Notes on : Zare, M., Dasgupta, A., Williams, M. ( 2025). Examining environmental racial micro-aggressions on a university campus. Academia Mental Health and Wellbeing, 2. https://doi.org/10.20935/MHealthWellB7958 Dave Harris This is a visual content analysis of spatial imagery on a predominantly white campus. Students took photographs and provided narratives. Four main themes emerged — '(1) tokenism and visual differentiation; (2) selective visibility and stereotyping; (3) lack of belonging and empowerment; and (4) white saviourism' (1). These are environmental micro of you should is and they are pervasive and when you analyse them it helps reflect on the practices to develop a culture of belonging, more deeply than 'superficial impression management'. It is difficult to create a welcoming and validating environment although this essential to university success. Exclusionary messages may be unintentionally conveyed and these can be 'subtle yet harmful'. The data about diversity reveal an 'illusion of inclusion'. Racial hate crimes persist [some examples] and there have been threatening notes posted targeting vulnerable students. 'Such incidents reveal deep-seated issues of racial exclusion and hostility that persist', and this is supported by research. There are also 'racist epithets, racially discriminatory parties, and the rise of university presidents publicly apologising for such racially charged instances' [a weird 'influential' study is published, apparently analysing presidents' statements on racial incidents]. Terms are laid out in  table and they include 'racism — systemic or individual beliefs, behaviours and practices that discriminate against people based on race, privileging some racial groups over others… Micro-aggressions — behaviours or actions, rooted in negative stereotypes about people of colour, that subtly communicate messages of inferiority and exclusion' (2) [pretty naïve and assertive, and probably circular]. White spaces still disseminate these messages about the manifestation of whiteness and 'dominant cultural hegemonic practices'. Administrators sometimes hesitate to call these racist and fail to address them. They prefer coded language instead [including using euphemisms such as isolating or unfriendly]. Universities also 'engage in impression management to attract diverse applicants'. College campuses are potentially able to question and analyse racism, although suitable 'cross – racial relations' among students are more difficult. Exposure to varied opinions and diversity can encourage critical thinking and constructive resolution, and often requires more 'effortful information processing'. These practices can 'signal safety and trust to students of colour'. However racial diversity itself is not enough and can even create negative outcomes, such as a '"false fairness" effect' [an appearance of diversity] or a delegitimisation of claims of discrimination. This leads to new forms of racism and racial micro-aggression — these include harassment by campus police. This leaves the negative effects, and increasing feeling of stigmatisation, higher dropout, psychiatric symptoms [still black students alone?]. A '"sense of belonging"' is important and academic institutions must try to create 'structural, spatial and visual representation' that communicate this, to make spaces welcoming. We can assess institutional spaces and examine their messages, through things like their buildings and facilities. Environmental micro-aggressions can exist, therefore 'at a systemic level' [rather than an interpersonal one]. Examples include naming buildings after controversial figures such as Confederate leaders or colonisers, or displaying their images. A worse experience can result for black students leading to negative perceptions of campus in general. Instead, they 'must perceive their environment as accepting of their uniqueness' [either ambiguous or utopian]. The price of admission must not include a necessary sacrifice of self. Spatial imagery has been relatively neglected. It can 'subtly communicate messages of exclusion', as this investigation shows [so they choose the images?]. Although one of the researchers was a black female, two others are doctoral candidates in experimental psychology. One is a Middle Eastern WOC looking at how race culture and gender produce mental health outcomes. They decided to analyse data in the US although they are Canadian, benefiting from being both insiders and outsiders. They used visual content analysis of everyday artefacts as part of their course. They recruited seven graduate students into groups and this article focuses on one group with three students, two white women and one black. They engaged reflexively with their surroundings and then participated in 'group dialogue and thematic coding' to identify patterns. Including two white women means they could benefit from reflexive insiders [the course they were on made them reflexive]. If they could perceive messages, so could black students [!], And this helped defeat the view that it is black sensitivity that is responsible. Overall they developed a 'multifaceted understanding' [all three of them]. They started with a seminar on racial and cultural identities and how cultural understandings can lead to mental illnesses. They were then invited to scan every day campus spaces for two weeks, in pairs. [Leading to the absurd claim that they 'deductive resort cultural artefacts within the University that messaged or caused students of colour to feel welcome or unwelcome, speaking to their sense of belonging']. The material they study during the seminar also informed the analysis [I bet]. The black collaborator drew more lived experience, and the white ones focused on photographs which they then described: representations of the photographs were used in the research, and in the article, to meet ethical requirements. Photos taken in an academic hallway reveal nine portraits of previous deans, but only the current one is a woman and person of colour. She has a different frame and appears to be lit differently, in a less 'vibrant and emphasised' manner, which 'intentionally/unintentionally convey a subtle message about … [Her]… perceived importance or status' (3) [there is a representation of this photograph which indeed shows a different frame and different background for the current Dean]. New construction was underway at the time of recreational activities. These were intended to promote access. The construction sites are surrounded with fences covered with posters of students engaging in recreational activities, as advertisements. However, there is a 'racial disparity, portraying a disproportionately high number of white students', and often only partial images of black students. The students of colour who are depicted are 'stereotypical and segregated' [it is impossible to see this from the representation]. Website photographs of computer simulations of the recreation centre, but 'of the 25 people in the picture only to appear to be POC, although their race is difficult to discern'. One black person is running past the centre rather than 'making use of the actual building'. There are no WOC. Photographs of the programme for working abroad were also studied. Those from Africa so white students and faculty taking the trips, and suggest that 'all students involved in the team are white'. They are displayed in a well used area (4). Analysis of these images combined researcher notes and student reflections [exactly how I wonder] with a particular focus on whether students of colour would see the campuses welcoming. Student collaborators written descriptions were then compared with researcher observations and these were synthesised to identify patterns of consistent exclusionary or racist content 'across both sets of accounts' [we can predict a high level of agreement, of course]. Collaboratively coding then ensued 'using a critical race and sense – of – belonging lens' [a reference to a general work on analysing visual images, which I do not know]. Themes were then arranged according to frequency and prominence and whether they fitted the most pervasive observations' There were four themes that emerged [as in the abstract at the start]. Tokenism refers to a feeling of being present as a token, sometimes having to represent the token identity. Institutions can use this to look progressive and to conceal the way structural factors work. 'For this reason, recent studies have categorised tokenism as a form of micro-aggression'. Tokenism and visual distinction was prevalent with most of the images — the photos of the Dean illustrate whiteness and male dominance over the leadership functions before, and reminds the viewer of the predominant leadership of white men. In that sense the photographs 'further serve as a visual reminder of American white hegemonic values dominating higher education'. The Dean, by contrast appears as a token (5). This will signal that access to senior leadership is still limited for POC. The isolation of the first black woman Dean 'can subtly convey how difficult it is to women and people of colour to obtain such positions'. This is not a move towards in inclusivity but rather a comment on the 'rarity and exceptionality' of the current Dean's position. The poster advertising recreational activities similarly 'seems to be stereotypical, tokenistic, and superficial as it does not show [people] in meaningful roles' [disdain for leisure here of course]. Tokenism also appears on the website photographs because only one student of colour is depicted as using the new recreational centre, which 'reinforces the message that students of colour are present merely for appearances rather than being recognised as integral members of the campus community' [contradictory surely — black people don't want to be seen more often in superficial roles? The last message is also problematic — how would you depict integral members of the campus community?]. A table on page 6 expands these descriptive remarks and identifies themes. As expected, the photo of trips abroad indicates white saviourism and stereotyping, eg one photo shows three white students from the University meeting black community members in Ethiopia. Stereotyping and selective visibility is also detectable in promotional materials [we get a bit repetitive here, although we note in addition that black faces 'are either not visible at all or are obscured'. One black female is 'depicted positioned as a passive observer rather than an active participant… Standing and watching'. This is an example of particularly 'symbolic rather than substantive'representations and it sends messages of who belongs and how people in the past were excluded. Generally, white students are the 'prototypical representative[s] of the college community' [are they also the numerical majority?]. The participation of students of colour 'is less important' and this is 'very harmful as it extends racist narratives of POC as less capable or less deserving'. A general exclusion of racialised students signals the opportunities are reserved for the privileged few and this contributes to a 'broader institutional culture' that marginalises students of colour. This can also 'have a significant negative impact on their self-esteem and sense of belonging… [They]… Feel invisible and unimportant' [we know this?] (7). Exclusion of POC in leadership and in student communities is a 'central message' and student collaborators saw these this discriminatory and having a direct impact [with a substantial quote from one student, mostly running over what we've heard already]. This can therefore 'suggest some viewers a lack of visible commitment to enhancing diversity and inclusion on campus' (7). Images like those of the work programme 'can be interpreted as subtly reflecting whiteness in the framing of academic opportunities' [no doubt, but did many students actually interpret them in this way?]. Exclusion in photographs may lead to self exclusion from facilities, and this can restrict opportunities for integration and development [even in the low status leisure activities, it seems]. White saviourism is identified in a repetitive manner — helpers are white, those being served are POC. This is paternalistic, implying that POC have been less fortunate, which denies the agency and perpetuates white superiority. This 'discourse of incapability' implies that help is needed from outside. 'These depictions are repeated over and over, which perpetuates paradigms of power between the colonies and diminishes or fails to see the available alternatives and knowledge at the local level'. In this way it 'maintains the cycle of dependency and inequality' [as before, I don't recognise any of the supporting references which seem to be psychological ones]. Overall they are confident that spatial imagery communicates themes of exclusion and that this is perceived, at least by student collaborators, 'as conveying micro-aggressive or exclusionary messages'. This is in line with earlier research and shows that mere diversification, increasing the numbers of marginal groups is not enough to create a culture of inclusion [what the hell would be? Campuses are internally divided by ability, status and subject rivalry]. University administrators must be aware of the importance of visual messages, and realise that spaces are not neutral. They must take proactive steps to promote inclusivity 'through concrete behavioural changes' as a previous study also found. They have to engage in 'behavioural intentions'. One solution might be to create a 'common superordinate identity' such as all being members of the same university (8). Greater involvement of POC in extracurricular activities will help, may be allocating more accessible shared spaces or ensuring there are messages of inclusion. Cultural centres, campus artworks and monuments, cultural events and diverse representation in naming buildings might help. Detailed amendments can also be useful such as making sure that the current Dean's portrait is not so different from the others. The work abroad programs might be particularly addressed by a new narrative, intentionally including POC and promotional materials and making their participation 'visible priority'. They may need a targeted recruitment approach, or special help with any barriers such as financial ones. Successful efforts should be better published. The study has 'limitations' [!]. Student researchers will also students, graduate course and this may have influenced them, although the team are confident that they 'conceptualise the problem in their own ways and portrayed their concerns' (8). The perceptions of the research students may not be shared by all students, a sign of 'the pervasiveness of white centrality'. There was a small sample size although they focused on unique experiences and gained valuable insight rather than generalisable findings. Nevertheless, student should not be seen as representative necessarily. They did produce insights that were 'situated'. They must also acknowledge the role of subjectivity in the interpretation of the images and narratives, 'both from the student collaborators and from us as researchers'. They were aware of being affected by their own critical academic materials and their own positionalityies. More larger research is needed, including any possible intensification of micro-aggressions [white backlash? Irony?]. Generally institutions must remain attuned to racism and how it can be communicated. They did choose easily accessible sites for their images. They urge universities to address these matters in the future to encourage 'deeper reflection and change'rather than engaging in 'superficial impression management'.