The Color of Sin

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-color-of-sin

It is a well known fact that most people associate white with purity
and black with sin. Two scientists in Virginia, Gary Sherman and Gerald
Clore, wanted to explore this concept and see if the association went
below metaphors and stemmed from an ancient fear of dirt and contagion
rooted in the human neurons. To do this they adapted the Stroop test,
which was made in the 1930's, but has become a popular internet pastime
for some. The test involves several words of differentiating colors. For
example: one might read pink, but in white script. The idea is to
identify the COLOR of the text as quickly as possible. The task becomes
difficult, because our mind wants to automatically think of the word we
read instead of the actual shade. Hesitation is seen as conflict within
the mind and a heightened inability to break the brain's association
between the word and the color it says as opposed to the physical
properties of the letters. The scientists modified the test, by using
words that had moral overtones: such as greed and honesty. The words
would flash in either black and white on a screen. Fast reaction time
was seen as evidence that the relationship was seen automaticly and
natural within the subject's brain. Any hesitation was seen as a forced
connection; therefore in the participants mind they would not normally
associate the word with that specific color. The scientists' experiments
proved their hypothesis: reaction time was considerably faster when the
moral words were white and the immoral words were black, rather than
when virtue was black and sin was white. To test the colors connections
between purity and dirt as well as right and wrong the scientists'
re-administered the test. Except this time some participants were asked
to read a book about a greedy, corrupt lawyer before the test in order
to put them in the mood for immoral thoughts. These participants'
results would then be compared to those geared towards more ethical
thinking. The idea was that those primed for immoral thoughts would
score faster in connecting black with immorality. Again, the hypothesis
rang true. They also associated black with not only misbehavior such as
crime and cheating, but with being a self-centered, irresponsible
slacker. One last time they retested individuals, this time those who
were obsessed with cleanliness. Again, these individuals scored higher
reaction times, but only if they preferred cleaning products having to
do with personal hygiene as opposed to object cleanser such as Lysol.
The article sums up by saying that, despite their lack of separate
racial testing, that this may provide answers as to why prejudice
exists.
I do not think this article affects humanity that much, since most of
us are already aware of the color associations in our brains. What would
have been interesting is if they did racial separate testing to see
whether dark skinned people thought differently than white skinned.
Then, if the results remained constant they could conclude that the
association might have to do with an instinctual fear of darkness as it
alludes to insecurity, whereas in light one is safe to view other
predators or possible foodstuffs.
I think that this article was written too early, as the studies are
obviously still in an early phase if they wish to eventually conclude
that all people think white is better. I also think it is very rash for
the writer/scientists to assume that people associate white with fair
skinned people and black with dark skinned. There is a great difference
between the two and skin comes in many shades so it is unfair to make
conclusions about prejudice based on the evidence they collected so far.
However, the article itself was well written, starting with classic
examples of the relationship of white and purity in our media: westerns
where the good cowboys all where white hats, the idea of pristine
new-fallen snow. I also found his usage of links to related articles
extremely helpful in my understanding.