Prototypical psychological Africanity (racial identity) profiles and orientations for social engineering of African descent people

2013 Race, Gender and Class Race, Gender & Class Pg. 110 Vol. 20 No. 1/2 ISSN: 1082-8354

By Dr. Daudi Ajani ya Azibo, Jeaneme Robinson-Kyles and Marc Johnson 

Dr. Daudi Ajani ya Azibo is a Social Psychologist with interests in psychological Africanity, defense mechanisms, and culture-focused disorders. He is the author of the Azibo Nosology, a diagnostic system of African-centered mental disorders linked to African personality theory. He was named a "Distinguished Psychologists" by the Association of Black Psychologists in 1993.


Jeaneme Robinson-Kyles is a Clinical Psychologist and Associate Director of the Counseling Center at the University of Central Florida. Her research interests are academic achievement and psychological Africanity.

Address: Counseling Center, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd., Orlando, FL 32816-3170. Ph.: (407) 823-2811, Email:

Marc Johnson is Employed at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital. He has assisted Dr. Azibo since 1988.

Address: The Sleep Center, Pennsylvania Hospital, 800 Spruce St., Philadelphia, PA 19107. Ph.: (215) 829-3250.

Abstract: It is asserted within the context of Frantz Fanon's call to set afoot a new person of African descent that for social, cultural, and economic development of the African-U.S. population, perhaps Africans worldwide, racial identity must be changed to "psychological Africanity", an orientation to sustain, develop, extend, and defend African life and culture as a priority. Desirable and undesirable profiles and orientations of psychological Africanity (also called racial identity and African personality) based on Azibo's (2006a) rudimentary psychological Africanity framework were investigated for this purpose. Five conceptual profiles and three empirically-derived psychological Africanity orientation groups labeled correct, diffused, and incorrect were articulated and operationalized. Hypothesized relationships with a measure approximating pure psychological Africanity (meaning identification as African descent as if there had been no Eurasian disruption of African civilizations) and huge amounts of explained variance were found in two studies for both profile conceptualizations and the orientations. Results confirm the desirable profiles and the correct orientation group stand the best chance of bringing the psycho-cultural change necessary for African-U.S. development.

Eurasians have disrupted civilizations of African descent people (ADP) (Blaut, 1993; Chomsky, 1993; Fagan, 1998) continuously for over 6000 years (Williams, 1976). For African-U.S. people (descendents of Africans enslaved in the United States) this has resulted in a profound mental victimization (Azibo, 2011a; Jennings, 2003, 2011; Wilson, 1993). The victimization, in turn, has bewitched, bothered, and bewildered African-U.S. people to the point of inferiorizing their masses (Welsing, 1991). What is to be done for the victims?

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. recognized the importance of overturning this inferiorized mentality when he encouraged study of "psychological and ideological changes in Negroes" (King, 1968:183). Frantz Fanon (Hansen, 1996; Holdstock, 2000) issued a call to "set afoot a new man" (Fanon, 1963:316) meaning new ADP mentally speaking. Some heeded these civil rights era imperatives early on (e.g., Krupat, 1975:13-43). Despite some improvement, as the 1990s approached, Amos Wilson (1989) acknowledged dissatisfaction with many African-U.S. males and admonished "make another man" (original emphasis) and John Henrik Clarke (1997:xvii) pointed to the continuation of this social engineering imperative for ADP: "In the twenty-first century .... first we change ourselves" (added emphasis). Caucasian scholar Michael Bradley (1992) pleaded for the direction the change must take:

I cannot help but make a plea: African Americans must forsake the white man's social structures, concepts of justice and, yes, even religion and return, as far as possible, to genuine African values and identity (insofar as these can be accurately recovered and reconstructed). (p. 243-244)

Harkening these clarion calls would seem to suggest the need for reemergence of the racial construct called the African personality. We run to race for its explanatory and prescriptive power. Indeed, "race as part of personality ... just is [and] Race can be understood by way of racial identity [psychological Africanity] theory, and, by using it, one can grasp race's role in human development" (Carter, 1995:267-268).

In pursuing the African personality it becomes clear that what remains needed in a concretized form is "a model .... [with] blueprints and examples" (Fanon, 1963:312). In articulating such a model, wise instruction "not to imitate Europe" (Fanon, 1963:313) will be heeded. It would be equally unwise for ADP to imitate the Eurasian Arab (Williams, 1976:23-24, 58-61) whose Arabicizing of ADP has been shown to be pernicious (Ali, 2006, 2007, 2010; Chinweizu, 1987). In articulating our model we draw upon African-centered social theory and philosophical deep thinking especially as it applies to the nature of African human nature or the African personality (Azibo, 2011b; Khoapa, 1980; Osei, 1970, 1971, 1981).


The ultimate goal is to socially engineer the psychological orientation of African-U.S. people for The Rebirth of African Civilization (Williams, 1993) empowered (Wilson, 1998). We offer a model for the setting afoot of African-U.S. people anew and aright meaning wholly congruous with authentic African ancestral psychological orientation and militating against ignominious mentalities like a racial identity literally circumscribed from "Nigger to Negro" (Jennings, 2003, 251), American Africanism (Morrison, 1993), and slave (Morrow, 2003; Olomenji, 1996; Wilson, 1999) and colonized (Chinweizu, 1987) consciousnesses.

Our task, then, is to delineate prototypical psychological profiles and orientations of African-U.S. identity using an African-centered framework and provide empirical support. Prototypical is used in the sense of an original model on which something is patterned, a model that exhibits the essential features of a later type to be developed. We will present desirable/appropriate and undesirable/inappropriate profiles and orientations.

It cracks the skull, frankly, that most African personality and racial identity scholars and practitioners mistake abnormal African-U.S. functioning for normal (Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, in press) because they disrespect criteria for making the distinction articulated by Azibo (1989, 1996c). To proceed with our task, this must be cleared up. Whenever ADP's behavior and thought proceeds from Eurasian frames of reference that are anti and/or contradictory to social reality interpreted Africentrically, the abnormalcy attribution applies because the racemaintenance dictate of human nature is violated. As well, the harmful dysfunction analysis applies. It posits disorder "when the individual lacks an ability that human beings are designed to possess .... a person ought to be able to do something if the person would be able to do that thing if the person's mental mechanisms were functioning as designed" (Wakefield, 1997:252-253, original emphases). Theory says ADP are designed to possess the race-maintenance function (Azibo, 1989, 1990a, 1991a; 1991b, 1996c; Khoapa, 1980). It simply is something ADP "ought to be able to do". This, however, is not the case overwhelmingly (Azibo, 2011a; Baruti, 2005b; Sutherland, 1989, 1997) due to the aforementioned disruption of their civilizations. The race-maintenance and harmful dysfunction criteria for abnormalcy attribution help in distinguishing desirable versus undesirable profiles.

Being clear on the attribution for normalcy from the Africentric framework is also imperative. Since the assumption of consubstantiation in primordial spirit is the motivational dynamic at the core of all African-centered formulations of the person (Azibo, 2011b, 1996c), every African-centered construct of African personality maintains that self-consciously participating in the defense and development of the African collective is the paramount arbiter of appropriate behavior or point of reference for conceptualizing normalcy (Azibo, 1990a, 1991a). Hence, normalcy in ADP requires a self-consciousness that is oriented to defend, develop, and maintain ADP's life, life chances, and culture as a priority. This is our definition of psychological Africanity. And, the beauty here is that it simply does not get any more rudimentary than this. It reflects a unidimensional continuum of high to low conscious mental orientation to defend, develop, and maintain African life and living as a priority. This rudimentary model or conceptualization (Azibo, 2006a) stands despite the horrific necrosis of the African personality caused by enslavement, colonialism, and their legacies (Ani, 2004; Azibo, 2011a; Baruti, 2005a; Jennings, 2003; Williams, 1976) having presently placed the normalcy orientation for self-consciously defending and developing the African collective in a decrescent state.


Pure psychological Africanity means identification as African descent as if there had been no Eurasian disruption of African civilizations. Since U.S.-ADP have had their psychological Africanity disfeatured and disfigured resultant of Eurasian conquering (Azibo, 2011a), there is all the more need for a model that approximates pure psychological Africanity so that it could be used in the social engineering of the new African. Pure psychological Africanity itself would be an ideal standard.

Models taking into account how the assaults on psychological Africanity have negatively affected it in combination with psychological Africanity affirmation may better capture the contemporary, non-pure state of psychological Africanity in African-U.S. people. It would seem vital that these models predict pure psychological Africanity affirmation since that is the direction in which psychological Africanity development must go. Movement in any other direction would violate and undermine the rudimentary conceptualization.

The original multidimensional model. A theory of six motivational orientations that are simultaneously operating and idiosyncratically organized in the African-U.S. individual was proposed in the 1970s (Wright & Isenstein, 1978). Based on factor analysis, the Black Personality Questionnaire (BPQ) (Azibo, 1996b) operationalizes this model. Two orientations are undesirable: Pro-White (PW) indexes acceptance and approval of Caucasians and their American cultural standards for African-U.S. people and Anti-Black (AB) indicates disparagement and negation of personal, cultural, institutional, and ideological Africanity (Blackness). The four desirable orientations are Pro-Black (PB) indicating personal commitment to the success of African-U.S. people throughout society, Pan African (PA) indicating identification with ADP worldwide, Third World (TW) indicating desire to ameliorate Western oppression visited upon all peoples, and Anti-White (AW) indicating a negation of White Americans and their cultural standards. These manifest six motivational orientations are the first multidimensional model of psychological Africanity/racial identity. Additionally, it makes conceptual sense to combine the undesirable orientations PW and AB into a composite called Anglocentric and the desirable orientations PB, PA, TW, and AW into one called Africentric. Importantly, neither the empirically derived motivational orientations model nor the conceptually derived composites model contradicts the rudimentary conceptualization as each individual and composite orientation is consonant with Azibo's (2006a) rudimentary conceptualization either directly or inversely. Based on the foregoing we develop five prototypical profiles (Figure 1).

Profiles A and B depict undesirable psychological Africanity. Profile A persons operates on negative AW energy. Conspicuously absent here are positive orientations that affirm psychological Africanity like PB, PA, and TW. The new African person should not be consumed with AW alone. Vernacularly, the type of AW in Profile A is a "Charley Fever" where Mr. Charlie is a reference to the White man. And, the sentiment is one of "I just hate White people, all of them". A Profile B person operates on energy that affirms Whiteness/Europeanism/Western civilization and negates all things African. Own-race maintenance is not possible with this person whereas anti-African behavior including activity injurious to ADP and behavior that extols and undergirds Caucasian/Eurasian people and social dictates would be expected.

Desirable psychological Africanity is depicted in Profiles C and D only. The predominant orientations in each profile are positive energized Africanoriented ones. Thus, they provide a concrete guide for setting afoot the new African descent person. Is Profile C more or less favorable than Profile D? In other words, can AW orientation be positive? The history of Eurasian domination does produce Charley Fever of Profile A, but also demands nothing short of reasoned, rational anti-Whiteness given the predacious, vampiric history of Eurasian's relationship with ADP spurred by Eurasian culture itself which offers much to be critical of (Ani, 1994; Baruti, 2006; Williams, 1976). In this light, AW based in historical and cultural reflection is to be expected in reality prone ADP. This type of AW orientation is qualitatively different from that in Profile A, although it is as yet undetermined whether Charley Fever AW sentiment may meld with it or be mellowed by it.

The Diffused Identity profile depicts a psyche consisting of high levels of some desirable orientations like PB and PA as well as the PW undesirable orientation. The reader should note that in our theorization the PW orientation is dominant and highlighted in the cognitive structure of the Diffused Profile person despite occupying about the same percentage of cognitive space as PB and PA. An individual with a diffused profile would likely as not respond with admixture of Pro-African and Pro-White behavior. Our thinking is that this profile is the most prevalent in contemporary cohorts of African-U.S. people (Azibo, Johnson & Robinson, 2007; Azibo & Robinson, 2004).


The idea that psychological Africanity is multidimensional has led to theorizing and measurement that contradicts the rudimentary conceptualization. Specifically, some theories propose high or advanced states of psychological Africanity that actually militate against prioritization of the defense and development of matters African (e.g., Psychological Nigrescence, 2001; Sellers et al., 1998). This development has been labeled the contradiction in construct conceptualization issue (Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, 2011). In contrast, psychological Africanity orientation groups consonant with the unidimensional continuum underlying the rudimentary conceptualization have been empirically derived. Nominally, they are correct psychological Africanity orientation which is highest on the continuum, incorrect which is lowest, and diffused which lies in between them. With African-centered criterion variables, persons classified as correct outperform diffused who outperform incorrect (Azibo, 2008; Azibo, Cassius, Marion, & Caspar, in review; Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, in press; Dixon & Azibo, 1998). This is consistent with a 40-year trend in African-U.S. racial identity research dating to Thomas's observation in 1971 that Blackness [psychological Africanity/racial identity] is a tonic for African-U.S. people (e.g., Carter, 1995:139-149; Chambers et al., 1998; Constantine et al., 2006; Croasdale & Mate-Kole, 2006; Cross, Parham, & Helms, 1998; Houston, 1990; Jones, 1998; Outten et al., 2009; Murray & Mandara, 2003; Schultz, 2003; Sutherland, 1995; Taylor, 1998; Tomes, et al., 1990; Townsend & Lanphier, 2007). This theme is found with children and adolescents too (Belgrave et al. 2009; Townsend & Belgrave, 2000; Mandara et al., 2009). Arguably, cultural orientation to reality reflected in psychological Africanity in the individual's psyche is the single most important matter in the community mental health of African-U.S. people (Azibo, 1990b; Nobles, 1976). Thus, empirical validation efforts of psychological Africanity, especially of basic premises, are warranted.


For a people to overturn themselves, Martin-Baro?'s (1994, 30) liberation psychology identifies "Three Urgent Tasks [namely] ... recovering historical memory, de-ideologizing common sense and everyday experience, and utilizing the virtues of the people". For our profiles and orientation groups to be useful in setting ADP afoot anew aright they should predict functioning in the context of Martin-Baro?'s tasks. The question that is fundamental to all others is Which profile or orientation group will predict pure psychological Africanity? since this must be socially engineered. According to Azibo (1991a), the most fundamental prediction is that of own-race maintenance behavior which should obtain for those ADP with higher levels of psychological Africanity whensoever race maintenance is at issue. To perceive race maintenance to be in question and to deal with it constructively presupposes the person possesses psychological Africanity. Therefore, we hypothesize first that pure psychological Africanity will be predicted (a) by total BPQ scores and (b) by the original multidimensional and composite models the BPQ operationalizes, namely the six motivational orientations and the Africentric and Anglocentric orientations. The second hypothesis is that psychological Africanity orientation will also predict pure psychological Africanity with the correct orientation group having the highest mean followed in order by the diffused then incorrect groups.

Study 1


Participants. In 1982, 184 African-U.S. students in general psychology classes across the southeast and Midwest were administered five psychological Africanity instruments ordered randomly. Sixty percent were female (n=111) and 40% male (n=73). Average age was 22.2.

Instruments. African Self-Consciousness Scale (ASCS) (Kambon, 1996). A pure psychological Africanity meaning the African personality construct ideologically as it would manifest but for aforementioned Eurasian disruption of African civilizations is approximated by the ASCS. Sample items of the 42 are It is not such a good idea for Black students to be required to learn an African language, Black children should be taught that they are African people at an early age, and I feel little sense of commitment to Black people who are not close friends or relatives. Computed alpha was .80.

Black Personality Questionnaire (BPQ) (Azibo, 1996b). Individual motivational orientation scores (PW, PB, etc.) were computed by summing the items endorsed for that subscale. Africentric score was computed by summing AW, PB, PA, and TW scores; Anglocentric score was computed by summing PW and AB scores. A total score was computed as (2 x Africentric score) + (Anglocentric score). Weighting the Africentric this way permits the total score to be placed on a high-to-low unidimensional continuum. Sample items of the 50 are Black preachers are pimping offthe Black community, the White church is a good place for Blacks to be integrated into, and I have considered adopting an African name.

Consistent convergent and construct validity findings (Azibo, 1983, 1991a, 2006a, 2006b; Azibo et al., in review; Azibo & Dixon, 1998; Azibo, Johnson, & Robinson, 2007; Azibo, Melton-Arnold, & Dale, 2006; Azibo & Robinson, 2004; Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, 2011; Burlew, Bellow, & Lovett, 2000; Robinson & Azibo, 2003) characterize the BPQ. Subscale internal consistency, however, has been mixed. In the present sample, Cronbach alpha for total scores was .75. Subscale alpha and mean interitem correlations (in parentheses for subscales with fewer than 10 items evincing low reliability) were as follows: PW = .52 (.14), PB = .51 (.13), PA = .56 (.21), TW = .63 (.28), AW = .81, and AB = .55. Alpha for the Africentric scores was .83 and .55 for the Anglocentric. The mixed internal consistency results warrant caution but should not discourage, however, continued usage of BPQ subscale scores evincing low internal consistency because of the BPQ's history of empirical validity in combination with adequate total scale score reliability. Validity is more important as there is an argument that "low alpha reliability coefficients may not be sufficient to infer that the racial identity items [from any racial identity test] are not accessing the corresponding construct" (Carter, Pieterse, & Smith, 2008:105). The Association of Black Psychologists (1984,:v) anticipated this rationale and warned about "conform[ing lockstep] to certain conventionalized paradigms of ... instrumentation, and measurement" (see Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, 2011).


The mean total BPQ score was 30.97 (SD = 10.23) and 5.15 (SD = .87) for the ASCS. Total BPQ score predicted ASCS score, beta = .527, t (182) = .10.417, p .001. The adjusted R2 was .37. The regression of ASCS score on BPQ subscales was reliable, F (6, 177) = 40.87, p .001, with a large adjusted R2 = .567. Statistically significant (p .02, df = 177) individual predictors were AB (beta = -.144, t = -2.583), PW (beta = -.157, t = -2.488), and AW (beta = .376, t = 5.195).

The BPQ composites model, Africentric and Anglocentric predictors, also explained substantial variance in ASCS scores (adjusted R2 = .516) reliably: F (2, 181) = 98.48, p .001. Both predictors were reliable (p .001): Africentric beta = .646, t (181) = 12.366 and Anglocentric beta = -.229, t (181) = -4.387. The question arises whether the Africentric composite is driven solely by the AW subscale since neither PB, PA, nor TW were reliable individual predictors and AW was. A hierarchical regression analysis controlling for AW score was conducted. AW score was entered first followed by Anglocentric and a (PB + PA + TW) composite (this is the Africentric score minus AW score). The increment in R2 = .136 was statistically significant: F (2, 180) = 25.9, p .001. The beta coefficient for Anglocentric was reliable at -.232, t (180) = -4.464, p .001 as was the beta for the Africentric minus AW variable of .299, t (180) = 5.059, p .001.

A 1-way ANOVA with correct, diffused, and incorrect psychological Africanity orientation groups was conducted on ASCS scores. The groups were operationalized as follows: correct orientation = Africentric score Mdn of 13 and Anglocentric score Mdn of 5; incorrect orientation = Africentric score 13 and Anglocentric 5; diffused orientation = all others = (a) Africentric $ 13 and Anglocentric $ 5 or (b) Africentric # 13 and Anglocentric # 5. Because the Levine statistic was reliable, significance level was set at .01. The ANOVA was reliable, F (2, 181) = 35.63, p .001, and accounted for sizeable variance (omega squared = .27).

The correct psychological Africanity orientation group mean was 5.96 (SD = 1.0, n = 39), the diffused was 5.07 (SD = .71, n = 102) and the incorrect was 4.6 (SD = .53, n = 43). Fisher's LSD with strict Bonferroni correction revealed the correct orientation mean was reliably greater than the diffused and incorrect means. Also, the mean of the diffused group reliably exceeded the incorrect group's (see Figure 2).

Study 2


Participants. In 1995, 55 students (36 female, 19 male) in upper level psychology classes at a southeastern HBCU received course credit for participating. Fifty-two percent were seniors, 32% juniors, and 16% sophomores. Average age was 21.6. Study 1 was replicated by administering in a large classroom a demographic questionnaire followed in randomized order by the BPQ, ASCS, and two other measures.

Instruments. The BPQ and ASCS discussed in Study 1 were used. Total BPQ score alpha was .68. Alpha and mean interitem correlations in parentheses for BPQ subscales follow: AW = .85, AB = .38, PW = .67 (.28), PB = .42 (.20), PA = .44 (.17), and TW = .60 (.29). Africentric alpha was .80 and Anglocentric .40. BPQ internal consistency results are mixed as in Study 1. (The same argument for using the BPQ in Study 1 would apply here were it not a replication.) Alpha for the ASCS was .90.


The mean BPQ score was 43.13 (SD = 9.6). For ASCS scores the mean was 6.35 (SD = .80). Total BPQ score did predict ASCS score: F (1, 53) = 24.47, p .001, beta = .562, adjusted R2 = .303. The BPQ subscales model reliably predicted ASCS scores, F (6, 48) = 8.21, p .001, with an adjusted R2 = .445. AW was the only reliable predictor with beta = .356, t (48) = 2.477, p .05. PW and PA approached statistical significance.

With Africentric and Anglocentric variables as predictors, the model's adjusted R2 was .464. This was reliable: F (2, 52) = 24.39, p .001. Africentric predicted reliably: beta = .58, t (52) = 5.696, p .001. So did Anglocentric: beta = -.283, t (52) = -2.766, p .01. Controlling for AW scores, a hierarchical regression analysis with Anglocentric and the Africentric minus AW variable, (PB + PA + TW), entered second yielded a reliable increment in R2 = .147, F (2, 51) = 7.274, p .01. The beta coefficient for Anglocentric was -.284, t (51) = -2.755, p .01. For Africentric minus AW, beta was .239, t (51) = 2.174, p .05.

Orientation groups were operationalized as in Study 1 and used in a 1-way ANOVA with ASCS score as the dependent variable. The reliable analysis, F (2, 53) = 8.191, p .01, yielded an omega squared statistic of .204. The correct psychological Africanity orientation group mean was 6.94 (SD = .54, n = 10), the diffused was 6.41 (SD = .69, n = 34), and the incorrect was 5.72 (SD = .88, n = 12). Using the Bonferroni correction, Fisher's LSD revealed no difference between the correct and diffused group means, but both of these were reliably greater than the incorrect group's.

Study 1 and Study 2 evinced the same overall pattern of results although mean ASCS scores were higher in Study 2 (see Figure 2).


All hypotheses were supported by the results in both original and replication studies. The pure psychological Africanity variable was predicted by Azibo's, (2006a) rudimentary psychological Africanity model. This model has both uni- and multi-dimensional aspects and the BPQ neatly captures them. Perhaps avoiding thinking about psychological Africanity's dimensionality as either uni- or multi-dimensional in favor of a both/and conceptualization and operationalization is warranted. The only requirement is that no dimension (facet, status, or factor) may contradict the rudimentary conceptual definition of psychological Africanity as the self-conscious prioritization of the defense, development, and maintenance of ADP's life, life chances, and culture. Contradiction in construct conceptualization (Azibo, 1998; Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, 2011) is not permissible and avoidable when the African-centered perspective is understood epistemologically (Azibo, 1992) and then employed (Azibo, 1996d, 2006c).


Importantly, the validity of the concept of correct, diffused, and incorrect prototypical psychological Africanity orientation groups existing on a unidimensional high to low continuum is fully supported (Figure 2). There is no surprise that correct and incorrect groups perform as expected. But, being in between correct and incorrect psychological Africanity orientation groups on the continuum, the theorization that diffused orientation persons will likely as not respond with an admixture of pro-African-centered and pro-Eurasian-centered behavior (Azibo & Robinson, 2004) appears supported by the result pattern emerging from both studies. Specifically, in the replication the diffused orientation group's pure psychological Africanity mean is not reliably lower than the correct orientation group's, but is reliably lower in the first study.

The attribution of abnormalcy in otherwise normal individuals would also seem a notion sustained by the results of the diffused and incorrect classifications. By Africentric criteria of normalcy (Azibo, 1989, 1990b, 1991a, 1996c), they fall short of own-race maintenance, at least as indexed by pure psychological Africanity. When Wakefield's criteria are added, they fall short of normalcy because manifesting pure psychological Africanity is something ADP are designed to do and would be able to do if their mental mechanisms were functioning for maintenance of the extended self of ADP. At best, the diffused orientation group was inconsistent across two studies. The diffused group's inconsistency is perfectly consistent with behavior that would characterize our theoretical Diffused Profile individuals. Also, it seems that Profile B would perform commensurate with the incorrect psychological Africanity orientation group and Profiles C and D the correct orientation group.


Multiple regression was relied on for an inkling into how persons classified into the conceptual profiles might behave. The role of AW is prominent in predicting pure psychological Africanity. We speculate that it is the reasoned, rational AW of Profile C that is operating. Since AW is not the only force in the data as indicated by the Anglocentric composite (PW + AB) and the Africentric without AW composite (PB + PA + TW) producing reliable increases in explained pure psychological Africanity variance and each being statistically significant predictors in both studies, a Profile C interpretation (rational AW-infused Africentricity) may be a better bet than Profile A (sole dominance of AW orientation presumably predominated by Charley Fever cognition).

These results stemming from the hierarchical analysis suggest also Profile D is not to be simply discarded in favor of Profile C. Actually, the consistency of the Africentric composite in both studies bodes well for speculating that Profiles C and D are best candidates for setting afoot the new person of African descent. Still, that Profile C is empirically favored over Profile D given AW's consistency as a strong predictor must be pointed out. Perhaps the AW of Profile C is protective as it should combat susceptibility to the persuasion over ADP exercised by Caucasians as pointed out by Wright (1985:1-16) and Ani (1994). And, it likely would be reinforcing of a "Race First" attitude (Garvey, 1986; Martin, 1976) direly needed among African-U.S. people today (Daniels, 2005). Profile D does not have this potential protection that AW might afford. Baruti (2011) cogently argues the rightness of rational anti-Whiteness and Ferguson et al. (2008) point out the need to study anti-White racial attitudes. Nevertheless, both Profiles C and D would seem to portend "Black power through the creation of a 'self-defined', self-directed personality" (Amos Wilson cited in Jamison, 2007:10).

Also important is the inappropriateness of Profile B for the new African. It is hinted at by the consistent inverse predictions of pure psychological Africanity by Anglocentric scores. Scholars and mental health workers must be disabused of the ideas embodied in this profile that in all things "West is Best" or "White is Right" and that post racial societies require such an orientation in ADP (see Curry, 2011). Profile B epitomizes what Amos Wilson called "the other-directed African personality .... an Afrkan container devoid of Afrikan content" which disempowers the African personality/psychological Africanity (see Jamison, 2007:10). It is not a profile to be built upon, but dismantled.


Overall, prevailing psychological Africanity theories (see Azibo, 1990a; Constantine et al., 1998; Cross, Parham, & Helms, 1998; Duncan & McCoy, 2007; Jones, 1998; Schultz, 2003) are found wanting (Azibo, 1998). The most important reason is committing the contradiction in construct conceptualization error both theoretically and with their assessment instruments. Representative examples are so-called nigrescence theory which posits multiculturalist inclusive (Psychological Nigrescence, 2001) and multidimensional theory which posits assimilationist, humanist, and oppressed minority ideologies (Sellers et al., 1998) as acceptable, appropriate, and desirable. These represent the antithesis of psychological Africanity and are not to be confused with inverse constructs (Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, 2011). Thus, much prevailing racial identity scholarship provides models to work with that are tantamount to our diffused and incorrect psychological Africanity orientations and Profile B and the Diffused Profile which, from our framework, are entirely inappropriate for the new African person. Future research must be cognizant of this as well as continue to investigate theoretically basic questions.

Applied questions of immediate political concern are also vital: Will Obama's anti-African-U.S. rhetoric ("we're all just mongrels", "Black men need to take care of their children") and policies (opposition to reparations and targeted action for African-U.S. people) receive a pass from Profile C and D and correct orientation persons? Will these persons be intrepid and stalwart against American domination of ADP at home and abroad?

It bears pointing out that the theoretical model per se (both profiles and orientations) stands independent of its operationalization. Assessment instruments like the BPQ frequently require modification across time periods (Azibo, Robinson, & Scott-Jones, 2011), without an implication for the underlying theory. This point should not be blurred. The applicability of the theory-based profiles and orientations from the rudimentary model is not diminished by technical measurement issues with the BPQ as the identical result pattern evinced in the datasets from 1982 and 1995 suggests. The profiles and orientations would seem as researchable in and applicable to contemporary cohorts of African-U.S. students, non-college and non-U.S. populations of ADP as for the student cohorts analyzed here. Although our geopolitical context is the United States, the work is likely applicable to ADP worldwide both in terms of the concepts employed (when locally adapted) and the need to counter Eurasian psycho-cultural domination.

The task of socially engineering the new African descent person grounded in psychological Africanity with "deliberate intentional interventions" (to use Campbell & Russo's words, 1999:52) is a worthy one that is at hand. There must be action, but no action without research (Lewin, 1946). The research would best be approached as a meaningful (read capable of helping people, Bausell, 1994) reform where tweaking and improving are built into the process (Campbell, 1969; Campbell & Russo, 1999:150-154) and must include the psychological Africanity/African personality subject variable (Azibo, 1996d). As a selfconsciousness of ADP as ADP is engineered, particular attention is to be paid to development of the individual's character a la Baruti (2011) as well.


Since the purpose in setting afoot the new African person is ONLY to re-birth African civilization empowered, and since African civilizations historically have prospered when they have operated in accord with the African-centered worldview (Azibo, 1999; Counter & Evans, 1981; Osei, 1971; Williams, 1976, 1993), and since strategies for addressing problems of low psychological Africanity have been articulated (Azibo, 1990b; Baruti, 2009; Phillips, 1996; Taylor et al., 1998) and since case studies reveal that fixing broke psychological Africanity is doable and indispensable in psychotherapy regarding women's issues (Abdullah, 1998 ), parenting and family functioning (Atwell & Azibo, 1991), and sexual dysfunction (Denard, 1998), it becomes more evident why ADP must be transformed psychologically back to the traditional African personality of psychological Africanity. The social engineering that is being called for is imperative if the new African man, woman, and child are to be set afoot as called for long ago in an aright manner. Setting afoot the new African man, woman, and child aright precludes a Eurasian-based form and requires returning to the classic African personality (e.g., Khoapa, 1980) summarized in this article as the psychological Africanity construct after Azibo (2006a). The model to be engineered is the correct psychological Africanity orientation (versus the diffused and incorrect) concretely depicted in Figure 1 as prototypical Profiles C and D with C favored over D. Perhaps Frantz Fanon is smiling since at long last after so many decades a concrete model that neither imitates Europe-nor Arabicizes-is advanced for setting afoot the new African descent person psychologically. It is prerequisite for the re-birth of African civilization.


My Deepest thanks to Mr. Gil Russell for various technical assistance.




Abdullah, S. (1998). Mammy-ism: A diagnosis of psychological misorientation for women of African descent. Journal of Black Psychology, 24:196-210.

Ali, A.H. (2006). The caged virgin: An emancipation proclamation for women and Islam. New York: Simon & Schuster.

_______. (2007). Infidel. New York: Simon & Schuster.

_______. (2010). Nomad: From Islam to America. New York: Free Press.

Ani, M. (1994). Yurugu: An African-centered critique of European cultural thought and behavior. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

_______. (2004). To be Afrikan: Toward the healing, rebirth and reconstruction of Afrikan civilization: Maat/Maafa/Sankofa. In J. Kamara & T. Van Der Meer (Eds.), State of the race: Creating our 21st century: Where do we go from here?, pp. 137-166. Boston: Diaspora Press.

Association of Black Psychologists. (n.d.). History, by-laws and ethical standards of the Association of Black Psychologists. Washington, DC: The author.

Atwell, I. & Azibo, D. (1991). Diagnosing personality disorder in Africans (Blacks) using the Azibo Nosology: Two case studies. Journal of Black Psychology, 17:1-22.

Azibo, D. (1983). Perceived attractiveness and the Black personality. Western Journal of Black Studies, 7, 229-238.

_______. (1989). African-centered theses on mental health and a nosology of Black/African personality disorder. Journal of Black Psychology, 15:173-214.

Azibo, D. (1990a). Advances in Black/African personality theory. Imhotep: An Afrocentric Review, 2:22-47.

_______. (1990b). Treatment and training implications of the advances in African personality theory. Western Journal of Black Studies, 14:53-65.

_______. (1991a). An empirical test of the fundamental postulates of an African personality metatheory. Western Journal of Black Studies, 15:183-195.

_______. (1991b). Towards a metatheory of the African personality. Journal of Black Psychology, 17:37-45.

_______. (1992). Articulating the distinction between Black studies and the study of Blacks: The fundamental role of culture and the African-centered worldview. The Afrocentric Scholar, 1(1):64-97.

_______. (1993). Eurocentric psychology and the issue of Race. Word: A Black Culture Journal, 2:43-57.

_______. (1996a). African psychology in historical perspective and related commentary. In D. Azibo (Ed.), African psychology in historical perspective & related commentary, pp. 1-28. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

_______. (1996b). Black Personality Questionnaire: A review and critique. In R. Jones (Ed.), Handbook of tests and measurements for Black populations, 2:241-249). Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry.

_______. (1996c). Mental health defined Africentrically. In D. Azibo (Ed.), African psychology in historical perspective & related commentary, pp. 47-56. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

_______. (1996d). Personality, clinical, and social psychological research on Blacks: Appropriate and inappropriate research frameworks. In D. Azibo (Ed.), African psychology in historical perspective & related commentary, pp. 203-234. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

_______. (1998). The distinction between African personality personologists and other personality scholars: Implications for research on identity development and an entreatment for reconceptualization. In R. Jones (Ed.), African American identity development, pp. 207-216. Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry.

_______. (1999). Africentric conceptualizing as the pathway to African liberation. International Journal of Africana Studies, 5:1-31.

_______. (2006a). An African-centered rudimentary model of racial identity in African descent people and the validation of projective techniques for its measurement. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 30:148-178.

_______. (2006b). Empirical exploration of the Azibo theory of diminutional psychological misorientation. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 30:9-43.

_______. (2008). Psychological Africanity (racial identity) and its influence on support for reparations. Journal of Negro Education, 77(2):117-130.

_______. (2011a). The psycho-cultural case for reparations for descendents of enslaved Africans in the United States. Race, Gender & Class, 18(1-2):7-36.

_______. (2011b). Understanding essentialism as fundamental: The centered African perspective on the nature of prototypical human nature: Cosmological Ka (spirit). Western Journal of Black Studies, 35(2):77-91.

Azibo, D., Cassius, S., Marion, M., & Caspar, D. (In review). The structure of college students' personal spaces with racial-cultural artifacts as a function of psychological Africanity orientation (racial identity): A case study. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Azibo, D. & Dixon, P. (1998). The theoretical relationship between materialistic depression and depression: Preliminary data and implications for the Azibo nosology. Journal of Black Psychology, 24:211-225.

Azibo, D., Johnson, M., & Robinson, J. (2007). Rethinking African-U.S. racial identity development as abnormal psychology. International Journal of Africana Studies, 13(1):124-152.

Azibo, D., Melton-Arnold, L., & Dale, A. (2006). Social desirability explored with a sample of African descent college students and the Black Personality Questionnaire. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 30(2):121-145.

Azibo, D. & Robinson, J. (2004). An empirically supported reconceptualization of African- U.S. racial identity development as an abnormal process. Review of General Psychology, 8:249-264.

Azibo, D., Robinson, T, & Scott-Jones. (2011). Psychological Africanity as Racial Identity: Validation of African American Multidimensional Racial Identity Scale, Black Personality Questionnaire, and Cultural Misorientation Scale. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 35(4):246-267.

Azibo, D. & Scott-Jones, G. (In press). Notes on Afrocizing or how the African personality (psychological Africanity) develops: Basic implications for re-birthing African civilization. Ghana International Journal of Mental Health.

Baruti, M. (2005a). Kebuka! Remembering the middle passage through the eyes of our ancestors. Atlanta: Akoben House.

_______. (2005b). Mentacide and other essays. Atlanta: Akoben House.

_______. (2006). Eureason: An African-centered critique of Eurocentric social science. Atlanta: Akoben House.

_______. (2009). Centered: Building Afrikan realities. Atlanta: Akoben House.

_______. (2011). Iwa: A warrior's character. Atlanta: Akoben House.

Bausell, R. (1994). Conducting meaningful experiments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Belgrave, F., Cherry, V., Butler, D., & Townsend, T. (2009). Sisters of Nia. Champaign, IL: Research Press Publishers.

Blaut, J.M. (1993). The colonizer's model of the world. New York: Guilford Press.

Bradley, M. (1992). Chosen people from the Caucasus. Chicago: Third World Press.

Burlew, K., Bellow, S., & Lovett, M. (2000). Racial identity measures: A review and classification system. In R. Dana (Ed.), Handbook of cross-cultural/multicultural personality, pp. 173-196. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Campbell, D. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24:409-429.

Campbell, D. & Russo, M. (1999). Social experimentation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Carter, R. (1995). The influence of race and racial identity in psychotherapy: toward a racially inclusive model. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Carter, R., Pieterse, A., & Smith, S. (2008). Racial identity status profiles and expressions of anger in Black Americans: An exploratory study. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 36:101-114.

Chambers, J., Kambon, K., Birdsong, B., Brown, J., Dixon, P., & Robbins-Brinson, L. (1998). Africentric cultural identity and the stress experience of African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 24:368-396.

Chinweizu. (1975). The West and the rest of us. New York: Vintage Books.

_______. (1987). Decolonising the African mind. Lagos: Pero Press.

Chomsky, N. (1993). Year 501: The conquest continues. Boston: South End Press.

Clarke, J.H. (1997). Foreward. In J. Carruthers & L. Harris (Eds.), African world history project: The preliminary challenge, pp. x-xvii. Los Angeles: ASCAC.

Constantine, M., Alleyne, V., Wallace, B., & Franklin-Jones, D. (2006). Africentric cultural values: Their relation to positive mental health in African American adolescent girls. Journal of Black Psychology, 32:141-154.

Constantine, M., Richardson, T., Benjamin, E., & Wilson, J. (1998). An overview of Black racial identity theories: Limitations and considerations for future theoretical conceptualizations. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 7, 95-99.

Counter, S.A. & Evans, D. (1981). I sought my brother: An Afro-American reunion. Boston: MIT Press.

Croasdale, A. & Mate-Kole, C. (2006). Racial identity development and psychological adjustment among African American drug users. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 30, 68-88.

Cross, W., Parham, T., & Helms, J. (1998). Nigrescence revisited: Theory and research. In R. Jones (Ed.), African American identity development (pp. 3-71). Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry.

Curry, T. (2011). On derelict and method: The methodological crisis of African-American philosophy's study of African-descended peoples under an integrationist milieu. Radical Philosophy Review, 14(2):139-164.

Daniels, R. (2005). Reasserting a race first strategy.

Denard, D. (1998). Application of the Azibo nosology in clinical practice with Black clients: A case study. Journal of Black Psychology, 24:182-195.

Dixon, P. & Azibo, D. (1998). African self-consciousness, misorientation behavior, and a self-destructive disorder: African American male crack-cocaine users. Journal of Black Psychology, 24:226-247.

Duncan, G. & McCoy, H. (2007). Black adolescent racial identity and respectability. Negro Educational Review, 58(1-2):35-48.

Fagan, B. (1998). Clash of cultures (2nd ed.). Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.

Fanon, F. (1963). The wretched of the earth. New York: Grove Press.

Ferguson, T., Leach, M, Levy, J., Nicholson, B., & Johnson, J. (2008). Influences on counselor race preferences: Distinguishing Black racial attitudes from Black racial identity. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 36:66-76.

Garvey, M. (1986). Message to the people: The course of African philosophy. Dover, MA: The Majority Press.

Hansen, W. W. (1996). A Frantz Fanon study guide. New York: Grove Press.

Holdstock, T. (2000). Re-examining psychology: Critical perspectives and African insights. Philadelphia: Routledge.

Houston, L. (1990). Psychological principles and the Black experience. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Jamison, D. (2007). Amos Wilson: Toward a liberation psychology. The Griot, 26(1):1- 12.

Jennings, R. (2003). From nigger to negro: Dysfunctional beginnings of identity for New World Africans. In D. Azibo (Ed.), African-centered Psychology: Culturefocusing for multicultural competence, pp. 251-276. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

_______. (2011). From slavery to contemporary genocide: A literary and linguistic analysis of why American Blacks deserve reparations. Race, Gender & Class, 18(1-2):73-94.

Jones, R. (1998). African American identity development. Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry.

Kambon, K. (1996). The Africentric paradigm and African-American psychological liberation. In D. Azibo (Ed.), African psychology in historical perspective and related commentary, pp. 57-70. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Khoapa, B. (1980). The African personality. Tokyo: United Nations University.

King, M. L., Jr. (1968). The role of the behavioral scientist in the civil rights movement. American Psychologist, 23(3):180-186.

Krupat, E. (1975). Readings and conversations in social psychology: Psychology is social. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2:34- 46.

Mandara, J., Gaylord-Harden, N., Richards, M., & Ragsdale, B. (2009). The effects of changes in racial identity and self-esteem on changes in African American adolescents' mental health. Child Development, 80:1660-1675.

Martin, T. (1976). Race first: The ideological and organizational struggles of Marcus Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association. Dover, MA: The Majority Press.

Martin-Baro, I. (1994). Writings for a liberation psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Morrow, A. (2003). Breaking the curse of Willie Lynch: The science of slave psychology. St. Louis: Rising Sun Publications.

Murray, C. & Mandara, J. (2003). An assessment of the relationship between racial socialization, racial identity and self-esteem in African American adolescents. In D. Azibo (Ed.), African-centered Psychology: Culture-focusing for multicultural competence, pp. 39-66. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

Nobles, W. (1976). Black people in White insanity: An issue for Black community mental health. Journal of Afro-American Issues, 4:21-27.

Olomenji. (1996). Mentacide, genocide, and national vision: The crossroads for the Blacks of America. In D. Azibo (Ed.), African psychology in historical perspective & related commentary, pp. 71-82. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Osei, G.K. (1970). The African philosophy of life. London: The African Publication Society.

_______. (1971). The African: His antecedents, his genius, and his destiny. New Hyde Park, NY: University Books.

_______. (1981). The African concept of life and death. London: The African Publication Society.

Outten, H., Schmitt, M., Garcia, D., & Branscombe, N. (2009). Coping options: Missing links between minority group identification and psychological well-being. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 58(1):146-170.

Psychological nigrescence revisited [Special issue]. (2001). Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29(3).

Robinson, J. & Azibo, D. (2003). Are stages of African identity development consistent with the African personality construct? In D. Azibo (Ed.), African-centered psychology: Culture-focusing for multicultural competence. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

Schultz, D. (2003). African-American personality theory. In D. Azibo (Ed.), Africancentered Psychology: Culture-focusing for multicultural competence, pp. 39-66. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

Sellers, R., Shelton, N., Cooke, D., Chavous, T., Rowley, S., & Smith, M. (1998). A multidimensional model of racial identity: Assumptions, findings, and future directions. In R. Jones, (Ed.), African American identity development, pp. 275- 302. Hampton, VA: Cobb and Henry Press.

Sutherland, M. (1989). Individual differences in response to the struggle for the liberation of people of African descent. Journal of Black Studies, 20:40-59.

_______. (1995). Racial socialization of African American children for liberation. Black Child Journal, 8:22-26.

_______. (1997). Black authenticity: A psychology for liberating people of African descent. Chicago: Third World Press.

Taylor, J. (1998). Cultural conversion experiences: Implications for mental health research and treatment. In R. Jones (Ed.), African American identity development, pp. 85-97. Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry.

Thomas, C. (1971). Boys no more. Beverly Hills, CA: Glencoe Press.

Tomes, E., Brown, A., Semenya, K., & Simpson, J. (1990). Depression in Black women of low socioeconomic status: Psychosocial factors and nursing diagnosis. Journal of the National Black Nurses Association, 4:37-46.

Townsend, T. & Belgrave, F. (2000). The impact of personal identity and racial identity on drug attitudes and use among African American children. Journal of Black Psychology, 26:421-436.

Townsend, T. & Lanphier, E. (2007). Family influences on racial identity among African American youth. Journal of Black Psychology, 33:278-298.

Wakefield, J.C. (1997). Normal inability versus pathological disability: Why Ossorio's definition of mental disorder is not sufficient. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 4(3):249-258.

Welsing, F. (1991). The Isis papers. Chicago: Third World Press.

Williams, C. (1976). Destruction of Black civilizations. Chicago: Third World Press.

_______. (1993). The re-birth of African civilization. Hampton, VA: U.B. & U.S. Communications Systems.

Wilson, A. (1989, Sept. 10). The psycho-historical destruction of African civilizations (videotape). New York: Afrikan World InfoSystems.

_______. (1993). The falsification of Afrikan consciousness. New York: Afrikan World Infosystems.

_______. (1998). Blueprint for Black power: A moral, political and economicimperative for the twenty-first century. New York: Afrikan World Infosystems.

_______. (1999). Afrikan-centered consciousness versus the New World Order: Garveyism in the age of globalism. New York: Afrikan World Infosystems.

Wright, B. (1985). The psychopathic racial personality. Chicago: Third World Press.

Wright, B.J. & Isenstein, V. (1978). Psychological tests and minorities. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.