🧭 Theory In Brief

This study develops a theory of pigmentocratic executive approval that links skin color–based group attachments to differences in skin tone between citizens and their leaders. The theory predicts two related dynamics: (1) deviations in skin tone between citizens and the incumbent reduce approval most strongly for citizens who are lighter than the leader, and (2) citizens whose skin tone is lighter than the executive will punish incumbents more harshly for poor economic performance.

📊 How Leadership Skin Tone Was Measured and Compared to Public Opinion

• A skin tone assessment was conducted for dozens of national leaders across the Americas.
• Those leader skin tone measures were merged with mass survey data from the corresponding countries, including public evaluations of executive performance and approval.
• The combined data permit tests of whether relative skin tone (citizen versus leader) predicts executive approval and responsiveness to economic performance.

📝 Key Findings

• Approval declines when a citizen’s skin tone deviates from the incumbent’s, with the largest decreases observed among citizens who are lighter than the leader.
• Economic underperformance by incumbents generates stronger punitive responses from citizens whose skin tone is lighter than the executive’s.
• These patterns of executive approval mirror broader pigmentocratic hierarchies: lighter skin tones receive relative privilege in approval dynamics across the Americas.

💡 Why It Matters

• Reveals a pigmentocratic logic in how citizens evaluate executives, showing that racialized perceptions of skin tone influence political support beyond traditional group labels.
• Suggests that representation and accountability are filtered through hierarchies of skin color, with implications for electoral behavior, policy responsiveness, and the study of racial inequality in politics.