Society of Indian Psychologists Statement on Retiring Native American Mascots, 1999, 2015

Society of Indian Psychologists Statement on Retiring Native American 
Mascots (Approved 1999, Minor Updates and Revisions, 2015)
We, the undersigned members of the Society of Indian Psychologists, 
write this in support of "retiring" all Indian personalities as the official 
symbols and mascots of universities, colleges or schools, and non-
professional and professional athletic teams. We support doing so because
of a variety of concerns related to the ethical practice of psychology. As a 
professional society of psychologists we operate under these professional 
ethical guidelines.
We are concerned that the continued use of Indian symbols and mascots 
seriously compromises our ability to engage in ethical professional 
practice and service to the campus and community. We believe that it 
establishes an unwelcome academic environment for Indian (students, 
staff, and faculty) and contributes to the miseducation of all members of 
the campus and community regarding the cultural practices and 
traditions of an entire ethnic group. In our view, the use of a historically 
and culturally inaccurate, stereotypic image undermines the educational 
experience of all members of universities and communities. It seems 
especially problematic for those who have had little or no contact with 
Indian people and their cultures.
Stereotypical and historically inaccurate images of Indians in general 
interfere with learning about them by creating, supporting and 
maintaining oversimplified and inaccurate views of indigenous peoples 
and their cultures. When stereotypical representations are taken as 
factual information, they contribute to the development of cultural biases
and prejudices, (clearly a contradiction to the educational mission of the 
University.) In the same vein, we believe that continuation of the use of 
Indians as symbols and mascots is incongruous with the philosophy 
espoused by many Americans as promoting inclusivity and diversity.
We understand that some affiliated with the institutions having a long 
history of use of these symbols may have a special attachment to them. 
We also understand and believe that this attachment may not have been 
formed out of maliciousness or negative intentions. To the extent, 
however, that tradition and/or economic issues are major obstacles to 
change, they should not usurp the principles of a society struggling to put
an end to racism. What once may have been a unifying symbol for the 
various bodies using these symbols has become a source of cross-cultural 
conflict. In light of all of these factors, we strongly support and encourage
the all such entities to develop a new symbol consistent with and 
contributing to the positive realization of national principles (our 
educational mission.)
In support of our concern about the ethically problematic nature of this 
issue for the professional practice of psychology, we cite relevant portions
of the "Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct" 
(American Psychological Association [APA], 2010) and the "Guidelines for 
Providers of Psychological Services to Ethnic, Linguistic and Culturally 
Diverse Populations" (APA, 1992).
APA Code of Ethics:
Principle D: Justice
Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all persons to 
access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal 
quality in the processes, procedures and services being conducted by 
psychologists. Psychologists exercise reasonable judgment and take 
precautions to ensure that their potential biases, the boundaries of their 
competence and the limitations of their expertise do not lead to or 
condone unjust practices.
Principle E: Respect for People's Rights and Dignity
Psychologists respect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights 
of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and self-determination. 
Psychologists are aware that special safeguards may be necessary to 
protect the rights and welfare of persons or communities whose 
vulnerabilities impair autonomous decision making. Psychologists are 
aware of and respect cultural, individual and role differences, including 
those based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, 
national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language and 
socioeconomic status and consider these factors when working with 
members of such groups. Psychologists try to eliminate the effect on their
work of biases based on those factors, and they do not knowingly 
participate in or condone activities of others based upon such prejudices.
In addition, several of the Guidelines for Providers of Psychological 
Services to Ethnic, Linguistic and Culturally Diverse Populations (1992) 
also address our concerns on this issue.
# 5. Psychologists respect client's religious and/or spiritual beliefs and 
values, including attributions and taboos, since they affect world view, 
psychosocial functioning, and expressions of distress. 
a. Part of working in minority communities is to become familiar with 
indigenous beliefs and practices and respect them.
# 7. Psychologists consider the impact of adverse social, environmental 
and political factors in assessing problems and designing interventions.
b. Psychologists work within the cultural setting to improve the welfare of
all persons concerned, if there is a conflict between cultural values and 
human rights.
#8. Psychologists attend to as well as work to eliminate biases, prejudices,
and discriminatory practices.
a. Psychologists acknowledge relevant discriminatory practices at the 
social and community level that may be affecting the psychological 
welfare of the population being served."
We applaud the current efforts across the nation to have this crucial issue
raised and addressed in a responsible and productive way. It is our hope 
this letter contributes to that effort.
Research Update (2015)
More recent research has confirmed the destructive nature of American 
Indian and Alaska Native sports mascots. Mascot exposure can be 
detrimental to self-esteem, community worth, and imagining achievement
among Native students (Fryberg, Markus, Oyserman, & Stone, 2008). 
Exposure to sports mascots also can negatively impact the mood of Native
students when compared to White students at the same institution. The 
differences in responses persisted even when the mascot images were 
judged to be “neutral” rather than “controversial” (LaRocque, McDonald, 
Weatherly, & Ferraro, 2011). Although it has been argued by proponents of
these mascots that the images honor Natives by presenting a positive 
image of the people and culture in mainstream society, the research has 
found that mascot images actually were associated with increased 
negative stereotyping of Natives by Whites (Freng & Willis-Esqueda, 2011).
In addition, mascot exposure for White Americans may make it more 
likely they will stereotype other non-Native minority groups (Kim-Prieto, 
Goldstein, Okazaki, & Kirschner, 2010). It is clear that exposure to 
mascots represents a risk to health and mental health for American 
Indians and Alaska Natives as well as to other non-Whites group members.
References
American Psychological Association (1992). Guidelines for providers of 
psychological services to ethnic, linguistic and culturally diverse 
populations. Retrieved April 6, 2015, from 
http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/policy/provider-guidelines.aspx
American Psychological Association (2010). Ethical principles of 
psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved April 6, 2015, from 
http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
Freng, S., & Willis-Esqueda, C. (2011). A question of honor: Chief wahoo 
and American Indian stereotype activation among a university based
sample. The Journal of Social Psychology, 151(5), 577-591. 
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2010.507265
Fryberg, S. A., Markus, H. R., Oyserman, D., & Stone, J. M. (2008). Of 
warrior chiefs and Indian princesses: The psychological 
consequences of American Indian mascots. Basic and Applied 
Social Psychology, 30(3), 208-218. 
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01973530802375003
Kim-Prieto, C., Goldstein, L. A., Okazaki, S., & Kirschner, B. (2010). Effect
of exposure to an American Indian mascot on the tendency to 
stereotype a different minority group. Journal of Applied Social 
Psychology, 40(3), 534-553. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2010.00586.x
LaRocque, A. R., McDonald, J. D., Weatherly, J. N., & Ferraro, F. R. 
(2011). 
Indian sports nicknames/logos: Affective difference between 
American Indian and non-Indian college students. American Indian 
and Alaska Native Mental Health Research, 18(2), 1-16. doi:http://
dx.doi.org/10.5820/aian.1802.2011.1
Other Resources
American Psychological Association (2002). Guidelines on multicultural 
education, training, research, practice, and organizational change for 
psychologists. 
http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/policy/multicultural-
guidelines.aspx
The American Psychological Association Statement Resolution 
Recommending the Immediate Retirement of American Indian Mascots, 
Symbols, Images, and Personalities by
Schools, Colleges, Universities, Athletic Teams, and Organizations: 
http://www.apa.org/about/policy/mascots.pdf
The American Anthropological Association statement to denounce 
inappropriate American Indian mascots: 
http://www.aaanet.org/issues/press/upload/Sports-Mascot-Resolution-
Release-Final.pdf
The Asian American Psychological Association Statement on American 
Indian Mascots in Sports
http://aapaonline.org/2015/01/30/aapa-statement-on-american-indian-
mascots-in-sports/
The Association of Black Psychologists statement: 
http://www.abpsi.org/pdf/DCfootballpressrelease2014.pdf