LAUSR

Abstract Do White voters evaluate minority candidates differently by the racial context of an election? This paper addresses this question by measuring the effects of racial contexts on candidate evaluation. Drawing upon two prominent theories of interracial relations – racial priming and racial triangulation theories -, I argue that White voters change their assessments on candidates depending on the racial context of an election, and the contextual effects occur only in select areas of candidate evaluation. I support this argument by setting up a unique survey experiment that places an Asian American candidate in racially varying electoral contexts and conclude two major findings: First, racial context takes effect in assessing candidates’ issue competence but not their personal traits. Second, Whites evaluate Asian candidates’ issue competence based on the racialized nature of a give issue.