Brief report White Americans’ opposition to affirmative action: Group interest and the harm to beneficiaries objection Laurie T. O’Brien 1 *, Donna Garcia 2 , Christian S. Crandall 3 and Justin Kordys 1 1 Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA 2 California State University San Bernardino, USA 3 University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA We focused on a powerful objection to affirmative action – that affirmative action harms its intended beneficiaries by undermining their self-esteem. We tested whether White Americans would raise the harm to beneficiaries objection particularly when it is in their group interest. When led to believe that affirmative action harmed Whites, participants endorsed the harm to beneficiaries objection more than when led to believe that affirmative action did not harm Whites. Endorsement of a merit-based objection to affirmative action did not differ as a function of the policy’s impact on Whites. White Americans used a concern for the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action in a way that seems to further the interest of their own group. A small but significant number of Black scholars have argued that affirmative action inadvertently harms Blacks and other disadvantaged groups by raising doubts about their abilities and undermining their self-esteem (e.g., Carter, 1991; Sowell, 2004; Steele, 1991). Some White critics of affirmative action have added this argument to a list of objections to affirmative action (Brimelow & Spencer, 1993; Crosby, 2004; Curry, 1996; Federico & Sidanius, 2002; Heilman, Block, & Lucas, 1992; Nacoste, 2006). Are Whites who claim that affirmative action policies harm intended beneficiaries motivated by a genuine concern for the beneficiaries or does this ‘concern’ mask a desire to promote their own group interests? The present study examines Whites’ objections to affirmative action in an American context. *Correspondence should be addressed to Dr Laurie T. O’Brien, Department of Psychology, Tulane University, 2007 Percival Stern Hall, New Orleans, LA 70118, USA (e-mail: lobrien2@tulane.edu). The British Psychological Society 895 British Journal of Social Psychology (2010), 49, 895–903 q 2010 The British Psychological Society www.bpsjournals.co.uk DOI:10.1348/014466610X518062