren’t cute . . .” (13-year old). Extreme gradations of dark skin were especially undesirable. As one 16-year-old participant put it, “[If you are] very very Black, like dark skin, like very very Black, you ain’t cute.” According to varied participants, being situated on the far end of the color continuum renders one socially undesirable. “Well, I don’t prefer light skin, but as long as you not ‘Black, Black’ like charcoal . . . long as you not ugly” (14-year old).

A few participants (n = 7; 23%) categorized darker skin girls/boys as “pretty or cute.” These individuals were either viewed as anomalies or subtyped, as to exclude them from the general perception that darker skin was unattractive. For example, often times for a darker skin girl or woman to be qualified as pretty, she had to have either pretty hair, nice teeth, or “know how to dress.” “Uh, she can be like dark skin, with curly natural hair, like with pretty teeth” (12-year old). Additionally, swag (i.e., coolness and/or sexiness) was identified as a trait that could potentially override the unattractiveness normally associated with dark skin. “If they’re dark skinned with swag, then they’re a keeper” (13-year old). Overall, dark skin boys or girls that can “dress” or possess “nice or good hair” were considered attractive, but ordinarily their skin color trumped all other attributes. “As long as you wear decent clothes then you’re ok” (15-year old). “But . . .” one participant retorted, “ . . . if a Black or a dark skinned guy wore the same exact thing as the light skinned guy, they would prefer the light skinned guy more just because he’s light skinned” (13-year old).

Theme B: Skin Tone and Social Standing and Education Level

Subtheme 1: Dark skin as lower class

One of the primary messages revealed was that skin tone denoted social standing and education, highlighted by 18 (60%) participants. The question, “What messages do you hear about dark skin girls and boys,” solicited responses from nearly every girl in one focus group. Participants clamored to be the first to respond. “They Ghetto!!” one yelled. “They think they from the hood,” another chimed in. Similar sentiments were expressed during separate interviews. According to a 12-year old, “[Dark skin girls] are ghetto . . . they think they’re ‘bout that life’ . . . that they can handle anything and everything. [People] think all dark girls are from the hood.” A 13-year old also perceived skin tone to be a determinant of one’s social class. “It just seem like people . . . think that more dark skin people, like Black people in particular, is more ghetto cause by the way they raised and stuff.”

Overall, there was consensus among focus group and interview participants that there is a socially held belief that dark skin is synonymous with lower class, “ghetto,” and/or “hood” living. Hood is a term that was used synonymously with “ghetto.” In fact, according to some of the participants, darker skin girls can only shop at discounted stores, such as “Beauty World and the Dollar Store” and dark skin people are, as a collective, considered “ignorant.” As a 13-year old stated, “[People] think Black people are more uneducated than light-skinned [people].” One participant commented, “ . . . I think everybody, well not everybody, but a majority of people always think that White people are smarter than Black people. So the lighter they are, the more intelligence they would have” (14-year old).

As the quotes above illustrate, girls appeared to receive messages that skin tone can socially and economically categorize African Americans. The power of skin tone to be an agent of social mobility was most acute when we asked participants to describe their perceptions of light skin African Americans.

Subtheme 2: Light skin as high class

Across all focus groups and interviews, participants (n = 22; 73%) shared their perceptions that lighter skin African Americans belonged to the upper class and had socioeconomic mobility. As one participant stated, “Light [skin people are] from the suburbs. [That] makes you wealthy, rich” (12-year old). In explaining light skin and dark skin boys’ and girls’ differential experiences in school, a 16-year old participant bolstered the previous assumption, stating, “[People] be like wealthy light-skinned people . . . live in a White neighborhood and they go to the White school.” When one participant was asked where she thought light skin guys grew up, she replied, “around . . . like typical places. Like neighborhoods where it’s like kids always play with each other and don’t play with guns and stuff like that” (13-year old). When the same question was posed, a 15-year-old participant echoed the same: “[They live in] nice places . . . well at least [they] look nice.”

Based on our analyses, African American girls appeared to receive the message that light skin individuals resided in nice neighborhoods and operated at a higher socioeconomic level. This message, which appeared to be received alongside the negative perception that dark skin equated to lower class, can be viewed as a subset or extension of the overall belief that light skin was a social asset. For one participant, the privilege of lighter skin individuals was notable: “You see [light skin girls] like Beyoncé and Halle Berry and that stuff . . . They always like . . . They go on shopping sprees like they get to spend their money wasting it on nothing.” Discussion of such differential experiences and treatment prompted some participants to highlight thoughts of unfairness and inequality, especially among those that believed lighter skin people are cognizant of their social advantages. “You know they think they can get everyone because they are light skinned” (13-year old). When we asked the girls what they believed we should do with the information, one replied, “tell [people] that every girl should get equal chances like light-skinned girls.”

Theme C: Skin Tone and Personality/Behavioral Traits

Another theme that emerged regarding skin tone-related messages was about the perception that differential personality and behavioral traits existed across complexion. This theme was mentioned by 19 (63%) participants. Although some participants mentioned that lighter skin people can be more friendly, outgoing, and potential leaders, the most salient message that the girls had about the personalities of lighter skin boys and girls was that they were conceited or had a bad attitude. This response occurred across seven out of the nine interviews and one of the focus groups. This perception of conceit was often in reference to their looks or the belief that they felt they were better. In one focus group, all six participants commented on this belief, “They think they the stuff,” one participant yelled. “They just think they’re better,” commented another (14-year old). Referencing redbones, a term used synonymously with light skin people (Maxwell et al., 2016; Spellers & Moffitt, 2010), one participant stated, “A redbone think they hot,” to which another commented, “Redbones think they ‘bout that.”

The notion that persons with lighter skin perceived themselves to be better was sometimes personally endorsed. “Like a lot of people think light skin people are conceited. This is true because I look in the mirror way too much on an everyday basis . . . Light skin people they stuck on themselves for a long time” (16-year old). Relatedly, “Me personally, I think they act kind of . . . kind of you know, antisocial-able, and you know, they think they can get everyone because they are light skinned” (14-year old). In a separate interview, one participant stated, “Light skin people may think they all that because they think they have a better . . . what’s the word? A better chance with going out with people because they light skin.”

As alluded to earlier, messages related to the personality and behavioral traits of darker skin boys and girls primarily surrounded the notion of being “ghetto” or ill behaved. Mentioned across five interviews and two focus groups, participants revealed that darker skin individuals possessed “ghetto” characteristics, such as being loud, defiant, and ill-behaved. A 12-year old shared that she hears “dark-skinned [boys] always have to put on a show” which “makes it seem like they’re bad.” When asked to describe the behavior and personalities of both dark skin boys and girls, a 14-year-old participant shared that “they’re full of violence and rage” and “bad and racial.” In varied instances, there appeared to be the general message that dark skin boys and girls displayed less eloquent speech patterns. “[Dark girls] are ghetto. They’re loud” (12-year old). A 14-year old put forth a similar claim, in that dark skin girls communicated in a way that was “ghetto.”

Taken together, there was evidence across the focus groups and interviews that participants received skin tone-related messages about the personality and behavioral traits of dark skin and light skin individuals. Although light skin individuals were considered conceited, darker skin individuals were viewed as acting “ghetto” or “hood,” in that they speak boisterously and or engage in deviant behavior.

Discussion

The current study relied on the voices of African American girls to explore the skin tone-related messages they receive. Data from focus groups and interviews revealed three themes related to the content of skin tone-related messages: (a) Skin tone denotes attractiveness, (b) Skin tone denotes social standing and education level, and (c) Skin tone is associated with personality/behavioral traits. Guided by social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), we anticipated that girls’ ideas about skin tone would be derived from others (e.g., family, peers, media, and institutions). Though not the focus of the current study, previous research suggests that colorist messages and stereotypes may be internalized through messages from others and popular media (Maxwell et al., 2016). Overall, our findings also suggest that, consistent with intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989) and previous work (Breland-Noble, 2013b), girls’ colorist messages about skin tone were gendered, such that skin tone was associated with constructs such as male preferences, self-objectification, standards of beauty, and attractiveness of African American girls, as discussed in more detail below.

Content of Skin Tone-Related Messages

Physical attributes

Overall, the most consistent message received regarding lighter skin individuals was that skin tone, along with eye color, and soft, nonkinky hair texture, render them more physically attractive. This description was in opposition to the messages noted about darker skin individuals, which depicted them as ugly, unattractive, and less appealing because of their skin tone. Such findings support previous literature on skin tone-related stigmas and attractiveness and demonstrate the continuity of this stereotype (J. C. Hall, 2017; Hunter, 2005; Russell et al., 1992; Wade, 2008; Watson et al., 2010). Hill (2002), using data from the National Survey of Black Americans, found that interviewers rated lighter skin women as more physically attractive than darker skin women. The perceptions of darker skin as physically unattractive and lighter skin as physically appealing are hallmark manifestations of colorism in multiple contexts, not just in the United States (J. C. Hall, 2017). However, in this study, the stereotypical beliefs regarding the attractiveness of skin tone were not specific to girls alone. Dark skin boys were also seen as unappealing.

Additionally, participants found individuals on the far end of the color continuum to be publicly regarded as extremely unappealing. However, this disdain was primarily the case when the individual was too dark, not when they were too light. In the current study, although some dark skin individuals were considered to be beautiful, these individuals were also subtyped, meaning they were recategorized utilizing some physical quality that would allow for their perceived deviation from the norm (Kunda & Oleson, 1995). For example, dark skin boys with swag and dark skin girls with “good” hair were considered attractive in spite of their skin tone. However, without these qualifying attributes, participants were clear that dark skin would, under normal circumstances, classify these individuals as physically inferior.

Given the gendered nature of skin-tone biases observed in previous research (J. C. Hall, 2017) and under the lens of intersectionality, we expected less skin-tone bias to be expressed for dark-tone adolescent boys than girls. This view was not the case in this study as girls expressed bias for both groups. However, the girls gave substantially more comments on skin tone and physical attributes of girls/women in comparison with boys/men. There were also substantially more comments on skin tone and class for girls than boys. It is likely that questions about skin tone among girls were more salient and personally relevant resulting in more in-depth references and discussion. Also, girls in this sample were in early adolescence (e.g., most were 12 and 13 years old) and perhaps had limited experience in relationships, resulting in similar attributions for boys as for girls.

Social standing

Many participants believed lighter skin individuals reside in affluent, high-class neighborhoods and darker skin individuals live in the “ghetto” or lower class communities. These beliefs are substantiated with research indicating that social status have been found to differ based on skin tone (Hunter, 2005; Russell-Cole et al., 2013; Wilder & Cain, 2011). Recalling the historical backdrop of colorism in the United States, some lighter skin enslaved individuals had better work conditions than darker skin enslaved persons (R. E. Hall, 2010). These differences during enslavement laid the foundation for the social elevation and social capital of lighter skin African Americans today (Harvey et al., 2005; Keith, 2009). During and after enslavement, darker skin persons were more often marginalized and unable to benefit from certain vocational and educational opportunities, subsequently finding it more difficult to enter into the middle class (Adams et al., 2016; Keith & Herring, 1991). The fact that centuries later, African American girls still associate skin tone with social standing speaks volumes about the transgenerational teachings and continuation of skin tone-related messages.

Personality and behavioral characteristics

Another theme identified in the content of skin tone-related messages was personality and behavioral traits. Similar to the women and girls in previous studies (Hunter, 2005; Townsend et al., 2010; Wilder & Cain, 2011), participants in the present study expressed the idea that people believe lighter skin boys and girls are more conceited and arrogant, which they perceived to be a result of their preferential treatment and adoration. Evidenced in the demeanor with which the girls spoke, their beliefs regarding the putative “superiority complex” of lighter girls served as substantial sources of frustration. Darker skin girls, on the other hand, were considered to be hood, loud, and obnoxious. According to Harrell (1999), African Americans have internalized the dichotomized belief that light is representative of good and Black is representative of evil. Based on Harrell’s (1999) work, viewing the world through this “Manichean” lens renders biased interpretations of social beings and contexts, such that individuals who more closely approximate Black are classified as immoral or negative, in comparison with those who are lighter who are categorized as good and virtuous. Harrell’s (1999) work on Manichean is similar to the work of Eberhardt et al. (2004), which has shown an implicit negative association between being African American and violence and criminality.

Implications of Internalizing Skin Tone-Related Messages

There are several potential negative implications for holding stereotypical beliefs about an individual’s behavior and personality (Hunter, 2007, 2008; Keith & Monroe, 2016; Townsend et al., 2010). In particular, research on behavioral confirmation suggests that a perceiver’s perceptions and actions may shape subsequent social interactions in ways that cause the behavior of the target to confirm the perceiver’s beliefs (Snyder & Swann, 1978). Accordingly, if girls hold perceptions that light skin girls are arrogant and snobby, and dark skin girls are loud and obnoxious, they may respond to dark skin girls with more hostility and/or light skin girls with more disdain, and elicit corresponding behavior. Erroneous and stereotypical beliefs about a group may cause a perceived target to experience feelings of ostracism, marginalization, and unworthiness, especially if these beliefs are expressed (Thompson & Keith, 2001). Among African American girls, internalized stereotypical beliefs and associated negative emotions may also result in negative mental health outcomes associated with social bullying (J. C. Hall, 2017) and or body modification (Glenn, 2008).

Bullying

Social bullying and teasing are possible consequences of colorist practices (J. C. Hall, 2017) that several participants believed were implications of skin tone-related messages in our study. Specifically, girls revealed that individuals who are especially dark disproportionately face ridicule and condemnation from their classmates or on the internet via Facebook or Twitter. Participants also linked this teasing to confrontations. Such treatment has significant mental health implications. As suicide rates continue to rise among teens, it is important to consider skin tone as a source of bullying. Adolescents who are victims of bullying can suffer from depression, suicidal attempts and ideation, and poor self-esteem (Klomek et al., 2007; Swearer et al., 2001). Experiences with bullying can also lead to poor academic performances and truancy (Rothon et al., 2011). To date few studies on bullying have examined the influence of skin tone. However, as Golden (2004), Wilder and Cain (2011), the women in Dark Girls, and our participants suggest: the ostracism, marginalization, and mockery darker skin individuals endure as a consequence of their skin color warrants consideration in the bullying research.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

Despite the strengths in the current study, there are limitations to acknowledge that highlight future research directions. First, although the aim of the current study was to garner in-depth information regarding African American girls’ understanding of messages related to skin tone, we acknowledge that skin tone is only one aspect of individuals’ person-specific factors and social identities that play a role in social evaluations. For instance, because theory and prior work suggest that colorism may be more pronounced for African American girls/women (e.g., Hunter, 2007), we did not include boys in the present study. However, some of the messages that emerged from girls, particularly regarding skin tone and physical attributes, suggest that this may also be a problem for boys.

In addition, we did not inquire about other person-specific factors (e.g., body size, hair texture, or other phenotypic characteristics) or individuals’ social identities (e.g., sexual orientation) that may have shaped participants’ thoughts, opinions, and experiences related to colorism. Furthermore, girls may not be equipped to objectively self-identify their skin tones. Without these categories, examinations across different groups (i.e., light skin, medium skin, and dark skin) were not possible. As such, future qualitative research should focus on person-specific factors and identities to test whether similar or unique messages emerge (e.g., among African American African American adolescents of varying sexual orientations, gender, class, and/or national identities). Disentangling individuals’ unique and nuanced experiences may have implications for tailoring programming to prevent the negative impacts of colorism.

Another limitation concerns coding. Charmaz (2006) recommends that ideally researchers should analyze and code data prior to the end of data collection in order to revise questions that can be implemented into future focus groups. In the current study, we conducted preliminary analyses at the end of the first few sessions but did not code the data until all focus groups were conducted. Thus, although our approach of clarifying prompts and questions allowed for comparisons across data and throughout the data collection process, we acknowledge that this process may not have been as rigorous as Charmaz’s (2006) recommends, and that future research following these recommendations is warranted.

In addition, although findings revealed that African American girls in the present study experienced commonalities in the content of the messages that they have about skin tone, our findings did not specifically identify if these messages were individually internalized. Thus, future research should examine the degree to which girls personally subscribe to colorist messages. This future research may occur via quantitative methods. Measuring the degree to which girls personally internalize colorist messages could allow researchers and practitioners to garner a more comprehensive understanding of the effects of colorism. It would also be useful in identifying appropriate opportunities at which to intervene to mitigate the potential psychological and social harm. Finally, although we used an in-depth qualitative approach to elucidate the content of the colorist messages held by African American girls, we did not assess the effect of these messages on the girls. Examining the impact of colorism on the mental health and health behaviors of African American girls is an important next step for future research.

Conclusion

In conclusion, colorism is a long-standing system of inequality that can result in poor mental health, negative socioeconomic consequences, and decreased opportunities for social inclusion (Allen et al., 2000; Blair et al., 2004; Blake et al., 2017; Eberhardt et al., 2006; J. C. Hall, 2017; Hunter, 2002, 2005; Keith & Herring, 1991; Landor et al., 2013; Monk, 2015; Townsend et al., 2010; Wilder, 2010). In the current study, our findings support previous literature on colorism (Coard et al., 2001; J. C. Hall, 2017; Hunter, 2005; Wilder & Cain, 2011), in that African American girls perceive colorist stereotypes of the past as communally held beliefs today, suggesting temporal and generational continuity. This qualitative inquiry furthers our understanding African American girl’s beliefs about skin tone and adds to the literature a perspective that has been largely missing. Results of this study may be useful to researchers and practitioners who seek to better understand, prevent, and/or confront colorist beliefs and their perpetuation. The findings also support the need for greater awareness of the significance of addressing colorism within the field of Black psychology. As our findings demonstrate, future research is needed to systematically investigate colorism among adolescents and address the phenomenon as well as its associated negative outcomes via education and intervention.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Jasmine A. Abrams

Faye Z. Belgrave

Chelsea D. Williams

Morgan L. Maxwell

References

Adams

E. A.

Kurtz-Costes

B. E.

Hoffman

A. J.

(2016, June). Skin tone bias among African Americans: Antecedents and consequences across the life span. Developmental Review, 40(June), 93-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.03.002

Allen

Telles

Hunter

(2000). Skin color, income, and education: A comparison of African Americans and Mexican Americans. National Journal of Sociology, 12(1), 129-180.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.

Belgrave

F. Z.

(2009). African American girls: Reframing perceptions and changing experiences. Springer.

Berry

D. C.

Duke

. (Directors). (2011). Dark girls [Film]. One Village.

Blair

I. V.

Judd

C. M.

Chapleau

K. M.

(2004). The influence of Afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing. Psychological Science, 15(10), 674-679. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00739.x

Blake

J. J.

Keith

V. M.

Luo

Salter

(2017). The role of colorism in explaining African American females’ suspension risk. School Psychology Quarterly, 32(1), 118-130. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000173

Bond

Cash

T. F.

(1992). Black beauty: Skin color and body images among African American college women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(11), 874-888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00930.x

Borgers

Hox

Sikkel

(2003). Response quality in survey research with children and adolescents: The effect of labeled response options and vague quantifiers. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 15(1), 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/15.1.83

10.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

11.

Breland-Noble

A. M.

(2013a). The impact of skin color on mental and behavioral health in African American and Latina adolescent girls: A review of the literature. In Hall

R. E.

(Ed.), The melanin millennium: Skin color as 21st century international discourse (pp. 219-229). Springer Science + Business Media.

12.

Breland-Noble

A. M.

(2013b). African American youth mental health: Individual, environmental and clinical factors in context. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 22(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-012-9693-y

13.

Burrell

Morgan

(1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. Ashgate.

14.

Burton

L. M.

Bonilla-Silva

Ray

Buckelew

Freeman

E. H.

(2010). Critical race theories, colorism, and the decade’s research on families of color. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 440-459. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00712.x

15.

Charmaz

. (2006). Contructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.

16.

Coard

S. I.

Breland

Raskin

(2001). Perceptions of and preferences for skin color, Black racial identity, and self-esteem among African Americans. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(11), 2256-2274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb00174.x

17.

Collins

P. H

. (2004). Black sexual politics: African Americans, gender, and the new racism. Routledge.

18.

Conrad

Dixon

Zhang

(2009). Controversial rap themes, gender portrayals and skin tone distortion: A content analysis of rap music videos. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(1), 134-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150802643795

19.

Crenshaw

(1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1(8), 139-167. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8/

20.

de Leeuw

. (2011). Improving data quality when surveying children and adolescents: Cognitive and social developmental and its role in questionnaire construction and pretesting. Report prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Finland: Research Programs Public Health Challenges and Health and Welfare of Children and Young People, Finland.

21.

Dixon

A. R.

Telles

E. E.

(2017). Skin color and colorism: Global research, concepts, and measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 43(1), 405-424. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-12060116-053315

22.

Drake

Cayton

(1945). Black metropolis. Harcourt Brace.

23.

Duke

. (Director). (2015). Light girls [Film]. RLJ Entertainment.

24.

Eberhardt

J. L.

Davies

P. G.

Purdie-Vaughns

V. J.

Johnson

S. L.

(2006). Looking deathworthy: Perceived stereotypicality of Black defendants predicts capital-sentencing outcomes. Psychological Science, 17(5), 383-386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01716.x

25.

Eberhardt

J. L.

Goff

P. A.

Purdie

V. J.

Davies

P. G.

(2004). Seeing Black: Race, crime, and visual processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 876-893. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.876

26.

Falconer

J. W.

Neville

H. A.

(2000). African American college women’s body image: An examination of body mass, African self-consciousness, and skin color satisfaction. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24(3), 236-243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-2464022000.tb00205.x

27.

Frazier

(1957). Black bourgeoise: The rise of the new middle class. Free Press.

28.

Fredrickson

B. L.

Roberts

T. A.

(1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173-206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x

29.

Frost

(1990). Fair women, dark men: The forgotten roots of colour prejudice. History of European Ideas, 12(5), 669-679. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-6599(90)90178-H

30.

Glenn

E. N.

(2008). Yearning for lightness: Transnational circuits in the marketing and consumption of skin lighteners. Gender & Society, 22(3), 281-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243208316089

31.

Golden

(2004). Don’t play in the sun: One woman’s journey through the color complex. Doubleday.

32.

Hagiwara

Penner

L. A.

Gonzalez

Albrecht

T. L.

(2013). Within-group health disparities among Blacks: The effects of Afrocentric features and unfair treatment. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19(4), 477-480. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032566

33.

Hall

J. C.

(2017). No longer invisible: Understanding the psychosocial impact of skin color stratification in the lives of African American women. Health & Social Work, 42(2), 71-78. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hlx001

34.

Hall

R. E.

(2010). A historical analysis of skin color discrimination in America: Victimism among victim group populations. Springer-Verlag.

35.

Hannon

DeFina

Bruch

(2013). The relationship between skin tone and school suspension for African Americans. Race and Social Problems, 5(4), 281-295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-013-9104-z

36.

Harrell

C. J. P.

(1999). Manichean psychology: Racism and the minds of people of African descent. Howard University Press.

37.

Harvey

LaBeach

Pridgen

Gocial

(2005). The intragroup stigmatization of skin tone among Black Americans. Journal of Black Psychology, 31(3), 237-253 https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798405278192

38.

Hill

S. A.

(2002). Teaching and doing gender in African American families. Sex Roles, 47(11-12), 493-506. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022026303937

39.

Hughes

Hertel

B. R.

(1990). The significance of color remains: A study of life chances, mate selection, and ethnic consciousness among Black Americans. Social Forces, 68(4), 1105-1120. https://doi.org/10.2307/2579136

40.

Hunter

M. L.

(2002). “If you’re light you’re alright”: Light skin color as social capital for women of color. Gender & Society, 16(2), 175-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912430222104895

41.

Hunter

M. L.

(2005). Race, gender, and the politics of skin tone. Routledge.

42.

Hunter

M. L.

(2007). The persistent problem of colorism: Skin tone, status, and inequality. Sociology Compass, 1(1), 237-254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00006.x

43.

Hunter

M. L.

(2008). The cost of color: What we pay for being black and brown. In Hall

R. E.

(Ed.), Racism in the 21st century (pp. 63-76). Springer.

44.

Keith

V. M.

(2009). A colorstruck world: Skin tone, achievement, and self-esteem among African American women. In Glenn

E. N.

(Ed.), Shades of difference: Why skin color matters (pp. 25-40). Stanford University Press.

45.

Keith

V. M.

Herring

(1991). Skin tone and stratification in the Black community. American Journal of Sociology, 9(3), 760-778. https://doi.org/10.1086/229819

46.

Keith

V. M.

Monroe

C. R.

(2016). Histories of colorism and implications for education. Theory Into Practice, 55(1), 4-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1116847

47.

Klomek

A. B.

Marrocco

Kleinman

Schonfeld

I. S.

Gould

M. S

. (2007). Bullying, depression, and suicidality in adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 46(1), 40-49.

48.

Kunda

Oleson

K. C.

(1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 565-579. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.565

49.

Lambert

S. D.

Loiselle

C. G.

(2008). Combining individual interviews and focus groups to enhance data richness. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(2), 228-237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04559.x

50.

Landor

A. M.

Simons

L. G.

Simons

R. L.

Brody

G. H.

Bryant

C. M.

Gibbons

F. X.

Melby

J. N.

(2013). Exploring the impact of skin tone on family dynamics and race-related outcomes. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(5), 817-826. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033883

51.

Lenhart

(2015, April 9). Teens, social media and technology overview 2015: Smartphones facilitate shifts in communication landscape for teens. Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/

52.

Lozada

F. T.

Tynes

B. M.

(2017, September). Longitudinal effects of online experiences on empathy among African American adolescents. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 52(September), 181-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2017.07.009

53.

Maddox

K. B.

Gray

S. A.

(2002). Cognitive representations of Black Americans: Re exploring the role of skin tone. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(2), 250-259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202282010

54.

Maxwell

M. L.

Abrams

J. A.

Belgrave

F. Z.

(2016). Red bones and earth mothers: The influence of rap music on African American girls’ perceptions of skin color. Psychology of Music, 44(6), 1488-1499. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735616643175

55.

Maxwell

M. L.

Brevard

Abrams

Belgrave

(2014). What’s color got to do with it? Skin color, skin color satisfaction, racial identity, and internalized racism among African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 41(5), 438-461. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798414542299

56.

Monk

E. P.

(2015). The cost of color: Skin color, discrimination, and health among African Americans. American Journal of Sociology, 121(2), 396-444. https://doi.org/10.1086/682162

57.

Norwood

K. J.

(2014). Color matters: Skin tone bias and the myth of a post-racial America. Routledge.

58.

Padgett

D. K.

(2009). Qualitative and mixed methods in social work knowledge development. Social Work, 54(2), 101-105. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/54.2.101

59.

Reiss

(1997). African Americans in colonial America. McFarland.

60.

Rothon

Head

Klineberg

Stansfeld

(2011). Can social support protect bullied adolescents from adverse outcomes? A prospective study on the effects of bullying on the educational achievement and mental health of adolescents at secondary schools in East London. Journal of Adolescence, 34(3), 579-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.02.007

61.

Russell-Cole

Wilson

Hall

R. E.

(2013). The color complex: The politics of skin color in a new millennium. Anchor Books.

62.

Russell

Wilson

Hall

R. E.

(1992). The color complex: The politics of skin color among African Americans. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

63.

Ryabov

(2013). Colorism and school-to-work and school-to-college transitions of African American adolescents. Race and Social Problems, 5(1), 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-012-9081-7

64.

Snyder

Swann

W. B.

(1978). Hypothesis-testing processes in social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(11), 1202-1212. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.11.1202

65.

Spellers

R. E.

Moffitt

K. R.

(2010). Blackberries and redbones: Critical articulations of Black hair/body politics in Africana communities. Hampton Press.

66.

Stephens

Few

(2007). The effects of images of African American women in hip hop on early adolescents’ attitudes toward physical attractiveness and interpersonal relationships. Sex Roles, 56(3/4), 251-564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9145-5

67.

Swearer

S. M.

Song

S. Y.

Cary

P. T.

Eagle

J. W.

Mickelson

W. T

. (2001). Psychosocial correlates in bullying and victimization: The relationship between depression, anxiety, and bully/victim status. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2(2-3), 95-121. https://doi.org/10.1300/J135v02n02_07

68.

Tharps

(2016). The difference between racism and colorism. http://time.com/4512430/colorism-in-america/

69.

Thompson

M. S.

Keith

V. M.

(2001). The blacker the berry: Gender, skin tone, self-esteem, and self-efficacy. Gender & Society, 15(3), 336-357. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124301015003002

70.

Townsend

T. G.

Neilands

T. B.

Thomas

A. J.

Jackson

T. R.

(2010). I’m no Jezebel; I am young, gifted, and Black: Identity, sexuality, and Black girls. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34(3), 273-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01574.x

71.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Kornienko

Douglass

B. S.

Updegraff

K. A.

(2018). A universal intervention program increases ethnic-racial identity exploration and resolution to predict adolescent psychosocial functioning one year later. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0766-5

72.

Wade

T. J.

(2008). Skin color biases: Attractiveness and halo effects in the evaluation of African Americans. In Hall

R. E.

(Ed.), Racism in the 21st century: An empirical analysis of skin color. (pp. 135-150). Springer.

73.

Wallace

S. A.

Townsend

T. G.

Glasgow

Y. M.

Ojie

M. J.

(2011). Gold diggers, video vixens, and jezebels: Stereotype images and substance use among urban African American girls. Journal of Women’s Health, 20(9), 1315-1324. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2010.2223

74.

Watson

Thornton

C. G.

Engelland

B. T.

(2010). Skin color shades in advertising to ethnic audiences: The case of African Americans. Journal of Marketing Communications, 16(4), 185-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527260802707585

75.

Wilder

(2010). Revisiting “color names and color notions”: A contemporary examination of the language and attitudes of skin color among young Black women. Journal of Black Studies, 41(1), 184-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934709337986

76.

Wilder

Cain

(2011). Teaching and learning color consciousness in Black families: Exploring family processes and women’s experiences with colorism. Journal of Family Issues, 32(5), 577-604. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X10390858