Purpose: Although Asian Americans are the only racial group for whom cancer is the leading cause of death, colorectal cancer screening is consistently lower than that of White Americans. Physicians also recommend colorectal cancer screening to Asian Americans at nearly half the rate as White Americans. This study tests a mechanism that may underlie low recommendation rates. I based my hypothesis on a conceptual model that integrates the literature on information processing and decision making with Asian American stereotypes. Methods: I conducted an online study of primary care physicians and measured their cancer screening referral behavior in response to clinical vignettes. I used the existing Asian Attitude Implicit Association Test (IAT) and developed a new Health Attitude IAT to measure implicit attitudes about Asian American foreignness and health advantages, respectively. Explicit attitudes about these constructs were also assessed through self-report. I used binary logistic regression models to evaluate the association of attitudes about Asian Americans foreignness and health advantage with screening recommendation. Results: My sample included 167 physicians (23% response rate). I found strong implicit bias that Asians are foreign (Cohen’s d = 1.09) and strong implicit bias favoring a white health advantage (Cohen’s d = -0.86). There were weaker explicit biases that Asians are foreign (Cohen’s d = 0.62). Explicit beliefs about health advantage favored Asians (Cohen’s d = 0.73). Physician race, age and gender were significant moderators of bias score. .I found no evidence of a race based screening disparity and no association between implicit or explicit bias scores and making a cancer screening recommendation. Conclusions: Foreign and health advantage biases exist among a sample of physicians, but may not influence cancer screening recommendation behavior. Physicians demonstrated both implicitly and explicitly held attitudes that Asian Americans are perpetual foreigners. Physicians also reported explicit beliefs that Asian Americans have health advantages relative to other races. Implicitly, their attitudes indicated that White Americans are a healthier group. Further research should address whether race-based cancer screening disparities persist in real world settings, both in terms of screening completion, and physician recommendation. If disparities still exist, alternate explanatory mechanisms should be identified.

<p>Past theory and research have documented several stereotypes that explain why biases against Asian Americans (AAs) in U.S. organizations can occur, such as the Model Minority Stereotype (MMS) and Perpetual Foreigner Syndrome (PFS). The current project expands on past work by proposing a new perspective of stereotypes driving (mis)treatment of AAs: Mechanistic dehumanization. Specifically, I argue that AAs are seen as more robot-like compared to other racial groups in the U.S., which may explain some of the negative workplace treatments they face. To test this phenomenon, I conducted a set of five pre-registered studies to examine the extent to which AAs tend to be more mechanistically dehumanized than other racial groups in the U.S., and its workplace implications. In a pilot study (N = 1,003), the results revealed that East, South, and Southeast AAs tended to be mechanistically dehumanized and internalized this dehumanization more than other groups. In Study 1 (Study 1a, N= 255; Study 1b, N = 427), a survey and experimental study provided support that AA coworkers are more mechanistically dehumanized than White American coworkers, and this mediated the relationship between coworker race and negative work outcomes (e.g., less perceived leadership potential, more exploitative treatment, and less workplace friendship). In another survey study, Study 2 (N = 473) found that mechanistic dehumanization exhibited incremental validity in predicting negative work outcomes for AAs, above and beyond MMS and PFS. Finally, in Study 3 (N = 477), an all-Asian sample found that AAs’ internalization of mechanistic dehumanization predicted more negative work outcomes (e.g., increased burnout, less workplace friendship), above and beyond MMS and PFS. Altogether, the current work supports a mechanistic dehumanization account of bias against AAs, reveals racial subgroup differences, and provides a novel explanation for why AAs experience certain workplace inequities. </p>