Race & Ethnicity in Independent Films: 

Prevalence of Underrepresented Directors and the Barriers They Face 

Katherine M. Pieper, Ph.D., Marc Choueiti, & Stacy L. Smith, Ph.D. 

Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism 

University of Southern California

(working paper) 

This project was supported in part or in whole by an award from the Research: Art Works

program at the National Endowment for the Arts: Grant# 13-3800-7017. 

The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent 

the views of the Office of Research & Analysis or the National Endowment for the Arts. The 

NEA does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information included in this report 

and is not responsible for any consequence of its use. 
1

Race & Ethnicity in Independent Films: 

Prevalence of Underrepresented Directors and the Barriers They Face

Katherine M. Pieper, Ph.D., Marc Choueiti, & Stacy L. Smith, Ph.D. 

Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism 

University of Southern California 

3502 Watt Way, Suite 222-223 

Los Angeles, CA 90089 

@MDSCInitiative 

Executive Summary 

The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence and experiences of directors from 

underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in film. To this end, the research involved three prongs. 

First, we examined race/ethnicity of all directors associated with U.S. dramatic and documentary 

films selected and screened at Sundance Film Festival (SFF) between 2002 and 2013. Using a 

modified version of U.S. Census categories, a total of 1,068 directors across more than 900 films 

were categorized into one or more racial/ethnic groups. 

Second, we assessed how diversity behind the camera was related to on screen diversity. Here 

we scrutinized the relationship between director race/ethnicity and character race/ethnicity across 

118 dramatic movies screened at SFF between 2010 and 2013 and 500 top-grossing films 

theatrically released between 2007 and 2012. Third, we interviewed 20 emerging and seasoned 

underrepresented narrative directors about the barriers and opportunities they have experienced 

navigating the independent film space. Below, we overview our major quantitative and 

qualitative findings. 

Quantitative Analysis 

Underrepresented Directors at Sundance Film Festival 

Across 12 years of U.S. films screened at Sundance Film Festival (2002-2013), 20.1% (n=215) 

of the directors were from one or more underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups. Put 

differently, the ratio of White directors to underrepresented directors is just shy of 4 to 1. 

Differences emerged across narrative and documentary films. Almost a quarter of all directors 

of narrative films were from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups (23.1%). Underrepresented directors comprised 15.6% of helmers in the documentary space. 

An assessment of gender prevalence revealed key differences. Across 12 years, 

underrepresented males (77.2%) were more likely than underrepresented females (22.8%) to 

direct U.S. narrative and documentary films. Looking more closely at film genre, 

underrepresented females accounted for 18.1% of directors in the narrative space (81.9% male) 

and 33.3% in the documentary space (66.7% male). Thus, underrepresented females were 

almost twice as likely to helm a documentary film than a dramatic feature. 

Director race/ethnicity is strongly associated with character diversity. In the SFF promotional 

materials, the percentage of underrepresented characters on screen increased 43.9% when a 
2

director of color helmed a film. Director race/ethnicity increases the likelihood of including on 

screen characters from the same racial/ethnic group when a “match” between director 

race/ethnicity and on-screen depictions is considered. 

Although they remain less prevalent than White directors, individuals from underrepresented 

groups do find a place to showcase their work at Sundance Film Festival. This work is often 

more diverse than that of White directors, and particularly so when considered in relation to the 

race/ethnicity of the director. 

Underrepresented Directors of Top-Grossing Films 

We examined the prevalence of underrepresented directors across 700 top-grossing films 

between 2006 and 2012 as a comparison to rates in independent film. Only 10.7% (n=84) of 

directors (n=785) were from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups. Looking to the 

relationship between the director and content was also informative. When a White director 

helmed a movie, 21.4% of characters on screen were underrepresented. When a director of color 

was behind the camera, 49.7% of characters were underrepresented. 

The presence of a director from a particular race/ethnicity heightens the likelihood that on screen 

characters will be from the same racial/ethnic group. This is evident among Black (52.6% of 

characters were Black), Hispanic (12.5% of characters were Hispanic/Latino) and Asian (27.5% 

of characters were Asian) directors of top-grossing fare. White directors showed the least 

amount of diversity on screen. 

In comparison to independent films, top-grossing fare is less likely to feature underrepresented 

individuals at the helm, particularly women. The films that do feature directors from diverse 

backgrounds are also more likely to showcase diversity on screen. It is clear from these findings 

that directors who may find a footing in the independent realm will find it difficult to transition 

to higher budgeted fare. 

Qualitative Analysis 

Barriers and Opportunities facing Underrepresented Directors 

Interviews with 20 directors from underrepresented groups revealed a series of impediments that 

face individuals as they navigate a filmmaking career. Notably, filmmakers described that 

politicized market forces were a significant obstacle to making films. Nearly two-thirds (65%) 

of those interviewed mentioned that perceptions of the marketplace (i.e., what sells) hampered 

their ability to create films, especially those with diverse casts or characters. Directors also 

mentioned that their abilities were doubted by investors or employees on a film set. Close to half 

(40%) indicated that due to the race and/or ethnicity or their age they were challenged or 

questioned by others in the industry. Directors also indicated that a lack of wealth or class 

membership (25%), perceived incongruity with community membership (25%), and gender 

(25%) functioned as barriers to advancement in the film industry. 

Several opportunities for change were provided. First, offering more creative support for diverse 

artists was suggested. Strengthening or broadening existing training or exhibition programs for 

directors from underrepresented groups could be one means of creating more exposure for artists. 
3

Second, directors recommended increasing financing or networking opportunities that would 

offer more chances for filmmakers to raise capital. Finally, creating structural interference in the 

industry to mandate diversity was proposed as a way to ensure change. 

 
4

Race & Ethnicity in Independent Films: 

Prevalence of Underrepresented Directors and the Barriers They Face1 

Katherine M. Pieper, Ph.D., Marc Choueiti, & Stacy L. Smith, Ph.D. 

Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism 

University of Southern California 

3502 Watt Way, Suite 222-223 

Los Angeles, CA 90089 

@MDSCInitiative 

Full Report 

Films can leave an indelible imprint on viewers. This unique art form has evolved alongside 

other forms of technology as a vessel for storytelling, capturing our imaginations and our culture. 

As a result, filmmakers have acquired a peculiar role, at once the architects of the imaginary 

while at the same time responsible for stewarding real-world businesses and brands. Their 

products straddle both art and commerce, since movies earn over $10 billion in annual domestic 

revenue.2

 While what we see on screen certainly entertains, it can also echo the larger world we 

live in. Given the rapidly changing cultural landscape we inhabit, it is important to consider 

whether films and filmmakers truly reflect the diversity of their audience. 

Although very little research has been conducted on the impact racial/ethnic status has on 

employment as a content creator, industry guild findings shed light on the problem. The Directors 

Guild of America found that during the 2012–2013 television season, 14% of episodic television 

shows were directed by a male from an underrepresented group and just 2% were directed by an 

underrepresented female.3 The Writers Guild of America reported that in 2009, just 5% of 

screenwriters in film were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. This was a decrease from 

an already low 6% between 2005 and 2008.4 

Perhaps the most systematic investigation of the prevalence of diversity behind the camera has 

been conducted by researchers at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of 

Southern California.5

 From 2007 to 2012, the prevalence of African-American directors of the 100 

top-grossing films each year decreased, from 7.1% in 2007 to just 4.9% in 2012. Across five years 

and 500 films, only two African-American female directors were represented. 

Outside of mere presence behind the camera, when individuals from underrepresented 

racial/ethnic groups do work as directors and producers, they may have a very different 

experience than their white male counterparts. According to the Writers Guild, the median wage 

gap between what white male film writers earned in 2009 and what underrepresented film writers 

earned was $20,864.6

 The gap is shrinking, but the WGA has attributed this to a decrease in 

incomes for white males rather than to increases in pay for underrepresented writers. 

Several books have explored the topic of race and work in the film industry.7

 However, these 

analyses tend to focus on individual biographies or challenges faced by a specific content 

creator, or about the work they create.8 Scholar Donald Bogle covers historic portrayals of 

African-Americans in both television and film,9

 and while he describes several notable content 

creators, he stops short of tracing patterns of employment over time. A broader catalogue of the 
5

societal impediments faced by content creators from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic 

backgrounds has not been clearly or comprehensively delineated. 

The most thorough study on this topic has been undertaken in the United Kingdom.10 

Researchers interviewed nearly 100 film and television workers about the nature of their career 

and the barriers they faced. The results demonstrated that there are a series of problems that 

underrepresented content creators associate with trying to obtain work in the film and television 

industries. First, media jobs do not carry a professional status, and individuals from certain 

underrepresented populations may be encouraged to seek employment in a more prestigious field 

(i.e., medicine, law, etc.). Second, financial limitations may exclude content creators from 

underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. The film industry is expensive to break into, with low or 

short-term pay for most employees. Though this may be a class barrier, the often intertwined 

nature of race and class may make this a salient concern for many underrepresented content 

creators. 

In addition to these barriers, the authors describe how closed social networks create difficulties for 

obtaining work. Breaking into these networks is difficult for content creators who are not 

connected to decision-makers through family ties or friendships. Moreover, exclusion from these 

circles reduces the likelihood of being recommended for positions through informal channels. The 

individuals interviewed in the U.K. study also described how they felt siphoned into creating 

“culturally specific programs”.11 These programs had less widespread market appeal and were 

produced less often. Creators described longer lag times between projects and subsequent financial 

disadvantages. Finally, the individuals interviewed reported that they felt they were tokens, merely 

hired to be in the background, representative of their racial/ethnic group, but without the ability to 

make decisions. 

Since higher budget fare appears less accessible to content creators from diverse backgrounds, 

where might individuals who want to work as directors find an outlet? In the U.S., apart from 

commercial production, one key arena to explore is independent film. Lower production budgets 

and more open access may allow more filmmakers from diverse backgrounds to participate. 

Recent work undertaken by researchers at USC Annenberg in partnership with Sundance 

Institute and Women in Film Los Angeles focused on women behind the camera in independent 

film.12 The landmark study reveals the contrast between this arena and studio filmmaking. 

Across 11 years and 1,220 directors of top-grossing films, only 4.4% were female. More females 

worked behind the scenes in independent films; across 11 years, 23.9% of directors at Sundance 

Film Festival were female. Interviews with independent filmmakers and industry thought leaders 

identified several impediments that females face as directors and producers in independent film. 

Those included gendered financial barriers, male-dominated industry networks, and work and 

family balance, among others. Beyond gender, however, 17.6% of the 51 individuals 

interviewed or surveyed reported that race and ethnicity is a complicating factor in the career 

barriers women face. 

Despite these findings, our knowledge of diversity in independent filmmaking remains limited, 

necessitating deeper investigation. Prior research has not illuminated the prevalence of content 

creators from underrepresented groups, the barriers they face, or their role in crafting stories 

about or featuring characters from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. The purpose of 
6

this report is to address this gap in our knowledge by answering the following research 

questions: 

1. Compared to U.S. population reports and to studio films, what percentage of content creators 

who identify with underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups had their work screened at the 

Sundance Film Festival between 2002 and 2013? 

2. Does diversity behind the camera affect diversity in front of the camera? 

3. What are the barriers to and opportunities for success in independent film for male and 

female filmmakers from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups? 

To address the research questions, the study involved three prongs. First, we examined 

race/ethnicity13 of all directors associated with U.S. dramatic and documentary films selected and 

screened at Sundance Film Festival (SFF) between 2002 and 2013.14 Using a modified version 

of U.S. Census categories,15 a total of 1,068 directors across 904 films were categorized into one 

or more racial/ethnic groups.16 

Second, we assessed how diversity behind the camera was related to on screen diversity. Here 

we scrutinized the relationship between director race/ethnicity and character race/ethnicity across 

118 dramatic movies screened at SFF between 2010 and 2013 and 500 top-grossing films 

theatrically released between 2007 and 2012. Third, we interviewed 20 emerging and seasoned 

underrepresented narrative directors about the barriers and opportunities they have experienced 

navigating the independent film space. Below, we overview our major quantitative and 

qualitative findings. 

Quantitative Section: 

Underrepresented Directors at Sundance Film Festival 

Across 12 years of U.S. films screened at Sundance Film Festival (2002-2013), 20.1% (n=215) 

of the directors were from one or more underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups. Put 

differently, the ratio of White directors to underrepresented directors is just shy of 4 to 1. 

Table 1 

SFF Directors, Industry Groups, & U.S. Census Diversity 

Race/Ethnicity 

SFF 

Directors 

(2002-13) 

Top 

Grossing 

Films 

(2006-12) 

DGA 

Episodic 

TV 

(2012-13) 

WGA 

TV 

Writers 

(2011-12) 

WGA 

Film 

Writers 

(2012) 

U.S. 

Census 

(2010) 

Underrepresented 20.1% 10.7% 16% 15.6% 5% 36.3% 

Not Underrepresented 79.9% 89.3% 84% 84.4% 95% 63.7% 

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Note: To facilitate comparisons, U.S. Census data is collapsed to reflect White (Not Hispanic or Latino) vs. All Other Groups. 

Data sources for this table are described in footnotes 6 through 10. 

As shown in Table 1, the overall SFF percentage of underrepresented directors across 12 years is 

higher than film industry norms, especially for feature film directors, but still below the U.S. 

Census (20.1% vs. 36.3%).17 We examined SFF participation rates in comparison to top-grossing 
7

films and mainstream television directors. Ten percent (10.7%, n=84) of directors (n=785) across 

700 top-grossing films between 2006 and 2012 were from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic 

groups.18 Using statistics from the Directors Guild of America (DGA), underrepresented 

directors comprised 16% of helmers working in episodic TV (2012-13).19 Because of the focus 

on director/writer at Sundance Institute, the percentage of writers in the WGA West is also 

relevant. Roughly one sixth (15.6%) of employed writers were from underrepresented 

racial/ethnic groups in TV (2011-12)20 and 5% in film (2012).21 

Examining SFF directors from specific racial and/or ethnic groups, the numbers will slightly 

deviate from the breakdown in Table 1. This is because directors were categorized in multiple 

racial and/or ethnic groups. Of all directors (n=1,068), 84.9% were White/Caucasian, 5.6% were 

Hispanic or Latino, 6.5% were Black/African American, 5% were Asian, 1.8% were Middle 

Eastern, 1.8% were Native American, <1% were Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and <1% 

were from Other races/ethnicities. Because directors may be counted as part of multiple racial 

and/or ethnic groups, these percentages do not sum to 100%.22

While the above patterns paint the overall picture, the analyses below were conducted by putting 

directors into two categories: underrepresented versus not underrepresented/White (see Table 1). 

The next set of analyses examined trends in director diversity at SFF in three key areas: genre, 

program category, and over time. We then assessed the gender of underrepresented directors at 

SFF between 2002 and 2013. Finally, the last section addresses whether an underrepresented 

director is related to on screen diversity. 

Figure 1 

Underrepresented Directors by Film Genre at SFF: 2002-2013 

Film Genre. All of the films in the sample were categorized as narrative (586 films) or 

documentary (316 films) across the 12 years. Two films defied categorization and thus were 

excluded from all further analyses. As shown in Figure 1, almost a quarter of all directors of 

23.1%

15.6%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Narrative

Documentary

% of Underrepresented Directors
8

narrative films were from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups (23.1%). Underrepresented directors comprised 15.6% of helmers in the documentary space.23 Due to the 

differences by genre, the following analyses treat documentary and narrative films distinctly. 

Program Category. To look at where stories by underrepresented directors were getting placed 

at the festival, we categorized all of the U.S. narrative and documentary films into three mutually 

exclusive silos: competition, premiere, and niche (all other program categories). As shown in 

Figure 2, little and non significant variation emerged by category for underrepresented or White 

directors in both narratives24 and documentaries.25

Figure 2 

Underrepresented Directors by Program Category at SFF: 2002-2013 

Over Time Analyses. For this section, we investigated how underrepresented directors were 

doing in narrative and documentary films over time.26 Exploring narrative films, we first 

bifurcated all films into two buckets: dramatic competition vs. dramatic non competition 

(premiere films, niche films). Then we looked at the percentage of underrepresented directors 

within these two categories across 12 years at SFF. 

 

Figure 3 shows fairly erratic increases and decreases in the percentage of underrepresented 

narrative directors overtime. What is important to note, however, is the 11.1% uptick between 

2002 and 2013 in the dramatic competition category. Though there is some variation (2%-

3.9%), the increase holds across 2011 (31.3%), 2012 (29.4%), and 2013 (33.3%). However, we 

must interpret these findings with caution as only 16 films are selected and screened in the 

dramatic competition category per year. Because of the small sample size, adding one additional 

underrepresented director per year can noticeably change a yearly percentage. In non 

competition films, an 8% decrease in underrepresented film directors was observed between 

2002 (31.4%) and 2013 (23.4%). The gains achieved in the competition category were leveled 

off with the losses experienced in the non competition category. 

15.9%

26%

10.6%

20.4%

16.4%

21.5%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Docs

Narratives

Comp

Premieres

Niche
9

 

Figure 3 

% of Underrepresented Narrative Directors at SFF Over Time: 2002-2013 

Figure 4

% of Underrepresented Documentary Directors at SFF Over Time: 2002-2013 

Focusing on the documentary space, the films also were separated into two categories: 

documentary competition vs. documentary non competition (premiere films, niche films). Just 

like dramatic films, we then looked at the percentage of underrepresented directors within these 

two categories across the 12-year sample. As shown in Figure 4, the percentages varied 

considerably from year to year for both competition and non competition documentary films. No 

notable shifts appear between 2002 and 2013 in movies selected and screened in the 

22.2%

33.3%

31.4%

23.4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Comp

Non Comp

20.8% 21.4%

10%

17.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Comp

Non Comp
10

documentary competition category. A 7.6% increase across the 12-year sample is noted in non 

competition films, though two years (2005, 2010) featured no underrepresented directors. Again, 

the trends observed in Figure 4 should be interpreted with caution due to the low number of 

underrepresented directors year to year within competition and non competition festival 

categories. 

Gender Prevalence. While the previous analyses considered all underrepresented directors, this 

section examines how race/ethnicity and gender intersect at SFF. This focus is important, as 

Sundance Institute and Women in Film Los Angeles launched a Women’s Initiative in 2012 to 

support female directors and producers as they navigate their film careers.27 

Across 12 years, underrepresented males (77.2%) were more likely than underrepresented 

females (22.8%) to direct U.S. narrative and documentary films. Looking more closely at film 

genre (see Figure 5), underrepresented females accounted for 18.1% of directors in the narrative 

space (81.9% male) and 33.3% in the documentary space (66.7% male). Thus, underrepresented 

females were almost twice as likely to helm a documentary film than a dramatic feature. 

Figure 5 

Gender of Underrepresented Directors by SFF Film Genre: 2002-2013 

A relationship exists by program category as well. In narrative films (see Table 2), 

underrepresented females face a steep fiscal cliff when moving from competition to niche films 

and another precipice transitioning to premieres.28 Examining gender within the documentary 

arena reveals an interesting non significant trend (see Table 2).29 A full 41.9% of the 

underrepresented directors in the competition category were female. The percentages of 

underrepresented female documentary directors were almost half of this in premiere (20%) but 

slightly less than half in niche (16.7%) categories. These findings need to be interpreted with 

81.9%

66.7%

18.1%

33.3%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Narrative Films Documentary Films

Male Directors

Female Directors
11

caution, as there were very few underrepresented female documentary directors in the premiere 

or niche categories. 

Table 2 

Gender of Underrepresented Directors by Program Category at SFF: 2002-2013 

Narrative Films Competition Premiere Niche 

Underrepresented Males 67.4% 94.1% 84.7% 

Underrepresented Females 32.6% 5.9% 15.3% 

Documentary Films Competition Premiere Niche 

Underrepresented Males 58.1% 80% 83.3% 

Underrepresented Females 41.9% 20% 16.7% 

Overall, the purpose of this section was to overview the prevalence of underrepresented directors 

at SFF between 2002 and 2013. Roughly a fifth of all directors were from an underrepresented 

racial and/or ethnic group. Further analyses revealed some deviation by film genre, program 

category, year, and gender in the prevalence of underrepresented SFF directors. Now that we 

have documented the frequency of underrepresented helmers at SFF, we turn our attention to the 

role these directors play in diversifying cinematic storytelling. 

Content Patterns. What impact does having an underrepresented director behind the scenes in 

SFF films have on character race/ethnicity on screen? To answer this question, the race/ethnicity 

of characters (n=929) was examined using promotional materials (e.g., trailers, film synopses) 

from 118 dramatic features screened at SFF from 2010 to 2013.30 The films were separated into 

two categories: those with underrepresented directors and those with only White directors. 

Then, we looked at the percentage of underrepresented characters across these groups. 

 

As shown in Figure 6, director race/ethnicity is strongly related to character diversity. In the SFF 

promotional materials, the percentage of underrepresented characters on screen increased 43.9% 

when a director of color helmed a film.31 Next, we turn to the distribution of character 

race/ethnicity by director diversity (underrepresented vs. White). Across SFF32 films, Table 3 

reveals that underrepresented directors have a higher percentage of Black, Hispanic, and Asian 

characters in their stories than do White directors. A slightly higher percentage of Middle 

Eastern and Native American characters occur in SFF underrepresented directors' films. 
12

Figure 6 

Underrepresented On Screen Characters by SFF Film Director Diversity 

% of underrepresented characters

Finally, we examined the degree to which directors’ specific race/ethnicity was related to 

showing characters on screen from the same racial/ethnic category. At this point we highlighted 

a “match" between directors’ racial/ethnic group and on screen characters’. We coded a 

“mismatch” when characters did not map onto the same race/ethnicity category as the group 

under consideration. Sample size restricted an analysis on Asian directors (see Figure 7). 

Table 3 

SFF Narrative Director Diversity by On Screen Character Race/Ethnicity 

Character 

Race/Ethnicity

Sundance Film Festival 

White 

Directors 

Underrepresented 

Directors 

White 88.9% 45% 

Black 4.8% 25.9% 

Hispanic 4.2% 16.4% 

Asian <1% 1.4% 

Middle Eastern <1% 5.5% 

Native American 0% 3.2% 

Other 1.3% 2.7% 

 Note: The above analyses only focus on promotional materials associated with 118 narrative films 

 at SFF between 2010 and 2013. 

55%

11.1%

0% 25% 50% 75%

White Director

Underrepresented

Director
13

As shown in Figure 7, director race/ethnicity increases the likelihood of including on screen 

characters from the same racial/ethnic group. For Black directors, over half of all characters in 

the promotional materials were Black (57.6%). When Hispanics were at the helm, 22.1% of 

characters analyzed were Latino. Similarly high matching percentages were found for Middle 

Eastern directors of Sundance fare. Figure 7 also reveals that White directors were the least 

likely of all racial/ethnic groups to diversify characters. 

Figure 7 

Matching Character Diversity by Director Diversity in SFF Feature Films 

Note: Blue shading in pie charts represents a “match” and green shading illuminates a “mismatch” between director 

race/ethnicity and character race/ethnicity. Due to small sample sizes, Asian directors and those from “other” 

races/ethnicities were excluded from analyses. 

In summary, the race and/or ethnicity of a director matters for the content of a film. When a 

director of color helms a dramatic feature at SFF, character diversity increases significantly. 

86.3%

13.7%

White Directors

57.6%

42.4%

Black Directors

22.1%

77.9%

Hispanic Directors

28.6%

71.4%

Middle Eastern Directors
14

Unfortunately, as we saw above, less than a quarter (23.1%) of all directors in narrative 

categories at SFF were from underrepresented groups. So, while these individuals depict a 

diverse collection of characters and stories, they are still relatively infrequent. The picture only 

becomes more whitewashed as we move from one source of independent content (SFF) to 

examine more mainstream, top-grossing directors and their films.

Top-Grossing Films 

Sundance Film Festival may be a road for some directors to more mainstream storytelling, 

including television or larger budget filmmaking. Thus, it becomes important to examine the 

career pipeline for underrepresented directors. In this section, the prevalence of 

underrepresented directors in top-grossing movies is assessed and compared to SFF patterns of 

participation. Then the racial and/or ethnic diversity of characters is analyzed. 

As mentioned above, the overall percentage of underrepresented directors in the 100 topgrossing films each year between 2006 and 2012 was 10.7% (n=785). However, this combined 

percentage offers little explanation of whether this point statistic demonstrates any variation over 

time. To that end, using SFF as a comparison, the percentage of underrepresented directors each 

year is plotted against programmed films. As illustrated in Figure 8, the year-to-year variation 

demonstrated in SFF films is not apparent in top-grossing fare. This nearly flat line shows that 

the percentage of underrepresented helmers is quite stable across 7 years and 700 films. 

Figure 8 

% of Underrepresented Narrative Directors at SFF & in Top-Grossing Films Over Time 

 

As another metric of the pipeline, the number of “unique” directors who helmed a top-grossing 

film between 2006 and 2012 was assessed. Some directors work multiple times across the seven 

years analyzed and thus were counted more than once in Figure 8. A total of 498 unique 

22.2%

33.3%

31.4%

23.4%

12.6%

10.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Comp

Non Comp

Top 100 Films
15

directors worked one or more times across the seven year sample, with 11.7% (n=58) from 

underrepresented racial/ethnic groups and 88.3% (n=438) White. This translates into a ratio of 1 

underrepresented director for every 7.55 White directors. 

Assessing the range of directing opportunities across the seven year time frame also is important. 

Over three fourths (79.3%) of underrepresented directors helmed one film, with 12.1% directing 

two and 6.9% directing three. One underrepresented director helmed 12 films (Tyler Perry), an 

outlier in the sample. Turning to White directors, 60.3% directed one movie, 24.4% two movies, 

11.4% three movies, 3.2% four movies, and <1% five or more movies. Based on these data, 

White directors were two times as likely to direct two films and over one and a half times as 

likely to direct three. 

Of the 58 underrepresented directors, we were curious to see if any of these helmers received 

artistic support (i.e., screened a short or feature film at SFF, participated in a lab, received a 

fellowship or grant) from Sundance Institute over the course of their careers. To this end, we 

looked up these 58 directors in the Institute’s online archives. A third (n=19) participated in SFF 

at some point in their film career or received artistic support from one of the labs or 

fellowships.33 These findings are similar to the results we obtained with female directors in the 

Women’s Initiative 2013 report.34 Thus, Sundance Institute is one cultural entity that cultivates 

and/or reinforces the pipeline of directors to more mainstream storytelling. 

Once again, the question posed above is of interest: does the prevalence of an underrepresented 

director relate to on screen character diversity? To answer this query, existing databases 

consisting of every speaking or named character (n=20,029) across 500 top-grossing films from 

2007 to 2012 are utilized.35 First, the presence or absence of an underrepresented director is 

related to the presence of underrepresented characters. As shown in Figure 9, when a White 

director helmed a movie, 21.4% of characters on screen were underrepresented. When a director 

of color was behind the camera, 49.7% of characters were underrepresented. 36 

Next, the association between director race/ethnicity (underrepresented vs. White) and the wider 

range of character race/ethnicity was explored (see Table 4). The presence of an 

underrepresented director increases the percentage of Black, Hispanic, and Asian characters. 37 

It is interesting to note that there were no Native characters portrayed in films by 

underrepresented directors, and very few in movies with White directors. Because Sundance 

supports Native directors, this may allow for a window into storytelling that may rarely be seen 

otherwise. 
16

Figure 9 

Underrepresented On Screen Characters by Top-Grossing Film Director Diversity 

% of underrepresented characters

Table 4 

Top-Grossing Director Diversity by On Screen Character Race/Ethnicity 

Character 

Race/Ethnicity

Top-Grossing Films 

White 

Directors 

Underrepresented 

Directors 

White 78.6% 50.3% 

Black 9.9% 35.4% 

Hispanic 3.7% 5.3% 

Asian 4.7% 8.2% 

Middle Eastern 2.6% <1% 

Native American <1% 0% 

Other <1% <1% 

Similar to the analysis of Sundance promotional materials, the “match” between director 

race/ethnicity and character race/ethnicity was of interest. As shown in Figure 10, the presence of 

a director from a particular race/ethnicity heightens the likelihood that on screen characters will 

be from the same racial/ethnic group. This is evident among Black (52.6% of characters were 

Black), Hispanic (12.5% of characters were Hispanic/Latino) and Asian (27.5% of characters 

were Asian) directors of top-grossing fare. As seen earlier in the analysis of Sundance materials, 

Figure 10 shows that White directors showed the least amount of diversity on screen. 

49.7%

21.4%

0% 25% 50% 75%

White Director

Underrepresented

Director
17

Figure 10 

Matching Character Diversity by Director Diversity in Top-Grossing Feature Films 

Note: Blue shading in pie charts represents a “match” and green shading illuminates a “mismatch” between director 

race/ethnicity and character race/ethnicity. Due to small sample sizes, Middle Eastern directors and those from 

“other” races/ethnicities were excluded from analyses. 

Given these results, underrepresented directors are largely responsible for diversifying the 

landscape of character race/ethnicity on screen. As the population of the U.S. becomes more 

diverse, underrepresented directors may be a key resource in cultivating stories to meet emerging 

or existing audiences. Yet, this is only possible if underrepresented directors are able to move 

from the independent realm to work in more lucrative arenas. Our data reveal that 

underrepresented directors may not move fluidly from screening at Sundance to helming larger 

budget motion pictures. In the next section, we explore the barriers that may prevent directors 

from achieving this goal. 

78.4%

21.6%

White Directors

52.6%

47.4%

Black Directors

12.5%

87.5%

Hispanic Directors

27.5%

72.5%

Asian Directors
18

Qualitative Section: 

Barriers & Opportunities Facing Underrepresented Directors 

We conducted in-depth interviews with a total of 20 directors who identify with an 

underrepresented racial and/or ethnic group. These individuals are currently working as 

narrative independent filmmakers. Six of the directors interviewed were female, and across the 

sample of twenty, multiple racial and/or ethnic groups were represented. Directors answered 

several questions related to their career progress, barriers faced, and the perceived impact of 

individual differences (e.g., race/ethnicity, age, gender) on the impediments they experience.38 

Responses to these questions were scrutinized for thematic patterns grounded in theory and 

research. Results are presented by trends across the sample. Table 5 shows the response 

categories most often spontaneously identified by directors. 

Table 5 

Response Categories for Spontaneously Identified Barriers 

Barrier % Reporting 

General Finance 90% 

Politicized Market Forces 65% 

Abilities Doubted 40% 

Class & Wealth 25% 

Perceived Community Incongruity 25% 

Gendered Barriers 25% 

General Financial Barriers 

A full 90% of those interviewed indicated that filmmakers face general hardships due to the 

economic structure of their profession. This barrier reflects low or intermittent pay for work, the 

time filmmakers spend developing projects, and the difficulty obtaining financing. In a resourcescarce environment, we anticipated that individuals would report that finance was a barrier. 

We previously identified the same barrier in our study of female filmmakers39, though the 

percentage of those interviewed mentioning general financial barriers was much lower (37.2%). 

Our prior sample of interviewees may have contributed to the lower percentage. We included 

documentary and narrative directors, producers, and industry thought leaders whose diverse 

experience may have made this issue less salient. 

Politicized Market Forces

After universal constraints facing directors, the second major barrier related specifically to the 

economic viability of storytelling about or filmmakers from particular racial and/or ethnic 

groups. Here, filmmakers discussed the market forces that were perceived to work against films 

by underrepresented directors: protagonists from diverse backgrounds, lack of bankable talent, 

the director’s point of view, and/or audience reception. Of those individuals interviewed, 65% 

indicated this was a barrier personally faced. Examples include: 
19

“I am very aware that film is a commodity and they’re trying to figure out how to sell it, and 

there’s nothing very sexy or marketable about Asian-American stuff, maybe Asian stuff, but not 

Asian-American, you know?” 

“...there’s a very short list of movie stars, the people that are considered movie stars that are 

Latin.” 

“People have straight up told me, ‘Nah, you can’t really have these characters all be Black or 

you can’t have this one character be Black.’ And ‘‘Cause, you know, people won’t go see it, or 

people won’t like it, or people won’t finance it, or you know you can’t get distribution in this 

country or that country.’ I mean people with the power to distribute film and with the power to 

finance films have told me that to my face...” 

The directors we interviewed discussed the difficulty they had procuring film financing. These 

filmmakers felt that their point of view, particularly the characters who populate their stories, 

were one of the key reasons that their movies were perceived to be outside the mainstream, 

unmarketable, and a poor investment. In our previous report on female filmmakers,40 women 

mentioned that subject matter could play a role in film finance. 

Two interconnected streams of thought appear to be driving this perception. First, directors told 

us that when seeking film financing, they are restricted to limited casting options. In 

explanation, some directors indicated that bankable talent primarily and disproportionately 

consists of White actors. For filmmakers committed to telling stories that reflect a diverse 

experience, finance rests on finding one of a small number of actors from underrepresented 

backgrounds who can carry a film. Interviewees cited instances when demands or requirements 

of funders guided casting choices, or the few options they had when trying to fill a lead role with 

an underrepresented actor. 

From an empirical point of view, bankability is a fluid concept with a high degree of 

unpredictability. Some actors maintain popularity across years and projects, while others ebb 

and flow in the public’s imagination. In some of our other work, we have found that industry 

mythologizing exists around whether females can open a film.41 It seems as though these same 

patterns of thinking apply to films featuring underrepresented actors as well. 

A second factor that directors mentioned was the perceived lack of an audience for films 

featuring diverse casts, stories about protagonists from different groups, or underrepresented 

directors. However, according to MPAA statistics,42 roughly 44% of domestic film ticket buyers 

are African-American, Hispanic, or from “other” ethnicities. Clearly, there is some indication 

that people from diverse backgrounds do go to the movies. When we turn our attention abroad, 

films by underrepresented directors seem to perform well with audiences overseas. Of the 79 

movies helmed by underrepresented directors in our top-grossing film sample from 2006 to 

2012, 87.3% (n=69) received international distribution. Of those, 24.6% earned between $101 

and $500 million outside the U.S. 

Critic scores or distribution density may also play a role in a film’s performance. We examined 

both of these factors in the same sample of top-grossing films. Movies by White directors and 

underrepresented directors obtained virtually the same average Metacritic score. The mean for a 

White directed film was 53.88, while underrepresented directors earned an average score of 
20

52.77.43 While storytelling ability does not differ, distribution density does. On average, films 

by underrepresented directors played on 388 fewer screens than those by White directors.44 

Differences in revenue may not be due to the stories being told, but the distribution, marketing, 

and advertising they receive. 

Apart from these two accepted modes of thinking, there may be other reasons why films from 

underrepresented directors seem less appealing to investors. Some angel investors may evaluate 

traits of entrepreneurs when considering proposals,45 and may reject opportunities due to the 

presence of a “fatal flaw” or other key feature.46 In entertainment, these flaws could be related to 

the director or to the film. The race and/or ethnicity of a director may adversely affect 

impressions related to leadership,47 as we will explore later. To the extent that investors rely on 

information processing biases when examining a business plan,48 these cognitive strategies could 

lead to doubts about a film’s potential success. This may be even more likely when investors are 

aware of industry perceptions or personally believe that films with diverse casts are less lucrative 

than those featuring more homogenous or White casts. As a result, underrepresented directors 

telling stories focused on different cultural groups may be disproportionately disadvantaged 

within a system that relies on stereotypes and conventional knowledge when awarding finance. 

Abilities Doubted 

The third major barrier cited was the perception that underrepresented directors could not 

successfully fulfill the perceived requirements of the directing role due to his or her racial/ethnic 

background or age. Here, individuals made reference to instances in which the abilities of a 

director were doubted, questioned, and/or challenged. Forty percent of the individuals 

mentioned this barrier during the interview. Within this category, 62.5% of the individuals 

included in this category focused on a person’s race/ethnicity or personal qualities, while 50% of 

the people mentioned doubt in a director due to his or her age. Some examples of this response 

as follows: 

“Do we trust this guy who’s not like us with our money? Do we trust this woman who’s not in a 

matriarchal industry, who’s in a patriarchal industry, with our money...you gotta convince 

everybody of everything every step along the way.” 

“There was definitely the sense when I would shadow on shows like I was a Make-A-Wish 

foundation kid, like this is a treat for the person of color to get to see how TV shows are made as 

opposed to actually taking me seriously as contender.”

“I feel like on set sometimes... people don’t take you seriously. Especially being...if you look 

young and if you are, maybe just you’re not White.” 

If a director is conceived of as the person who commands a film set, perceptions of competence 

and leadership ability are keys for success. Beliefs about what makes a successful leader may 

fall along stereotypical lines, such that individuals judge a leader’s “fit” in part based on his or 

her membership in a racial and/or ethnic group. Indeed, evidence suggests that people may 

perceive White individuals as more prototypical leaders.49 Even providing base rate data that 

suggests a company has more employees who are not White than those who are does not change 

the tendency to project a White individual into a managerial position.50 Cultural perceptions of 
21

what makes a good leader may impede underrepresented directors as they navigate film sets, 

pitch meetings, and networking opportunities. 

Stereotypes about underrepresented groups may affect more than simply how people are 

evaluated by others. Underrepresented directors may also fall prey to stereotype threat,

51 or the 

tendency to underperform when an unconscious activation of a negative group-based stereotype 

occurs.52 A robust literature has focused on stereotype threat and women’s math performance.53 

With regard to race and ethnicity, numerous studies reveal that African Americans and Hispanic 

Americans are vulnerable to stereotype threat in the realm of cognitive testing.54 For example, 

when given an exam that purported to test their verbal ability, African Americans who were 

primed with a stereotype performed worse than those who did not receive the prime. In a follow 

up study, African Americans evidenced significantly more self-doubt than White students when 

the test claimed to diagnose ability.55 Among Latinos, a similar effect on performance has been 

demonstrated on quantitative and spatial ability tasks.56 When their ethnic identity was 

activated, Asian women performed worse on a math test compared to Asian women who were 

not primed. Lowered test performance for the identity primed women was mediated by inability 

to concentrate on the exam.57 Across groups, research evidence demonstrates that activating 

stereotypes has a negative effect on performance. 

The consequences of being made aware of race and/or ethnicity or group stereotypes before 

taking on a task designed to test ability are important to consider for filmmakers. Directors may 

often find themselves in situations in which their ethnicity is salient or stereotypes are 

mentioned. For instance, investors may judge an opportunity by how prepared an entrepreneur is 

during the pitch process,58 which relies on demonstrating verbal and perhaps even mathematical 

ability. Reducing the salience of stereotypes about ability in these domains may be crucial to 

creating a situation in which both parties in a negotiation start on equal footing. 

Some directors were all too aware of these biases, and 40% indicated that coping strategies were 

necessary to deal with stigmas, prejudice, or discrimination. These strategies may not be a 

completely viable means of dealing with threats, however. Coping with stereotype and social 

identity threats (i.e., discrimination) requires dedicating mental effort to suppress emotions. 

Containing those feelings can reduce a person’s ability to regulate or control behaviors related to 

interpersonal communication or decision-making.59 This may influence how individuals are 

perceived by others and evaluations of their leadership ability. Directors described coping using 

tactics that ranged from discounting the experience of being stereotyped to conforming to other’s 

stereotypical beliefs or expectations as a strategy to achieve one’s goals. 

“I’ve never had a direct confrontation like that, but you know...if I did see it, I think in the 

moment I’d probably ignored it because there are other, I was focused on getting the shot, or 

getting the day, or getting the film...I probably just brushed if off and kept moving forward.” 

“I’m first generation, and there’s going to be other filmmakers out there that might be seventh or 

eighth generation, but their ethnicity is worn on, you know you can see it, whether it’s in their 

skin color or their accent or their eyes or whatever it might be, and I think that then they might 

be facing more, they might face more troubles because of that.” 
22

Although the term was not used by the interviewer, 25% of directors mentioned that the 

entertainment industry was racist or discriminatory. By labeling it as such, directors may be 

creating what scholars refer to in literature on media consumption as an oppositional text.

60 A 

director may frame the barriers he or she faces in a manner that allows for understanding of his 

or her own struggle within a wider framework of cultural disadvantage. Doing so may represent 

another method of coping with lack of opportunity related to a person’s racial/ethnic identity. 

Class and Generational Wealth 

The fourth major barrier cited was a lack of access to accumulated financial wealth. This may 

refer to a filmmaker’s own financial situation, but also includes family or parental level of wealth 

or class standing. Almost a third (25%) of the individuals interviewed cited this as a barrier. 

“I don’t come from a family that has money that can support me if I’m not doing that great...I 

have friends who don’t have a full-time job and they can dedicate their whole time to making 

their film and that’s definitely, they have an advantage because they don’t have to worry about 

the stresses of everyday life...” 

“...not having any generational wealth...just not having mommy and daddy or anybody to 

supplement my survival.” 

“...we don’t like to talk about it but I do think that there is a class structure that’s at play in our 

industry.” 

Teasing out the effect of social class versus race and/or ethnicity on film career outcomes is quite 

difficult. Particularly in the U.S., wealth gaps between White Americans and African or 

Hispanic Americans are significant. According to a Pew Research Center Report, between 2005 

and 2009, Hispanic households saw a 66% decline in net worth, and Black households a 53% 

drop. In comparison, wealth among White households fell 16%.61 Macroeconomic factors and 

historical wealth inequality may mean underrepresented directors have less access to personal 

wealth and fewer assets that could be used as collateral for loans. Early in a film career, this 

precarious financial situation may compromise the likelihood of pursuing filmmaking as fulltime work. 

Compounding the barrier any director faces due to personal lack of wealth may be the 

background of his or her family. Relying on family for financial support may be one way to 

supplement meager film incomes. Parent’s socio-economic status is related to academic 

achievement among children of immigrants, and educational attainment of college students.62 In 

fact, researchers have identified class as contributing to a barrier faced by media industry 

workers from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in the UK.63

Certainly not all individuals who identify with an underrepresented group hail from a lower 

socio-economic group. Still, borrowing capital may also be difficult for underrepresented 

directors due to systemic inequity. Evidence from the financial realm suggests that small 

businesses owned by African Americans, Hispanic/Latinos, or Asians/Pacific Islanders may face 

greater rejection when obtaining credit from financial institutions than White-owned 

businesses.64 Even after accounting for the impact of a broad array of factors (e.g., 

creditworthiness, home ownership), researchers still observed a gap in approval rates between 
23

White borrowers and all other groups. Thus, underrepresented directors may face lower access 

to capital from personal, familial, and/or institutional sources than their White counterparts. 

Perceived Community Incongruity 

The sixth barrier identified related to individuals’ sense of belonging to a particular group. 

Responses in this category focused on the perception of fit between a person’s identity and a 

larger social community. Twenty-five percent of individuals interviewed mentioned this 

category. Examples are below. 

 “I realized that would’ve been nice to be, to be part of one of the groups that control or they are 

in the system...being Latino is not enough....Latinos, they are not necessarily all united. It 

depends if you’re coming from Mexico, if you’re coming from Cuba, if you’re coming from 

Columbia, you know it’s difficult.” 

“I think being mixed-race...because it’s like everything in the world you kinda fall through the 

cracks, and you’re not part of any sort of African-American community and you’re not really 

part of a White community either, you’re kind of somewhere in the middle.” 

Some responses in this category represent individuals who categorized themselves as belonging 

to more than one racial and/or ethnic group. In particular, participants described how group 

membership or culture was important for feeling support and advocacy in their profession. Some 

qualitative evidence suggests that multiracial individuals may feel excluded from complete 

membership in multiple racial and/or ethnic groups.65 Additionally, these individuals may 

experience consequences such as decreased self-esteem or motivation when they are forced to 

identify with a single group.66 External beliefs about whether a filmmaker should create content 

in line with a perceived identity may be especially limiting when these perceptions reflect only a 

part of a person’s whole self-concept. 

Beyond multiculturalism, some directors indicated that they felt stereotyped and siloed into 

creating content that reflected their own backgrounds. This is similar to findings from another 

study of media industry employees, which states that workers fear being pigeonholed into 

creating “ethnicity related programmes” as they are often not a sustainable source of income.67 

Given the politicized market forces described above, opportunities to tell stories featuring 

diverse casts or voices may be few and far between. 

Gendered Barriers 

In this category, barriers related to gender were coded. This includes financial barriers 

specifically related to being female, male-dominated industry networks, stereotyping and 

objectification on set, work/family balance, and/or exclusionary hiring practices. Of the 

individuals surveyed, 25%, or all but one of the female directors in our sample, said that women 

faced barriers that were unique to their sex. 

“Especially with being a female, there’s certain stigmas of being moody or bitchy or emotional, 

which I’m not during work and then people question my leadership...they wonder because they 

feel like I’m too nice.” 
24

“I want on film sets not to have female producers wonder if I’m a threat to their male coproducer husband or something like that.” 

“You’re just not taken as seriously, people think you can only direct certain types of films, and 

not necessarily action films or dramatic films or something that’s more generally directed by 

men.” 

Female content creators face significant barriers in their filmmaking careers, as we have 

previously reported.68 Women from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups, however, may 

face barriers because of their gender and ethnic identity. For instance, the Directors Guild 

reports that a mere 2% of episodic television episodes in the 2012-2013 season were directed by 

underrepresented females versus 12% directed by “Caucasian” females.69 The gaps between 

White women and women of color exist in other arenas as well. In 2012, just 3.2% of women on 

Fortune 500 Boards were women of color, compared to 16.6% of women overall.70 Thus, while 

gendered barriers undoubtedly exist, they may be felt differently by women who identify with 

particular racial and/or ethnic groups. 

What scholars refer to as intersectionality71 may complicate the experiences of women from 

underrepresented groups. Membership in more than one disenfranchised community may 

complicate ascertaining which part of an identity (race, gender, class, sexual orientation) is the 

locus for disparate treatment.72 In certain domains, such as income inequality, the effect of being 

a woman and being from an underrepresented group cannot be considered wholly separate.73

Women of color may have or perceive a greater promotion disadvantage relative to White men 

than White women or other underrepresented males.74 

Some research shows that women from underrepresented groups perceive impediments such as 

“not having an influential mentor or sponsor...lack of informal networking with influential 

colleagues...lack of high visibility assignments.”75 In our previous study of female filmmakers, 

women stated that male-dominated industry networks created a barrier for advancement.76 Other 

evidence suggests that African American women in professional arenas may have even less 

access to these connections that facilitate advancement in organizations due to being in lower 

status jobs and less welcomed into social circles.77 Females from underrepresented groups may 

uniquely experience the impediments that face women in general. 

Examining our findings on top-grossing films, it is evident that women of color do not achieve 

the same career milestones at rates comparable to White women. Although 18.1% of 

underrepresented directors of narrative films at Sundance Film Festival are women, just four 

women of color are found across seven years of top-grossing content. One of these directors’ 

roles has even been challenged and discounted in many ways. The near invisibility of women of 

color as top-grossing film directors demonstrates that for these women, the hurdles may be set 

higher than those faced by White women. 

This section has described the reported barriers facing film directors who identify with 

underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups. The six spontaneously cited impediments closely 

relate to findings from our previous study on female filmmakers.78 Thus, across both 

investigations, it appears that systemic and significant inequalities persist for filmmakers who 

want to work in independent film or transition to larger budgeted fare. Next, we examine how to 

create opportunities for underrepresented filmmakers to overcome the barriers described here.
25

Opportunities for Change 

The final set of questions posed to directors dealt with awareness of programs, services, and 

organizations working to create change.79 We also asked about what other services might be 

helpful. Responses were assessed for relevant themes and common practices or services. Three 

central opportunities emerged across the sample and illuminate what the industry is already 

doing and where it can grow. Each is detailed below. 

Creative Support for Diverse Artists 

Filmmakers were aware of programs, film festivals, and supportive organizations seeking to 

encourage artists from underrepresented backgrounds. More than half (63.2%) of the directors 

we interviewed indicated that filmmaker labs, specialty film festivals, or shadowing and 

internship opportunities would impact change. This category included training these filmmakers 

had already received due to their participation in an artist support program. Individuals also 

forecasted the impact these programs might have on the next generation of directors. There was 

considerable interest in furthering the type, broadening the scope, and expanding participation of 

diverse voices. 

Artistic support not only molds and shapes stories and the range of diversity seen on screen, it 

also creates a pipeline for artists to gain experience, visibility, and exposure to a wider industry. 

Giving artists the tools they need to create authentic and diverse stories should cultivate new 

talent and ready them for careers in independent or studio filmmaking. Moreover, providing 

directors with a network of industry-based contacts and creative support may be one means of 

increasing the flow through a pipeline that currently cracks and leaks for underrepresented 

artists. 

Finance and Networking Opportunities 

Directors indicated that they had taken advantage of or would like more chances to engage with 

industry networks and financiers or grant makers in particular. Nearly half (47.4%) of the 

directors we spoke with said that access to resources and greater connectivity would be helpful 

for advancing their careers. Female filmmakers gave similar responses in our previous study.80 

Here, responses focused less on training in financial acquisition, and more on the provision of 

resources to directors for their films. 

Given the barriers we found related to perceptions of audiences and actors who can help assure 

financing, this suggestion may be crucial to address. One step is correctly estimating the 

spending power and audience size of African Americans, Hispanic, or Asian viewers. There is 

an opportunity to educate artists and financiers regarding attendance patterns and potential 

audience growth. Countering entrenched industry myths regarding films featuring diverse casts 

may help change decision-making patterns and open up avenues for underrepresented directors 

and their film projects. Cultivating investors from diverse racial and/or ethnic groups or with an 

orientation toward stories about characters from these groups is another strategy to pursue. 

Widening the horizon for financing opportunities will hopefully ensure that more stories make it 

to the screen. 
26

Structural Interference 

Finally, some individuals mentioned that to spur change in the entertainment industry, outside 

intervention was required. These individuals suggested government funding in support of 

diverse artists, mandates to distribute content, and holding studios or industry-based groups 

accountable through regular monitoring. This reaction may be brought on by a resignation to the 

status quo and belief in decision-makers’ reluctance to change. Twenty-one percent (21.1%) of 

directors mentioned that this would be a way to create more diversity behind the camera. One 

way to think about implementing monitoring of diversity is through activist groups who spur 

awareness through advocacy. GLAAD’s scrutiny of industry content and willingness to engage 

in collaboration with decision-makers serves as an example of how to use accountability to 

promote change. 

In other profitable entertainment domains, greater diversity in leadership positions has been 

achieved through voluntary adherence to policies designed to encourage hiring. The Rooney 

Rule in the NFL, though not without notable weaknesses, has been one prominent strategy to 

increase the number of African Americans interviewed for head coaching positions.81 Perhaps by 

requiring owners to interview at least one African American candidate, it forces individuals to 

deal with implicit biases they may experience.82 As a strategy for change, a similar elective 

option may be a step for studios or financiers to consider when they examine lists of directors to 

hire or films to fund. 

Conclusion 

The purpose of our investigation was to determine how directors from underrepresented racial 

groups fare in independent film. We examined this in three ways. First, we assessed the 

prevalence of underrepresented directors across 12 years at the Sundance Film Festival and in 

seven years of top-grossing films. Second, we explored the diversity of casts in both movies 

screened at Sundance and top-grossing films. Finally, we examined barriers and opportunities 

for directors from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups. As a result of this undertaking, a 

few general findings are apparent. 

Directors from diverse racial and/or ethnic groups are still outnumbered in independent film, and 

even more so in top-grossing films. There is also a noticeable difference between documentary 

and narrative filmmaking. Namely, filmmakers of color are more prevalent in the narrative 

space. This is counter to what we have previously found with regard to gender, and 

demonstrates that the democratized model described for women may not be as available to 

underrepresented male and female directors. Future work is needed to determine what barriers 

underrepresented documentary directors face and what opportunities exist in this domain. 

Given the lack of directors from underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups, our findings 

regarding their relationship to on screen diversity are also notable. The presence of an 

underrepresented director is associated with more character diversity in both independent and 

top-grossing fare. It is clear that a director’s identity does impact his or her filmmaking—and 

creates worlds that are more representative of the contemporary U.S. Yet, directors cited 

difficulty garnering the funds to create content that they believe is important and which features 

underrepresented groups. Access to finance becomes one important pathway to not only 

employing more underrepresented directors, but to seeing more diverse characters in film. 
27

Perhaps the most significant finding here is the steep drop-off in the number of underrepresented 

females working as directors in larger budget arenas. Women of color face the barriers reported 

by underrepresented directors in this investigation alongside the impediments that female 

directors face more generally. As a result, the evidence suggests that very few underrepresented 

female directors are given the chance to pursue their careers beyond making independent films. 

Addressing the hurdles and opening up opportunities for female directors from underrepresented 

racial and/or ethnic backgrounds is a crucial step toward widening the pipeline for all women. 

The pathway for change is also clear. Underrepresented filmmakers are hungry for the chance to 

tell their stories. These directors are at the forefront of capturing a dynamic and evolving 

culture. Artists from diverse racial and/or ethnic backgrounds must be supported at the 

beginning of their careers, via lab-based programs, through film schools, and through 

connections that offer them vital chances to practice and perfect their skills. As this occurs, 

financial decision-makers must see greater value in films that can reach broad and diverse 

audiences. Only through addressing systemic impediments faced by underrepresented directors 

can the media environment be transformed so that every story, and every storyteller, has an equal 

chance to be heard. 
28

Footnotes 

1. This project was funded by multiple sources: 1) 2013 Zumberge Interdisciplinary Award to 

Dr. S. L. Smith & Professor Doe Mayer at the University of Southern California; 2) Sundance 

Institute; 3) National Endowment of the Arts - 2013 Art Works Research Grants; and 4) 

resources granted or earmarked for Dr. Stacy L. Smith's Media, Diversity and Social Change 

Initiative at the Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism. 

2. MPAA (2013). Theatrical Market Statistics: 2013. Author. http://www.mpaa.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/03/MPAA-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-2013_032514-v2.pdf

3. Directors Guild of America (2013). DGA Report Finds Director Diversity in Episodic 

Television Remains Static. Retrieved from: http://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases 

/2013/100213-DGA-Report-Finds-Director-Diversity-in-Episodic-Television-RemainsStatic.aspx. 

4. Writers Guild of America-West (2011). Recession and regression: The 2011 Hollywood 

writers report. Retrieved October 15, 2012 from 

http://www.wga.org/uploadedFiles/who_we_are/hwr11execsum.pdf. 

5. Smith, S.L., Choueiti, M., & Pieper, K.M. (2013). Race/Ethnicity in 500 popular films: Is the 

key to diversifying cinematic content held in the hand of the black director? Los Angeles, CA: 

Author. 

6. Writers Guild of America-West (2011). 

7. Donalson, M. (2003). Black directors in Hollywood. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 

8. Grant, N. (1997). Innocence and ambiguity in the films of Charles Burnett. In V. Smith (Ed.) 

Representing blackness: Issues in film and video (pp. 135-156). New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers 

University Press. Lubiano, W. (1997). But compared to what?: Reading realism, representation, 

and essentialism in School Daze, Do the Right Thing, and the Spike Lee discourse. In V. Smith 

(Ed.) Representing blackness: Issues in film and video (pp. 97-122). New Brunswick, N.J.: 

Rutgers University Press. 

9. Bogle, D. (2008). Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies, & Bucks: An interpretive history of 

blacks in American films (4th Ed.). New York: Continuum. 

10. Randle, K., Wing-Fai, L., & Kurian, J. (2006). Creating difference: Overcoming barriers to 

diversity in UK film and television employment. Creative Industries Research and Consultancy 

Unit, University of Hertfordshire. 

11. Randle, Wing-Fai, & Kurian. (2006). See p. 72. 

12. Smith, S.L., Pieper, K., & Choueiti, M. (2013). Exploring the Barriers and Opportunities for 

Independent Women Filmmakers. Los Angeles, CA: Sundance Institute/WIF Los Angeles. 
29

13. Our race/ethnicity measure should be framed as “apparent.” While in some instances we had 

direct information, other judgments had to made in cases where this information was missing. 

The use of apparent ethnicity is consistent with other reports. For instance, the Writers Guild of 

America West Hollywood Writers Report (2009) indicates that around 20% of ethnicity 

judgments were missing from the data. The author of that report states that “these cases were 

more similar to white writers [sic] in terms of earnings than to other writers, and because 

research suggests that minority respondents generally are less likely to omit ethnicity information 

than non-minorities, cases with missing ethnicity information were coded as ‘white’ [sic] for the 

purposes of analysis (which follows the practice employed in earlier Hollywood Writers 

Reports)” (p. 9). See Hunt, D.M. (2009). The Hollywood Writers Report: Rewriting and all-toofamiliar story? A report prepared for the Writers Guild of America, West. 

The three prongs noted in the introduction address the three research questions proposed to the 

NEA in our 2012 proposal: Compared to U.S. population reports and to studio films, what 

percentage of content creators who identify as racial or ethnic minorities had their work screened 

at the Sundance Film Festival between 2002 and 2013? What are the barriers to and 

opportunities for success in independent film for male and female filmmakers from racial and 

ethnic minority backgrounds? Does diversity behind the camera affect diversity in front of the 

camera (i.e., casts or subject matter)? 

14. To create the sample of directors, a list was culled from the database created by Smith, 

Pieper, & Choueiti (2013). Using IMDbPro information, the database included directors, 

writers, producers, cinematographers, and editors of U.S. films selected and screened at the 

Sundance Film Festival between 2002 and 2012. Several movies were excluded from that list: 

1) any film in the world category; 2) any short film (i.e., 49 minutes or less); and 3) any film that 

did not originate in whole or part domestically. Three presentations were deemed "not films" and 

thus excluded in the data analysis: Silt/Field Studies #3, Hit RECord at the Movies, Frontier 6. 

Two films were included in the data file, but could not categorized as narrative or documentary 

(DysFunKtional Family, A Darkness Swallowed). Using the same approach, the U.S. narrative 

and documentaries selected and screened at Sundance Film Festival 2013 were added to the 

original database in March of 2013. Any directors added after this date to the 2013 films were 

not included in this analysis. The total number of directors across the sample is 1,078, which 

includes duplicate names of individuals that helmed more than one movie. 

To assess apparent race/ethnicity, we collected several types of data. First, we created a short 

demographic survey for Sundance Institute (SI). SI supplied contact information (e.g., emails, 

phone numbers) for the lion share of directors in our sample. Further, SI sent out an email 

alerting directors that we would be collecting demographic information from them. When 

electronic addresses could not be located for directors, helmers' email or phone numbers were 

obtained from Internet sources and/or contacting agents/managers/production companies. All 

directors with email addresses were contacted in May of 2013 to participate in a voluntary, short 

survey. Individuals were contacted up to six times, in intervals of 7-10 days. Some directors did 

not want to fill out an electronic survey and asked to be mailed a digital copy of the instrument. 
30

A total of 399 (43.8%) of the directors at SFF between 2002 and 2013 completed the question 

about race/ethnicity in our survey. To account for the remaining 56.2% (n=512) of the sample, 

we turned to five other sources of information: 1) Studio System's listing of the director's 

race/ethnicity (n=185 individuals); 2) racial/ethnic information about directors provided by 

Sundance Institute (n=50 individuals); 3) publically available information online (n=48 

individuals); 4) agents/managers (n=2); and 5) the senior research team categorized individuals 

(n=219). Given that information is not solely from the director, the aggregate measure is tapping 

apparent race/ethnicity. Also, the results should be interpreted with caution as certain groups 

may be under reported (i.e., Latinos, Middle Eastern, mixed race) or over reported (i.e., 

Caucasians). 

Additionally, a total of 10 directors could not be ascertained for apparent race/ethnicity due to 

insufficient information. These individuals were categorized as "can't tell." 

Data on top-grossing film directors was prepared based on Smith, Pieper, & Choueiti (2013). 

For this analysis, we assessed directors’ apparent race/ethnicity across the 100 top-performing 

domestic films (narrative, documentary) each year (2006-2012). The lists were created from 

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/. For 2012, the top 100 was pulled for the Women's Initiative on 

January 6th, 2013. To ensure comparability with our previous report, we used the same list. To 

ascertain apparent race/ethnicity, several sources of information were utilized: 

StudioSystem/inBaseline listing of the director's race/ethnicity; publically available information 

online; agents/managers; and senior research team judgments based on individual color 

photographs and biographical information. Results should be interpreted with caution, as the 

underrepresented category may underreport the incidence of Latinos or Middle Eastern 

individuals. 

15. A modified version of the U.S. Census classification was used to code apparent 

race/ethnicity. Participants were asked, “What is your race and/or ethnic origin? Mark all that 

apply, then write in your race and/or ethnic origin.” Eight responses options were given, 

allowing participants to select one or more racial or ethnic groups. Here is a list of the eight 

categories: 1) Hispanic, Latino and/or Spanish; 2) Caucasian/White; 3) Middle Eastern; 4) Black, 

African American, or other African descent; 5) Asian; 6) Native Indian of the Americas 

(including original peoples of North, Central, and/or South America); 7) Pacific Islander; and 8) 

other or unknown race and/or origin. These categories were adopted to mirror the Census 

classifications and facilitate comparisons with population statistics. 

Federal standards dictate the structure and measurement practices used by the U.S. Census 

Bureau with regard to race and ethnic origin, and mandate the classification of Hispanic as an 

ethnicity, distinct from six racial groups. These strictures are outlined in the Office of 

Management and Budget’s (OMB) 1997 Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of 

Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity (see p. 1, U.S. Census Bureau publication “The Black 

Population 2010”, among others). 

In the context of self-reporting, however, this classification poses a major issue. Several authors 

(Hirschman, Alba, & Farley, 2000; Lopez, 2005; Hitlin, Brown, & Elder, 2007) overview the 

historical and practical reasons for measuring Hispanic ethnicity as distinct from race in the 

context of the Census. Yet, these articles also discuss the fluid nature of identity. Lopez (2005) 

argues that a significant portion of Latinos and Hispanics consider their identity an ethnicity and 
31

a race. Hitlin, Brown, and Elder (2007) use social identity theory as the basis for their argument 

for a combined race/ethnicity item “allowing individuals who privilege such an identity to select 

it as their only identification” (p. 605). Moreover, Morning (2008) indicates that ethnicity and 

nationality may be linked with regard to the understanding of a person’s origin. The U.S. is one 

of a handful of countries that still uses the designation of “race” on Census measures, whereas 

the terms “ethnicity” and “nationality” are used more often worldwide to enumerate population 

data (Morning, 2008). 

Recently, the U.S. Census Bureau experimented with an alternative version of the race and 

Hispanic origin questions, including a version that used a combined item to assess race and 

ethnicity. Results demonstrated that a combined item reduced non-response rates and reporting 

of the “Some Other Race” category among Hispanic individuals (Compton, et al., 2012, p. 70). 

Thus, combining both race and ethnic origin into a single measure may overcome confusion 

associated between labels that denote ethnicity versus race or even citizenship. 

Our other major departure from U.S. Census involves the Middle Eastern category. We decided 

to include this classification for two reasons: 1) a recent U.S. Census (Compton, Bentley, Ennis 

& Rastogi, 2012) report indicated that focus group participants who identified as Middle Eastern 

wanted a better descriptor for their ethnic origin; and 2) Sundance Institute facilitates artist 

support programs in the Middle East (e.g., Jordan). 

As noted in footnote 2, 219 directors had to be categorized for race/ethnicity by the three authors. 

There at least four reasons to legitimate this approach. First, humans are skilled at detecting race 

or ethnicity from visual cues, including from photos. In fact, infants as young as three months of 

age exhibit a preference for looking at photos of faces belonging to individuals from their own 

race (Bar-Haim, Ziv, Lamy, & Hodes, 2006; Kelly et al., 2005, 2009). Second, even brief 

exposure to a face may elicit attentional biases and emotional responses. Psychological research 

suggests that attentional biases (Trawalter, Todd, Baird, & Richeson, 2008) and amygdala 

activity increase when initially viewing photos of African American faces compared to viewing 

of photos of White faces (Lieberman, Hariri, Jarcho, Eisenberger, & Bookheimer, 2005) or even 

dark-skinned White faces (Ronquillo et al., 2007). This differential brain response may develop 

in adolescence (Telzer, Humphreys, Shapiro, & Tottenham, 2013). Third, a robust literature in 

the field of communication has examined "apparent ethnicity" in a variety of media. Some 

scholars just categorize race, with little explanation of how such judgments are deduced (Oliver, 

1994; Mastro & Greenberg, 2000). Other scholars specify cues utilized to make "apparent 

race/ethnicity" judgments (Wilson et al., 1997, p. 253). For instance, Dixon & Linz (2000) 

utilized several indicators to ascertain race/ethnicity of individuals shown on the news: photos, 

video, artist renderings, family member photos/videos, surname, and/or stated race (p. 556). 

Fourth, a few individuals in our interview indicated their ability to “pass” as White in the 

industry despite having a multiracial or multiethnic background. Such experiences illuminate 

that individuals’ apparent race/ethnicity may be one standard by which they are evaluated, not 

their actual heritage. 

16. A total of 904 U.S. films were selected and screened at Sundance Film Festival between 2002 

and 2013. Of those, 586 were categorized as "narrative," 316 as "documentary," and 2 "can't 

tell" (A Darkness Swallowed, DysFunKtional Family). From these films, 1,068 directors 

comprised our sample of helmers. When analyzing film genre (narrative, documentary), program 
32

category (competition, premiere, niche), and over time analyses (2002-2013), the two “can't 

tells” were removed thus bringing our sample of directors to 1,066. 

17. Hixon, L., Hepler, B.R., & Kim, M.O. (September, 2011). The White Population 2010. U.S. 

Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration: Author. See Table 1 for 

breakdown. Not Underrepresented reflects the percentage of the population who identified race 

and ethnic origin as White alone, Not Hispanic or Latino. Underrepresented reflects the 

percentage of the population who identified as White alone, Hispanic or Latino, White in 

combination, and Not White alone or in combination. The U.S. Census states that “According to 

OMB, “White” refers to a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the 

Middle East, or North Africa” (p. 2). For this reason, the underrepresented category from SFF 

and top-grossing films are not directly comparable as individuals reporting origins in the Middle 

East were classified as “underrepresented” in these data sets. This was done to reflect the desire 

of individuals who identify with this ethnic group and have expressed that the U.S. Census 

categories do not fully capture their racial and/or ethnic origin (Compton, Bentley, Ennis & 

Rastogi, 2012). 

18. For this analysis, we assessed directors’ apparent race/ethnicity across the 100 topperforming domestic films (narrative, documentary) each year (2006-2012). The lists were 

created from http://www.boxofficemojo.com/. For 2012, the top 100 was pulled for the 

Women's Initiative on January 6th, 2013. To ensure comparability with our previous report, we 

used the same list. As with some of the directors from the SFF sample, we used several sources 

to identify the racial and/or ethnic background of top-grossing directors: Studio 

System/inBaseline database; agents/managers; publically available information; team judgments 

made using color photographs and biographical information. Two directors across the sample of 

787 directors were coded as “can’t tell.” 

19. Directors Guild of America (2013). According to the DGA, data for this report are derived 

from “information provided by the production companies to the DGA pursuant to the 

requirements of the collective bargaining agreement for episodes produced during the 2012-2013 

season” (see methodology at end of article). Data was checked with the show and with a 

representative from the production company. The report considers “the ethnicity and gender of 

directors hired to direct primetime episodic television across broadcast, basic cable and premium 

cable” (¶1). 

20. Hunt, D.M. (2013). WGAW TV Staffing Brief. Retrieved from: http://www.wga.org/ 

subpage_whoweare.aspx?id=922. The WGAW TV Staffing Brief (2013) details the percentage 

of working writers employed on TV shows in the 2011-2012 season. This data “refer to the 

writers and writer/producers working on a television show staff for all or part of the season.” 

21. Hunt, D.M. (2011). According to the WGAW Hollywood Writers Report (2011), “...the 

minority share of film employment actually declined by a percentage point since the last report, 

from 6 percent in 2007 to 5 percent in 2009” (p. 5). The methodology for the study is listed in 

the 2009 report (see Hunt, 2009). As stated, the WGAW used data “based on member reports of 

employment and earnings for each quarter” (p. 9). Demographic information is collected 

separately and connected to the member’s reports in WGAW databases. Hunt, D.M. (2014). 
33

Turning missed opportunities into realized ones. A report prepared for the Writers Guild of 

America, West. The percentage of minority writers in film in 2012 remains at 5%. 

22. The patterns we observe in SFF director race/ethnicity cannot be directly compared to U.S. 

Census data based on this analysis. This is because the standard U.S. Census classification 

requires that individuals first provide their ethnic origin and then their racial identification. The 

Census measure of ethnic origin captures whether individuals across all racial groups identify as 

Hispanic or Latino. In 2010, 16.3% of individuals identified their ethnic origin as Hispanic or 

Latino (regardless of their race). Then, the Census allows individuals to identify with more than 

one racial group. Census then reports individuals with one race. Of those, 72.4% identified as 

White/Caucasian, 12.6% identified as Black/African American, 4.8% identified as Asian, 0.9% 

as American Indian/Alaska Native, and 6.2% as Some Other Race. Finally, 2.9% of the 

population identifies as having two or more races (and any Hispanic or Latino origin). Further, it 

is important to note that the U.S. Census does not measure Middle Eastern, and thus the 1.2% of 

directors who reported this single ethnic origin would be classified as White/Caucasian on the 

Census. For these reasons, any comparison between our sample and U.S. Census racial/ethnic 

breakdowns should be approached with extreme caution. 

For more information, see Humes, K.R., Jones, N.A., & Ramirez, R.R. (March, 2011). Overview 

of Race/Ethnicity and Hispanic Origin: 2010. U.S. Census Bureau. 

23. A chi-square analysis for film genre (narrative, documentary) and director apparent 

race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not underrepresented) was significant, X2(1, 1,066)=8.90, 

p<.01, φ=-.09. 

24. For narrative film directors, a non significant chi-square was revealed for program category

(competition, premiere, niche) and helmer apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not 

underrepresented): X2(2, 644)=2.30, p=.32, V*=.06. 

25. For documentaries, a non significant chi-square emerged by program category (competition, 

premiere, niche) and director apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not underrepresented): 

X2

(2, 422)=1.02, p=.60, V*=.05. 

26. For all overtime analyses, we did not report statistical tests. This is due to the fact that 

several observed cells' frequency counts in the competition categories were small (1-5 range). 

27. Smith, Pieper, & Choueiti. (2013). 

28. Chi-square analysis was significant for program category (competition, premiere, niche) by 

gender (males, females) for narrative underrepresented directors, X2

(2, 149)=9.87, p<.01, 

V*=.26. 

29. For underrepresented documentary helmers, a non significant chi-square was revealed for 

program category (competition, premiere, niche) and gender (male, female), X2(2, 66)=4.06, 

p=.13, V*=.25. 
34

30. In an effort to look at the relationship between director race/ethnicity and the race/ethnicity of 

characters that inhabit their stories, we examined 118 film synopses and trailers across 4 years 

(2010-2013) at Sundance Film Festival. Every narrative competition and premiere film that was 

selected and screened at the festival comprised our sample. One film was excluded, as it was a 

documentary (i.e., The Cane Toads). Two films (May in the Summer, Very Good Girls) did not 

have trailers at the time of analysis. As such, we relied solely on evaluating characters' apparent 

race/ethnicity from information (e.g., photo, plot, cast listings) in the 2013 SFF program. 

Undergraduates were trained on how to unitize and evaluate characters' race/ethnicity, along with 

other demographic, sexualization, occupation, and thematic coding. For each film, a smaller 

team gathered race/ethnicity information for each member of the principal cast, similar to the 

way information was gathered for directors. This information was given to research assistants 

prior to data collection (Apparent Race/Ethnicity). Research assistants were instructed to 

indicate if the preliminary apparent race/ethnicity judgments needed to be changed (Apparent 

Race/Ethnicity Changes Yes/No), and if so, evaluated apparent race/ethnicity using new 

information (Revised Apparent Race/Ethnicity). 

Apparent Race/Ethnicity was coded as White, Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, 

American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Asian, Middle Eastern, or 

Other. Several sources of information were used to establish characters featured in promotional 

materials for the films, such as the longest trailer available on IMDbPro and the synopses and 

cast lists in SFF programs. All characters referenced in cast lists, photos, and movie descriptions 

were assessed for apparent race/ethnicity as well as all speaking or named characters. Across 

three practice films, training reliability was high for both unitizing (# of characters coded by 2 

out of 3 research assistants= 80%-92.3%) and variable coding (Using Potter & Levine 

Donnerstein's formula: apparent race/ethnicity=.75-.92; apparent race/ethnicity changes 

yes/no=.79-83; revised apparent race/ethnicity=.83-91). 

After training, the marketing materials for the 118 films were evaluated. Three independent 

research assistants reviewed each film and disagreements were resolved by one of the study 

authors (Choueiti). We computed reliability on every film in the sample. Across 54.2% of the 

films, unitizing reliability was 100%, meaning 2 out of 3 coders agreed on every character to be 

evaluated. Unitizing agreement was 80-93% across 38.1% of the films and between 64-78% 

across 7.6% of the films. In terms of analyzing variables, all three apparent race/ethnicity 

judgments were very reliable (apparent race/ethnicity median=1.0, range=.66-1.0; apparent 

race/ethnicity changes yes/no median=1.0, range=.29-1.0; revised apparent race/ethnicity 

median=1.0, range=.66-1.0). 

In addition to character diversity, we assessed 16 themes across 118 independent films’ 

promotional materials (i.e., description/photos in SFF catalogue, trailer on IMDb.Pro). Themes 

were derived from research on and theorizing about stereotypical attributes often associated with 

different races/ethnicities. Each theme was assessed as being present or absent across any form 

of a movie's promotional fare. The 16 attributes included: 1) politics/government, 2) citizenship, 

3) religion, 4) sports, 5) war, armed conflict, and terrorism, 6) criminal justice, 7) crime and 

violence, 8) guns, 9) street gang involvement, 10) immigration, 11) alcohol/tobacco use, 12) 

education, 13) drug use/abuse, 14) ethics, 15) social aggression, and 16) mental/physical 
35

impairment. These themes were assessed by one of the study authors after reading and watching 

all promotional materials for each film multiple times. Given the qualitative approach, reliability 

was not calculated. 

We were interested in how these themes might vary by the race/ethnicity of director. To this 

end, we categorized whether the promotional materials corresponded to a film helmed by an 

underrepresented director (yes/no). Then we conducted chi-square tests to measure the 

association between director race/ethnicity (underrepresented vs. not underrepresented) and 

theme (present/absent). One director's race could not be determined, bringing the sample size to 

117. 

Overall, only two of the 16 themes were significantly related to director race/ethnicity: criminal 

justice, X2 (1,117)=4.79, p < .05, φ=.20; street gang involvement, X2 (1,117)=10.26, p < .01, 

φ=.30. Promotional materials for films with an underrepresented director were more likely to 

involve themes of criminal justice (40.7% vs. 20%) and street gang involvement (11.1% vs. 0) 

than promotional materials without an underrepresented director. The latter finding should be 

interpreted cautiously as two of the four cells had low expected frequencies. 

Two additional themes (war/conflict/terrorism, alcohol/tobacco) approached significance at the p

< .10 level. Alcohol/tobacco use was more characteristic in content from Caucasian directors 

(66.7% vs. 48.1%) whereas war/conflict/terrorism was more likely to be depicted in content 

from underrepresented directors (1.1% vs. 7.4%). Due to low frequency counts, the latter finding 

should be interpreted cautiously. 

The results suggest that very little difference emerged across the thematic elements of 

underrepresented and non underrepresented directors. This may be due to the types of themes 

analyzed as well as the sample utilized. In explanation, storytelling may be affected by 

race/ethnicity in ways not tapped by the 16 themes outlined above. As such, future research 

should construct a more sensitive content coding scheme to capture qualitative and quantitative 

components of storytelling. Also, the entire film should be assessed. The type of promotional 

materials analyzed in this study may have only focused on the main characters and/or pivotal 

points in an unfolding narrative. 

Additionally, attributes of characters in the promotional materials were assessed. In particular, 

the race/ethnicity of lead/main characters as well as character hypersexualization (sexually 

revealing clothing, nudity), demographics (gender, parental status, relational status) and sexual 

orientation (LGBTQ status) was evaluated. These variables were assessed by research assistants 

after training and three reliability diagnostics. Using Levine-Donnerstein formula (1999), the 

range of reliability coefficients across the three tests were as follows: main/lead characters

(.8750 to .9565); gender (1.0), parental status (.5409 to .9167); relational status (.5409 to 

.9167); sexually revealing clothing (.9167 to 1.00), nudity (.8750 to 1.00), physical beauty (.9583 

to 1.00), and LGBTQ status (.8750 to .9583). Given the large sample size of characters 

evaluated, only significant associations at the p < .05 level are reported below. 

Interestingly, the demographics of characters (gender, parental status, relational status) did not 

vary by director race/ethnicity. A full 42.5% of all of the characters in promotional materials 

were female. Race/ethnicity of directors was not associated with the percentage of females 

depicted in sexualized attire, partially naked, or referenced as attractive. One variable that did 
36

differ was LGBTQ status, but only for female characters. Females were more likely to be 

depicted with a fluid sexuality by underrepresented directors (6.7%) than Caucasian directors 

(1.7%). Given low frequencies on this analysis, the results should be interpreted with caution. 

 One variable that did differ by director race/ethnicity was race/ethnicity of main/lead characters: 

X2 (6,167) =70.02, p < .01, V*=.65. When Caucasians helmed films, 95.5% of the main/lead 

characters were white. In contrast, only 39.4% of main/lead characters were white when 

underrepresented directors were at the helm. Similar, but less pronounced differences, emerged 

for Hispanic leads (12.1% vs. <1%), Black leads (30.3% vs. <1%), and Middle Eastern leads 

(6.1% vs. <1%) with underrepresented directors displaying more on screen diversity than 

Caucasian directors. 

The thematic analysis was undertaken to address the third research question posed as part of the 

NEA ArtWorks Research Grant. Given the pattern of results, we thought it best to focus in text 

on character diversity on-screen as a more robust indicator of differences in storytelling as a 

function of director race and/or ethnicity. 

31. A chi-square analysis for director apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not 

underrepresented) and character apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not 

underrepresented) was significant, X2(1, 929)=191.17, p<.01, φ=.45. 

32. A chi-square analysis for director apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not 

underrepresented) and character apparent race/ethnicity (White, Hispanic/Latino, Black/African 

American, American Indian/Alaska Native American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Asian, 

Middle Eastern, Other) was significant, X2(6, 929)=208.35, p<.01, V*=.47. 

33. Most of the support received by the underrepresented directors was screening their movies at 

Sundance Film Festival. 

34. Smith et al. (2013). 

35. For information on how this data was collected, see Smith, S.L., Choueiti, M. & Pieper, K.M. 

(2013). Further information can be found in Smith, S.L., Choueiti, M., Scofield, E., & Pieper, 

K.M. (2013). Gender Inequality in 500 Popular Films: Examining On-Screen Portrayals and 

Behind-the-Scenes Employment Patterns in Motion Pictures Released between 2007-2012. Los 

Angeles, CA: Author. 

36. A chi-square analysis for director apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not 

underrepresented) and character apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not 

underrepresented) was significant, X2

(1, 20,029)=792.24, p<.01, φ=.20. 

37. A chi-square analysis for director apparent race/ethnicity (underrepresented, not 

underrepresented) and character apparent race/ethnicity (White, Hispanic/Latino, Black/African 

American, American Indian/Alaska Native American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Asian, 

Other) was significant, X2(6, 20,029)=1234.34, p<.01, V*=.25. 
37

38. A total of 20 film directors who identified with an underrepresented racial and/or ethnic group 

(i.e., Black or African American, Hispanic/Latino, Asian or Asian American, Middle Eastern, 

and Native) were interviewed. Six participants were female and the remainder were male. The 

average age for those who provided it (n = 19) was 38.05 years. All had directed at least one 

feature length narrative film. 

Individuals answered four questions related to barriers faced by independent directors. The 

questions asked were: How would you say your career as an independent filmmaker is going 

right now? What isn’t going so well? What barriers have you personally faced as a director in 

independent film? To what extent do you think any of the barriers you have faced have anything 

to do with being from your specific racial and/or ethnic group? To what extent do they have to 

do with being female (if applicable)? To what extent do they have to do with your sexual 

orientation? To what extent do they have to do with your age? Is there anything else that might 

have impacted the barriers you have faced?

Responses were aggregated and analyzed by two of the study authors. Coding focused on 

identifying theoretically relevant elements that might arise at the finance, development, 

production, distribution and/or exhibition stage of a project. The unit of analysis was the 

individual response. Answers ranged in length and could fit into multiple categories. Responses 

could include assertions, speculation, perceptions, personal experience, or sharing the 

experiences of others. Quotes have been edited for readability as informed by APA guidelines. 

39. Smith, et al. (2013). 

40. Smith, et al. (2013). See page 25. 

41. Smith, S.L., Granados, A., Choueiti, M., Erickson, S., & Noyes, A. (2010). Changing the 

status quo: Industry leaders’ perceptions of gender in family films. Report prepared for the 

Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media. 

42. Motion Picture Association of America. (2012). Theatrical Market Statistics. Retrieved from: 

http://www.mpaa.org/policy/industry. Summing the total of African Americans, Hispanics, and 

“other ethnicities” results in 44%. 

43. An independent samples t-test using the presence of an underrepresented director as the 

blocking variable was not significant, t (694)=.560, p=.58. Metacritic scores ranged from 9 to 98 

across the sample. Mean for White Directors=53.88 (SD=16.74). Mean for Underrepresented 

Directors=52.77 (SD=14.87). 

44. An independent samples t-test using the presence of an underrepresented director as the 

blocking variable was significant, t (698) =4.76, p <.01. The widest point of release ranged from 

47 screens to 4,468 screens across the sample. Mean for White Directors=3048.81 (SD=682.49). 

Mean for Underrepresented Directors=2660.90 (SD=680.31). 

45. Mason, C., & Stark, M. (2004). What do investors look for in a business plan? A comparison 

of the investment criteria of bankers, venture capitalists and business angels. International Small 

Business Journal, 22(3), 227-248. Using verbal protocol analysis, the authors demonstrate that 

business angels report “marginally greater emphasis to the entrepreneur” (p. 240) than venture 
38

capitalists or bankers when reviewing proposals. The authors acknowledge that the method 

employed “may well have underemphasized the importance that angels give to the people behind 

the business” (p. 240). 

46. Hall, J., & Hofer, C. W. (1993). Venture capitalists' decision criteria in new venture 

evaluation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(1), 25-42. See page 34. Authors examined the 

proposal screening process of venture capitalists, finding that “the process proceeded until the 

venture capitalists identified a reason to reject the proposal or completed that stage of review 

without discovering a ‘fatal flaw’”. Maxwell, A. L., Jeffrey, S. A., & Lévesque, M. (2011). 

Business angel early stage decision making. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(2), 212-225. 

Researchers analyzed investment decisions based on interactions in a televised reality show. 

“...every opportunity that had a fatal flaw was rejected... during the selection stage” (p. 218). 

Fatal flaws were categorized using eight specific variables. 

47. Rosette, A. S., Leonardelli, G. J., & Phillips, K. W. (2008). The White standard: Racial bias in 

leader categorization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), 758-777. Sy, T., Shore, L. M., 

Strauss, J., Shore, T. H., Tram, S., Whiteley, P., & Ikeda-Muromachi, K. (2010). Leadership 

perceptions as a function of race–occupation fit: The case of Asian Americans. Journal of 

Applied Psychology, 95(5), 902-919. See detailed footnotes below for findings. 

48. Hilton, D. J. (2001). The psychology of financial decision-making: Applications to trading, 

dealing, and investment analysis. Journal of Psychology and Financial Markets, 2(1), 37-53. 

The author reviews studies that discuss the confirmation bias (p. 38) and illusory correlations (p. 

43) in financial decision-making. Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D., & Teoh, S. H. (2002). Investor 

psychology in capital markets: Evidence and policy implications. Journal of Monetary 

Economics, 49(1), 139-209. Authors review “the evidence for systematic cognitive errors made 

by investors” including salience, loss aversion, and representativeness (see pages 144-146). 

49. Sy, et al., (2010, p. 909). Study 1 evidenced main effects such that participants had higher 

leadership perceptions of Caucasian Americans than Asian Americans. In Studies 2 and 3, this 

relationship persisted and was qualified by an interaction between race and type of occupation. 

Means for Asian Americans in both occupations were still lower than for Caucasian Americans. 

The relationship between race and leadership perception is mediated by agentic (Caucasian) and 

competent (Asian) leadership traits. Chung-Herrera, B. G., & Lankau, M. J. (2005). Are We 

There Yet? An Assessment of Fit Between Stereotypes of Minority Managers and the 

Successful-Manager Prototype. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(10), 2029-2056. 

Ratings of prototypical managers were compared with ratings for managers across racial/ethnic 

groups. “The correlations between successful middle managers and Caucasian managers was 

significantly greater than the correlation between successful middle managers and African 

American managers” (p. 2039). This was also true for Hispanic American but not Asian 

American managers. Festekjian, A., Tram, S., Murray, C. B., Sy, T., & Huynh, H. P. (2013). I 

see me the way you see me: The influence of race on interpersonal and intrapersonal leadership 

perceptions. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1-18. Studies 1 and 2 use multiple 

regression to demonstrate that Caucasian Americans were more likely to be perceived as leaders 

than Asian Americans. Study 2 also tests mediation of this relationship, demonstrating that 
39

agentic traits mediate the Caucasian race/leadership perceptions relationship and competent traits 

mediate the Asian race/leadership perceptions relationship (see p. 9-10).

50. Rosette et al., (2008). Study 1 participants given information about a fictitious company were 

more likely to perceive that an interviewee was White when described as a leader versus an 

employee. When given base rate data about the prevalence of Whites in the organization, 

participants overestimated the likelihood that the leader was White (see p. 762). Study 2 

replicated these findings. 

51. Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., & Steele, C. M. (2005). Clearing the air: Identity safety 

moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women's leadership aspirations. Journal of 

Personality and Social Psychology, 88(2), 276-287. See page 277. Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. 

(1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of 

Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797-811. See page 797. 

52. Eagly, A. H., & Chin, J. L. (2010). Diversity and leadership in a changing world. American 

Psychologist, 65(3), 216-224. “The activation of cultural stereotypes inconsistent with widely 

accepted ideals of leadership thus can undermine leadership opportunity not only by eliciting 

doubts about stereotyped individuals’ leadership abilities but also by making them personally 

anxious about confirming these doubts and therefore wary about taking on leadership roles” (p. 

218). 

53. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women's math 

performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4-28. See Studies 2 and 3. 

Nguyen, H. H. D., & Ryan, A. M. (2008). Does stereotype threat affect test performance of 

minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of Applied 

Psychology, 93(6), 1314-1334. This meta-analysis finds an overall effect size of .26, which 

suggests that stereotype threat activation impairs women’s math performance. See p. 1314. 

Authors also discuss potential moderators to this overall effect, including race-related stereotypes 

and test difficulty. 

54. Nadler, J. T., & Clark, M. H. (2011). Stereotype threat: A meta-analysis comparing African 

Americans to Hispanic Americans. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(4), 872-890. This 

meta-analysis of studies examined performance improvements in Hispanic American and 

African American populations across 23 studies using “some cognitive measure of general or 

domain-specific knowledge” (p. 877). Reducing stereotype threat can improve performance on 

tests compared to situations in which stereotype threats are activated. The effect size when 

stereotype threat is eliminated (or not induced) is 0.52. Steele & Aronson (1995). In Study 1, 

Black students who were told a verbal-oriented test would assess their aptitude performed worse 

than Black participants who received no information about assessment. Additionally, Black 

students who believed they were being assessed scored lower than Whites in the same condition 

(see p. 800). This pattern was replicated in Study 2 (see p. 802). 

55. Steele & Aronson (1995, see p. 804). 
40

56. Gonzales, P. M., Blanton, H., & Williams, K. J. (2002). The effects of stereotype threat and 

double-minority status on the test performance of Latino women. Personality and Social 

Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 659-670. 

57. Cheryan, S., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). When positive stereotypes threaten intellectual 

performance: The psychological hazards of “model minority” status. Psychological Science, 

11(5), 399-402. 

58. Chen, X. P., Yao, X., & Kotha, S. (2009). Entrepreneur passion and preparedness in business 

plan presentations: A persuasion analysis of venture capitalists' funding decisions. Academy of 

Management Journal, 52(1), 199-214. Mitteness, C. R., Cardon, M. S., & Sudek, R. (2010). The 

importance angels place on passion when making investment decisions: Why does it matter to 

some and not all angels? Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 30(2), Article 2. 

59. Inzlicht, M., & Kang, S. K. (2010). Stereotype threat spillover: How coping with threats to 

social identity affects aggression, eating, decision making, and attention. Journal of Personality 

and Social Psychology, 99(3), 467-482. 

60. Duke, L. (2000). Black in a blonde world: Race and girls' interpretations of the feminine ideal 

in teen magazines. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(2), 367-392. See pages 

369-370. 

61. Kochhar, R., Fry, R., & Taylor, P. (2011). Wealth gaps rise to record highs between Whites, 

Blacks and Hispanics. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. See page 14 for data on decline 

of net worth. 

62. Portes, A., & MacLeod, D. (1996). Educational progress of children of immigrants: The roles 

of class, ethnicity, and school context. Sociology of Education, 69(4), 255-275. (see p. 263-264). 

Walpole, M. (2003). Socioeconomic status and college: How SES affects college experiences 

and outcomes. The Review of Higher Education, 27(1), 45-73. (see p. 60). 

63. Randle, Wing-Fai, & Kurian. (2007). 

64. Blanchflower, D. G., Levine, P. B., & Zimmerman, D. J. (2003). Discrimination in the smallbusiness credit market. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 930-943. Cavalluzzo, K., & 

Wolken, J. (2005). Small business loan turndowns, personal wealth, and discrimination. The 

Journal of Business, 78(6), 2153-2178. 

65. Townsend, S. S., Markus, H. R., & Bergsieker, H. B. (2009). My choice, your categories: The 

denial of multiracial identities. Journal of Social Issues, 65(1), 185-204. Miville, M. L., 

Constantine, M. G., Baysden, M. F., & So-Lloyd, G. (2005). Chameleon Changes: An 

Exploration of Racial Identity Themes of Multiracial People. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 

52(4), 507-516. 

66. Townsend et al., (2009). 
41

67. Randle et al., (2007). See page 72-73. 

68. Smith, et al. (2013). 

69. Directors Guild of America. (2013). 

70. Catalyst, The Prout Group, The Executive Leadership Council, the Hispanic Association on 

Corporate Responsibility, and Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics, Inc. (2013, August 15). 

Missing pieces: Women and minorities on Fortune 500 Boards—2012 Alliance for Board 

Diversity Census. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/missing-pieces-womenand-minorities-fortune-500-boards-2012-alliance-board-diversity. 

71. Bowleg, L. (2008). When Black+lesbian+woman≠ Black lesbian woman: The methodological 

challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 312-325. 

The term intersectionality is contextualized, indicating that “though explicit mention of the term 

intersectionality is rare, feminist psychology has been far more progressive than mainstream 

psychology in recognizing the interesections between women’s experiences of structural 

inequality based on race, gender, class, and sexual orientation” (p. 313, emphasis original). 

72. Sanchez-Hucles, J. V., & Davis, D. D. (2010). Women and women of color in leadership: 

Complexity, identity, and intersectionality. American Psychologist, 65(3), 171-181. (p. 173). 

73. Greenman, E., & Xie, Y. (2008). Double jeopardy? The interaction of gender and race on 

earnings in the United States. Social Forces, 86(3), 1217-1245. 

74. Yap, M., & Konrad, A. M. (2009). Gender and racial differentials in promotions: Is there a 

sticky floor, a mid-level bottleneck, or a glass ceiling?. Relations industrielles/Industrial 

Relations, 64(4), 593-619. Hite, L. M. (2004). Black and white women managers: Access to 

opportunity. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(2), 131-146. 

75. Giscombe, K., & Mattis, M. C. (2002). Leveling the playing field for women of color in 

corporate management: Is the business case enough? Journal of Business Ethics, 37(1), 103-119. 

(See p. 108) 

76. Smith, et al. (2013). 

77. Combs, G. M. (2003). The duality of race and gender for managerial African American 

women: Implications of informal social networks on career advancement. Human Resource 

Development Review, 2(4), 385-405. See pages 394 and 395 for review. 

78. Smith, et al. (2013). 

79. One director did not complete the interview, so 19 individuals answered questions related to 

opportunities that exist for or might advance independent directors. The questions asked were: A 

few organizations are working in support of films and directors [of your background]. Are you 

aware of any of these organizations? What do you know about the work that these organizations 

are doing? Are there services that are not provided that might be useful? If so, what are they?
42

Responses were aggregated and analyzed by two of the study authors. Coding focused on 

identifying commonly occurring themes that related to existing support or potential future 

programs. The unit of analysis was the individual response. Once more, answers ranged in 

length and were allowed to fit into multiple categories. As above, responses could include 

assertions, speculation, perceptions, personal experience, or sharing the experiences of others. 

80. Smith et al. (2013). 

81. Harrison, C.K. & Associates (2013). Coaching Mobility (Volume I in the Good Business 

Series). A Report for the NFL Diversity and Inclusion Series. Author states that “while the 

Rooney Rule has been effective in allowing ethnic minority candidates more initial access than 

was previously realized at the time—the culture of NFL male networks, cryonism [sic]... and the 

‘who knows you’ culture requires that a serious analysis of the situation continues to occur” (p. 

19). 

82. Collins, B. W. (2007). Tackling unconscious bias in hiring practices: The plight of the Rooney 

rule. NYUL Rev., 82, 870-912. Author states: “The NFL's longstanding hiring practices and 

networking systems have consistently allowed front-office decisionmakers [sic] to avoid 

interacting with qualified African American candidates. Without any substantive exposure to 

such candidates, decisionmakers commonly - and often unconsciously - rely on racial stereotypes 

... At a bare minimum, the Rooney Rule forces these decisionmakers to come face-to-face with 

candidates whom they previously may have shunned. While not a perfect cure, recent statistics 

suggest that the Rooney Rule has succeeded in diversifying the NFL's head coaching ranks.” (p. 

872) 
43

Acknowledgements 

We would like to extend a heartfelt thanks to multiple individuals and groups that contributed to 

this project's completion. We are indebted to Dr. Larry Gross for his constant support of our 

research and project needs. Also, we are grateful for the staff support from the ASCJ facilities 

team, the business office, and the Communication Director's staff. Dr. Doe Mayer's contribution 

to this report was extraordinary and came at a critical time during instrument development and 

pre testing. In terms of Sundance Institute, a special thanks to Keri Putnam, Laurie Hopkins, 

Elizabeth Greenway, Andrew Eastwick, Radhi Taylor, Velissa Robinson, Caroline Libresco, 

John Cooper, Siobhan Doheny, Bird Runningwater, Moira Griffin, and Adam 

Montgomery. Finally, we wanted to thank our MDSC leadership team of undergraduates who 

contributed in enumerable ways to this report: Yu-Ting Liu (Tingers), Jheanelle Garriques (Fly), 

Lily Puglisi (L.O.P., Point), Amy Muramoto (Where's Landy?), and Rosan Hsu 

("Roxanne"). We could not have done this without you or the entire Media, Diversity, & Social 

Change Initiative team. 

Undergraduate Research Team 

Ashima Agrawal 

Christopher Allison 

Marisa Andrade 

Lisa Battaglia 

Aimee Bennett 

Sarah Block 

Mitchell Cavender 

Stella Chung 

Maria De La Garza 

Samantha Dickens 

Jessica Duncan 

Landy Eng 

Jheanelle Garriques 

Emani Glee 

Sawyer Harris 

Miranda Hearst 

Sarah Hempel 

Cody Hock 

Rosan Hsu 

Edward Lau 

Yu-Ting Liu 

Andrea Lowitz 

Katherine Martinez 

Jenny Meier 

Saira Mirza 

Amy Muramoto 

Luis Nevarez 

Janet Ocampo 

Matthew Padavick 

Melody Pakravan 

Jun Ho Park 

Katie Phan 

Lily Puglisi 

Michael Ramires 

Vanessa Rivero 

William Robinson 

Jordan Schroer 

Elizabeth Scofield 

Avital Shoomer 

Crystal Smith 

Hannah Stetson 

Sameer Suri 

Sareen Tavidian 

Artur Tofan 

Grace Tran 

Sadie Trautwein 

Kymberly Van Der Weyde 

Zhongyue Wang 

Tiffany Wang 

Bridgette Webb 

Samuel Weiser 

Zi Ye 

Christine Yoo 

Monica Zinn