Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Katharine M.Conn If serving in a national service program can cul- catalyzes beliefs that systemic injustices are more to tivate an understanding of the perspectives of the blame for the positions of disadvantaged Americans disadvantaged communities they work in,then it than their positions being a natural consequence of may reduce prejudice as well.Indeed.scholars have the individuals'own decisions and merit.In addition. shown that knowledge gains,increased perspective- participation lessens prejudice toward disadvantaged taking,and empathy for the out-group are central to populations and increases amity toward these groups. reducing prejudice(Pettigrew and Tropp 2008).3 As The effects we find are both substantively large and such,a durable "real-world"intervention in which durable.These findings provide insight on the impact the advantaged segment of the population gains the of national service programs,which is significant perspective of the disadvantaged should also reduce given the amount of public and private investments prejudice toward the poor,and the racial and ethnic made in creating and maintaining such programs both minorities who are disproportionately poor.This is domestically and globally.More broadly,these results significant given that social scientists know very little have implications for understanding the impact of about specific policies and programs that have the intergroup contact on perceptions of social justice in capacity to decrease prejudice.A recent meta-analyses American society and prejudice reduction. of research on prejudice reduction found a paucity of internally valid research;only 11 percent of prejudice reduction studies test the causal effects of real-world interventions (Paluck and Green 2009;Paluck 2016; DIVISIONS BY CLASS AND COLOR Paluck,Green,and Green 2018). Income inequality has increased in the United States Studying the effects of national service programs since the 1970s(Keeley 2015;Saez 2013),and the pro- and the intergroup contact that is at the core of these portion of Americans believing that the United States programs,however,has been elusive due to problems is stratified into groups of "haves"and "have nots" of selection bias.When an individual participates in a has grown in concert(Newport 2015).With wealth and 4号元 national service organization.does that individual al- power increasingly concentrated among those in the ready see the perspectives of the"have nots"?Or does top income brackets,scholars have noted a develop- participation in a service experience alter perceptions ment of two Americas,with the rich and poor lacking of social justice?Our study overcomes this selection common experiences.Worse.those who reside in the bias problem.Teach For America(TFA)is a prominent more privileged America do not even realize a differ- national service organization that focuses on inequal- ent America exists for others,which may perpetuate ity.It recruits top college graduates and integrates them inequality (Putnam 2015).At a minimum,the "haves" into low-income communities for two years.Crucially, and "have nots"perceive the world differently.Re- TFA began in 2007 to implement a selection process search into the antecedents of beliefs about poverty that lends itself to a quasi-experimental regression has found that persons of higher socioeconomic status discontinuity design (RDD).Having a threshold point to the ostensible fairness of the economic,social. admission score allows us to compare the attitudes and and political system,emphasizing the centrality of hard belief systems of applicants who fell just short of the work to achieve their privileged positions.In contrast, acceptance threshold score (and were not accepted low-income Americans increasingly doubt the veracity S5.501g to TFA)against those who fell just past the threshold of the American dream in which prosperity and success score (and were accepted into the program)to make can be acquired through hard work alone(Kreidl 2000: causal claims.We collect responses from over 32,000 Kluegel and Smith 1986;Newman,Johnston,and Lown TFA applicants across nine cohorts of applicants 2015) between 2007 and 2015 in an original survey,and A similar divide about the fairness of the status quo combine this data with over 120,000 TFA applicant and the opportunity gap exists along racial lines.White files with admissions scores.The scope of the data Americans view the economic system as notably more and the nature of the program being studied provides just than black Americans (Newport 2015;Sigelman us with novel leverage over a research question of and Welch 2009)and Hispanic Americans(Hunt 1996) enduring interest that has proven difficult to answer. Kinder and Sanders (1996)found a similar racial cleav- Our results suggest that service in TFA has had a age relative to the role of government in providing strong impact on participants'attitudes and beliefs assistance to African Americans to remedy structural that reflect greater empathy and perspective-taking racial inequality.Although minority groups recognize toward disadvantaged communities.Relative to non- that individualistic factors like hard work are key,they participants,participants are more likely to believe are more inclined than white Americans to believe that that the economic,social,and political status quo in the such factors are not enough in light of an unfair sys- United States is unfair.Ceteris paribus,participation tem.In contrast,the average white American feels no such structural remedies are necessary,instead tending to blame victims of poverty and their perceived defi- L Perspective-taking and empathy are similar concepts,and there is ciencies (Lipset 1996;Ryan 1971).The same is true of evidence that each can give rise to the other;however,they are dis- the criminal justice system.Most white Americans be- tinct concepts.Empathy is an emotional response that involves "feel- ing for"another.Perspective-taking is more cognitive and involves lieve that the criminal justice system is fundamentally imagining another's point of view (Vorauer and Quesnel 2015).Here, fair,while most African Americans do not (Hurwitz we do not make this nuanced distinction. and Peffley 2005).Perceptions of the criminal justice 722Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Katharine M. Conn If serving in a national service program can cul￾tivate an understanding of the perspectives of the disadvantaged communities they work in, then it may reduce prejudice as well. Indeed, scholars have shown that knowledge gains, increased perspective￾taking, and empathy for the out-group are central to reducing prejudice (Pettigrew and Tropp 2008).3 As such, a durable “real-world” intervention in which the advantaged segment of the population gains the perspective of the disadvantaged should also reduce prejudice toward the poor, and the racial and ethnic minorities who are disproportionately poor. This is significant given that social scientists know very little about specific policies and programs that have the capacity to decrease prejudice. A recent meta-analyses of research on prejudice reduction found a paucity of internally valid research; only 11 percent of prejudice reduction studies test the causal effects of real-world interventions (Paluck and Green 2009; Paluck 2016; Paluck, Green, and Green 2018). Studying the effects of national service programs and the intergroup contact that is at the core of these programs, however, has been elusive due to problems of selection bias. When an individual participates in a national service organization, does that individual al￾ready see the perspectives of the “have nots”? Or does participation in a service experience alter perceptions of social justice? Our study overcomes this selection bias problem.Teach For America (TFA) is a prominent national service organization that focuses on inequal￾ity. It recruits top college graduates and integrates them into low-income communities for two years. Crucially, TFA began in 2007 to implement a selection process that lends itself to a quasi-experimental regression discontinuity design (RDD). Having a threshold admission score allows us to compare the attitudes and belief systems of applicants who fell just short of the acceptance threshold score (and were not accepted to TFA) against those who fell just past the threshold score (and were accepted into the program) to make causal claims. We collect responses from over 32,000 TFA applicants across nine cohorts of applicants between 2007 and 2015 in an original survey, and combine this data with over 120,000 TFA applicant files with admissions scores. The scope of the data and the nature of the program being studied provides us with novel leverage over a research question of enduring interest that has proven difficult to answer. Our results suggest that service in TFA has had a strong impact on participants’ attitudes and beliefs that reflect greater empathy and perspective-taking toward disadvantaged communities. Relative to non￾participants, participants are more likely to believe that the economic, social, and political status quo in the United States is unfair. Ceteris paribus, participation 3 Perspective-taking and empathy are similar concepts, and there is evidence that each can give rise to the other; however, they are dis￾tinct concepts. Empathy is an emotional response that involves “feel￾ing for” another. Perspective-taking is more cognitive and involves imagining another’s point of view (Vorauer and Quesnel 2015).Here, we do not make this nuanced distinction. catalyzes beliefs that systemic injustices are more to blame for the positions of disadvantaged Americans than their positions being a natural consequence of the individuals’ own decisions and merit. In addition, participation lessens prejudice toward disadvantaged populations and increases amity toward these groups. The effects we find are both substantively large and durable. These findings provide insight on the impact of national service programs, which is significant given the amount of public and private investments made in creating and maintaining such programs both domestically and globally. More broadly, these results have implications for understanding the impact of intergroup contact on perceptions of social justice in American society and prejudice reduction. DIVISIONS BY CLASS AND COLOR Income inequality has increased in the United States since the 1970s (Keeley 2015; Saez 2013), and the pro￾portion of Americans believing that the United States is stratified into groups of “haves” and “have nots” has grown in concert (Newport 2015).With wealth and power increasingly concentrated among those in the top income brackets, scholars have noted a develop￾ment of two Americas, with the rich and poor lacking common experiences. Worse, those who reside in the more privileged America do not even realize a differ￾ent America exists for others, which may perpetuate inequality (Putnam 2015). At a minimum, the “haves” and “have nots” perceive the world differently. Re￾search into the antecedents of beliefs about poverty has found that persons of higher socioeconomic status point to the ostensible fairness of the economic, social, and political system, emphasizing the centrality of hard work to achieve their privileged positions. In contrast, low-income Americans increasingly doubt the veracity of the American dream in which prosperity and success can be acquired through hard work alone (Kreidl 2000; Kluegel and Smith 1986; Newman, Johnston, and Lown 2015). A similar divide about the fairness of the status quo and the opportunity gap exists along racial lines.White Americans view the economic system as notably more just than black Americans (Newport 2015; Sigelman and Welch 2009) and Hispanic Americans (Hunt 1996). Kinder and Sanders (1996) found a similar racial cleav￾age relative to the role of government in providing assistance to African Americans to remedy structural racial inequality. Although minority groups recognize that individualistic factors like hard work are key, they are more inclined than white Americans to believe that such factors are not enough in light of an unfair sys￾tem. In contrast, the average white American feels no such structural remedies are necessary, instead tending to blame victims of poverty and their perceived defi￾ciencies (Lipset 1996; Ryan 1971). The same is true of the criminal justice system. Most white Americans be￾lieve that the criminal justice system is fundamentally fair, while most African Americans do not (Hurwitz and Peffley 2005). Perceptions of the criminal justice 722 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Shanghai JiaoTong University, on 26 Oct 2018 at 03:53:05, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000412