IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v364y2025ics0277953624009778.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Searching for equity: White normativity in online skin cancer images”

Author

Listed:
  • Rondini, Ashley C.
  • Diallo, Genab
  • Bryant, Foster
  • Kowalsky, Rachel H.

Abstract

In this paper, we examine the range of skin tones represented in publicly available online image search results through which non-medical audiences might seek information about skin cancer signs, symptoms, and risks. We use the Fitzpatrick scale, a numerical classification system grouping six human skin tones (or “phototypes”) in dermatology, as a guide for analyzing the skin tones appearing in (n = 1600) Google image search results for search terms related to skin cancer. We find that light skin tones (1,2, and 3 on the Fitzpatrick scale) comprise the significant majority (roughly 96%) of those depicted in Google image searches of information about skin cancer signs and prevention; dark skin tones (4, 5, and 6 on the Fitzpatrick scale) appear with significantly less frequency (roughly 4%) in the same search results. Disparate representation of diverse skin tones—and, more specifically, omission of dark skin images—suggests that racial biases inflect the search results generated by seemingly race-neutral skin-cancer related search terms. This embedded racial bias privileges white normativity to the disadvantage of dark-skinned patients, who are most likely to be racially classified as Black.

Suggested Citation

  • Rondini, Ashley C. & Diallo, Genab & Bryant, Foster & Kowalsky, Rachel H., 2025. "“Searching for equity: White normativity in online skin cancer images”," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 364(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:364:y:2025:i:c:s0277953624009778
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117523
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624009778
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117523?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:364:y:2025:i:c:s0277953624009778. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.