Figure 5 - uploaded by Janet Swim
Content may be subject to copyright.
Female participants' attributions to ability and sexism as a function of social context. From Stangor et al. (2001).
Source publication
Discrimination towards members of low-status groups takes a variety of forms, and results in a variety of negative consequences for its victims. Furthermore, discrimination may influence its targets either directly (for instance, when housing discrimination makes insurance, mortgage rates, or rents higher for African Americans than for whites) or i...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... shown in Figure 5, we found that members of stigmatised groups (in this case women) were more likely to report that a failing grade assigned by an opposite-category evaluator (a man) was caused by discrimination, rather than by lack of ability or effort, when judgements were made privately, or when they were made in front of another woman. However, we also found that women were significantly more likely to make ability (rather than discrimination) attributions when they expected to report these responses in the presence of a male student. ...
Similar publications
Although more blatant forms of discrimination have declined, racial prejudice continues to manifest itself in subtle ways. For example, People of Color experience racial microaggressions (i.e., subtle slights or ‘put downs’) in their face-to-face interactions (Nadal, 2011) and in online contexts (Clark et al., 2011). This study investigates whether...
We examine the relationship between concentration and price dispersion using variation induced by a merger in the Canadian mortgage market. Since interest rates are determined through a search and negotiation process, consolidation weakens consumers' bargaining positions. We use reduced-form techniques to estimate the mergers' distributional impact...
Recent studies have used statistical methods to show that minorities were more likely than equally qualified whites to receive high-cost, high-risk loans during the U.S. housing boom, evidence taken to suggest widespread discrimination in the mortgage lending industry. The evidence, however, was indirect, being inferred from racial differentials th...
The aim of this study is to find out the level in financial inclusion between 41 African countries. To reach to this goal for knowing which countries have the high level or the low level in financial inclusion according to some variables such as Adults with an outstanding mortgage, Using a Formal Account, and Account From a Formal Financial Institu...
Citations
... Both approaches highlight that recognizing discrimination precedes action. Staircase models such as the 'ask, answer and announce' model (Stangor et al. 2003) and the 'confronting prejudicial response' model (Ashburn-Nardo, Morris, and Goodwin 2008) suggest that the perception of sexism is a necessary first step in confronting it. Similarly, perceiving injustice is an important antecedent of collective action (van Zomeren, Postmes, and Spears 2008) and perceiving gender-based injustices is key to igniting women's interest in collective action to overcome sexism (Ellemers and Barreto 2009;Radke, Hornsey, and Barlow 2016). ...
... Gender as a natural group variable can only be a predictor (Tate 2015). The above-described literature and in particular the staircase models that describe the recognition of discrimination as the first step in a chain of reactions towards discrimination (e.g., Ashburn-Nardo, Morris, and Goodwin 2008; Stangor et al. 2003) underpin the theoretical plausibility of our proposed mechanism. In fact, discrimination against women is an ongoing problem and gender quotas are one, albeit controversial, solution. ...
... This result is consistent with the long-presumed but not yet empirically tested notion (Kluegel 1985;Konrad and Hartmann 2001) that perceptions of continued discrimination against women on attitudes towards gender policies are mediated by the perceived necessity of such policies. Moreover, our results align with research showing that the recognition of discrimination against women tends to be the first, but not last step when confronting sexism or joining collective action for women (Ashburn-Nardo, Morris, and Goodwin 2008; Ellemers and Barreto 2009;Radke, Hornsey, and Barlow 2016;Stangor et al. 2003). ...
This research identified two mechanisms that explain gender differences in attitudes towards gender quotas. Using a multi-method approach, we assessed attitudes as self-reported support for gender quotas and rater-coded valence of participants' free associations with gender quotas. Study 1 examined quotas for university professorship positions (N = 237) and Study 2 quotas for corporate leadership positions (N = 587). Supporting the first mechanism, women's greater perceptions of discrimination against women related to greater perceived necessity of gender quotas, which related to more favourable attitudes. Supporting the second mechanism, men's greater concerns that quotas discriminate against men related to greater concerns that quotas stigmatize women as incompetent, which related to less favourable attitudes. By advancing the understanding of key mechanisms behind attitudes towards gender quotas, this research contributes to effectively designing and successfully implementing hard affirmative action policies aimed at overcoming women's underrepresentation in leading academic and corporate positions.
... Discrimination is not always a direct approach; rather, individuals may experience indirect disparity (Stangor et al., 2003). When a group of people is ideologically brainwashed and belongs to a specific ideology, positive or negative, they may apply it in their workplace towards others whom they perceive as inferior. ...
... If they have had negative experiences with a male individual in their personal life, they may generalize these experiences to all males, leading to mental health deterioration among male employees and potentially affecting their physical health as well. The situation worsens when the administration reacts in extreme ways, such as rewarding some employees while depriving others based on their ideologies and thoughts, even if they are qualified enough (Kaiser and Major 2006;Major et al., 2007;Stangor et al., 2003). ...
This paper discusses some objective truths in
the workplace where an employee may feel
isolated for various reasons in different
domains such as salary, professional status,
promotions, and more. Certain ideologies of
human society create disparities in these
natural practices and limit development in our
modern world. For instance, politics, religion,
class, gender, and language contribute to these
disparities. The researcher utilizes Henry
Tajfel’s social identity theory to understand the
social problems created by specific groups of
people. Qualitative methodology is employed
to collect data. Ten of the most reviewed
articles were studied among the 30 chosen
articles to review literature and find essential
information.
... How these experiences are categorized and labelled is important. Research shows that minority group members' labelling of their treatment is complicated and involves reference to the degree it was intentionally motivated or more accidental, etc. with the corollary that not all problematic treatment is necessarily labelled as involving 'discrimination' (Crosby, 1984, Crosby et al., 1986Stangor et al., 2003). Accordingly, it is important that when we ask minorities about their treatment, we do not simply rely on the one concept (of discrimination). ...
... Although it is unlikely that the pupil would construe the welcome from the teacher as discriminatory or racist, there may be contexts in which they would. However, this labelling process is complex (Crosby, 1984, Crosby et al., 1986Stangor et al., 2003) and one in which others play a role in constructing and validating accounts of what happened as more or less serious (Xie et al., 2021). The key point here is that if we are to capture the breadth to minorities' hurtful experiences there is value in having a range of analytic concepts that extend beyond discrimination and misrecognition contributes in this regard. ...
... As noted in the introduction, this does not mean that misrecognition experiences cannot come to be judged as evidencing discrimination: to the degree there is social support that encourages such a categorization, this is possible (Xie et al., 2021). However, to narrow our range of constructs to discrimination is to exclude socially relevant experiences that minorities may not necessarily come to define as discriminatory for all manner of reasons (Crosby, 1984, Crosby et al., 1986Stangor et al., 2003). ...
This paper reports a quantitative investigation of the antecedents and consequences of misrecognition for group relations. Moreover, as we simultaneously take into account effects associated with perceived discrimination, we are able to show the added value of attending to the experience of misrecognition as a predictor of outcomes relevant to intergroup relations. The sample comprised 368 Dutch participants with an Antillean (n = 126), Chinese (n = 118), or Surinamese (n = 124) ethnic background. Results indicated that those who identified strongly with their ethnic group and who perceived other (so-called ‘native’) Dutch people as having negative perceptions of their ethnic group, reported greater levels of misrecognition and discrimination. In turn, higher levels of misrecognition and perceived discrimination were associated with participants reporting lower levels of Dutch identification, lower levels of trust in Dutch authorities, and a greater willingness to exhibit collective action on behalf of their ethnic group. Specifically, misrecognition was more strongly associated with Dutch identification and trust in Dutch authorities, while perceived discrimination was more strongly associated with collective action tendencies. These findings point to the practical and theoretical importance of misrecognition: Both the experience of discrimination and misrecognition are relevant to understanding the sustainable integration of ethnic minorities in multi-cultural societies.
... For instance, the spiral of silence theory suggests that individuals are less inclined to express their opinions if they believe their viewpoints are in the minority and that the majority holds opposing views (Noelle-Neumann, 1991, 1993. Moreover, individuals may avoid engaging in climate change discussions to manage impressions, fearing disapproval (Sechrist et al., 2004) or loss of respect (Stangor et al., 2003). ...
Public discussions on climate change, as a form of social interaction, are widely recognized as effective tools for promoting collective action. However, there is limited research on examining the factors that influence climate change discussions from a social interaction perspective. In the present study, we conducted a large sample (N = 1,169) survey to investigate personal (such as self-efficacy and personal response efficacy) and others' (such as perceived others' response efficacy and social norms) factors influencing climate change discussions from a social interaction perspective. The results showed that (i) for people with high climate change perceptions, personal response efficacy, self-efficacy, and social norms have positive effects on climate change discussions, but the effect of perceived others' response efficacy on climate change discussion is not significant; (ii) for people with low climate change perceptions, self-efficacy and social norms have positive effects on climate change discussions, but the effects of personal response efficacy and perceived others' response efficacy on climate change discussion are not significant; (iii) irrespective of individuals' high or low perceptions of climate change, social norm remains the most important predictor of climate change discussions. These findings make valuable contributions to the theoretical literature and intervention efforts regarding climate change discussions from a social interaction perspective.
... Male Allyship: Male allies are capable of recognizing sexism and are willing to confront it in order to promote gender equality [18]. ...
... Finally, when considering the impact of interpersonal exchanges that convey attitudes toward women (i.e., sexism), it is important to recognize that individuals differ in the degree to which they are chronically aware of, and feel attached to, a social group that they are a part of (Major et al., 2002). Drawing from research tied to prejudice and discrimination, we theorize that identification with one's gender-that is, the extent to which women consider being part of their gender group as important to one's self-definition (Major et al., 2002;McCoy & Major, 2003)-impacts the manner in which sexism is detected and processed (Dardenne et al., 2007;Major et al., 2002;Stangor et al., 2003). More specifically, individuals with a greater gender identity are more likely to attribute interpersonal mistreatment and behavior to the biases and prejudicial attitudes of the perpetrator . ...
Despite the growing attention devoted to women's experiences of sexism within organizational contexts, there is comparatively less work elucidating the affective and behavioral self‐regulatory processes that unfold following sexist incidents that happen before organizational entry—that is, during the job search process. In this study, we integrate ambivalent sexism theory with self‐regulation theory to explore the differential impact of experiences of hostile (i.e., overt, derogatory, expressions of female inferiority) and benevolent sexism (i.e., subtle, seemingly positive, expressions of female incompetence) during the job search. Further, drawing from research on discrimination, we also consider whether reactions to sexism are shaped by the extent to which women identify with their gender. We tested our conceptual model through a weekly study of 103 female new labor market entrants. Findings indicated that while weekly experiences of hostile sexism related to heightened anger, experiences of benevolent sexism elicited anxiety; these effects were exacerbated for highly gender‐identified female job seekers. Anxiety—but not anger—prompted next‐week job search effort and intensity, which yielded distinct effects on search success and well‐being. Notably, exploratory analyses demonstrated that these affective responses to weekly experiences of hostile and benevolent sexism did not emerge for male job seekers, suggesting that such experiences of sexism can be more impactful for women on the job market. Thus, our work highlights the critical self‐regulatory processes that unfold weekly following female job seekers’ exposure to sexism.
... The stressors related with social identity are a unique type, quite different from non-bias-related stressors, and with severe consequences for health (Bey et al., 2019). When bias and prejudice are conceptualized and broadly categorized as racism or homophobia, for example, this may hide important differences between group members since some of them may experience more prejudice and discrimination than others (Stangor et al., 2003). To explain this variability, research has focused on individual, situational, and structural factors. ...
Despite the growing number of bias-motivated violence studies, the evidence available remains limited, and there are several gaps in our understanding of the complex relationship between negative attitudes and biased violence. In addition, the literature on this topic has many facets and nuances and is often contradictory, so it is difficult to obtain a clear overall picture. Research has made good progress in this area, but it still suffers from a lack of systematization and from a highly segmented approach to victimization and offending. To contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the subject, this integrative narrative review provides a critical reappraisal of the theoretical, methodological, and empirical research from a systemic perspective. To this end, 134 academic publications on personality and social psychology, clinical psychology, sociology, criminology, and related disciplines were examined. The evidence suggests that although bias-motivated violence shares characteristics with other types of offensive behavior, it is actually a unique phenomenon due to its background rooted in prejudice, identity, and attitudes in which the intersection of individual, psychosocial, and ecological factors is especially relevant. The impact on the victim and their community is diverse, but it has a series of distinctive severe psychological consequences that significantly reduce the probability that incidents will be reported. Here, we present a series of findings and reflections on bias-motivated violence and provide recommendations for research, practice, and policy.
... For instance, Hyers (1999, see also Woodzicka &LaFrance, 2001) found that although women predicted that they would directly confront a man who targeted them with several sexist comments, a majority of women actually did not confront when they experienced this situation in an experimental setting. Related research around this time showed that the main conundrum faced by targets of bias is that, although they wanted to confront, they feared being perceived as complainers and hypersensitive (Stangor et al., 2003;Stangor, Swim, Van Allen, & Sechrist, 2002). ...
Self-confrontation, whereby people become aware of their responses being more biased than their personal standards condone, triggers self-regulation and bias reduction. However, impediments to self-confrontation reduces its occurrence. Other-confrontation, where someone points other another person's biased responses with disapproval, provides an antidote. Research has identified confrontees' reactions and associated moderators, but in a largely descriptive manner. We propose a theoretical framework capturing consequences of other-confrontation for confrontees. The confrontee's perceived validity of the confrontation determines whether they evaluate their response based on their personal standards, which prompts negative self-directed affect and bias reduction. Simultaneously, the confrontee's perception that the confronter is trying to impugn their egalitarian and non-prejudiced image triggers negative other-directed affect and, in turn, the confrontee's generation of social costs (e.g., dislike for the confronter). Moderators affecting bias reduction and social costs operate through their influence on people's answers to the perceived validity and impugnment questions.
... On the other hand, compared to sexism awareness, perspective-taking had more robust overall effects on increasing both men's and women's perceptions of institutional sexism by increasing their tendency to side with the plaintiff and their recommended sanctions against the company. Recognition of sexism is the first critical step in being able to confront sexism or support someone else confronting sexism (Ashburn-Nardo et al., 2008;Drury & Kaiser, 2014;Stangor et al., 2003). Therefore, perspective-taking may be an optimal strategy when the goal is to increase recognition of institutional gender discrimination in order to effect change. ...
Women are more likely than men to perceive institutional sexism. In the present study, we examined the gender gap in perceptions of a legal case in which a female plaintiff claims she was a victim of institutional gender discrimination by an employer. Participants were randomly assigned to receive information about institutional forms of sexism (or not) prior to learning the facts of the case. In addition, participants were randomly assigned to take the female plaintiff's perspective (or remain objective) while reviewing the case. In isolation, sexism awareness and perspective-taking both independently eliminated the gender gap in perceptions of discrimination. However, contrary to expectations, the gender gap reemerged among participants who were made aware of sexism prior to perspective-taking such that women perceived more discrimination than men. Implications for interventions to increase perceptions of institutional sexism are discussed.
... That is, the worldview of a person who believes strongly that individual outcomes are based primarily on merit will tend to be threatened by information that one's own or others' opportunities are hampered by discrimination (Major et al., 2007). Thus, to preserve the integrity of their worldviews, people may (re)frame discrimination as stemming from legitimate processes, downplay the impact of discrimination, or simply be less apt to realize that an action might be discriminatory (Major et al., 2007;Stangor et al., 2003). Research suggests that ideology plays this role for third-party observers (Major et al. 2002(Major et al. , 2007 O'Connor and Kmec 2020), but we do not know whether ideology loses its force when it collides with the self-interest of targets of discrimination in specific discriminatory decisions. ...
... It matters whether workers perceive discrimination as such because it will guide whether they experience the "indirect" effects of discrimination, in addition to its direct effects (Stangor et al., 2003). That is, discrimination's direct effects occur whether the target realizes it or not. ...
... For example, if a supervisor withholds a promotion from a pregnant woman, her workplace advancement and material resources decrease no matter how she labels that treatment. But many outcomes are indirect and depend on whether the worker experiences and labels their treatment as discriminatory (Stangor et al., 2003). Self-report data shows that those who label their treatment as discriminatory experience unambiguously negative consequences for mental and physical wellbeing (Jones et al., 2016;Lewis et al. 2015;Phelan and Link 2015;Schmitt et al., 2014), as well as work attachment and intentions to leave their current job (Jones et al., 2016). ...
Employers use ideologically-tinged rhetoric to justify workplace discrimination. We argue that workers will be less likely to label biased treatment against them as discriminatory when they subscribe to those ideologies as well. We tested this prediction and the consequences of labeling for work attitudes and performance using an experiment that assigned parents to a low-status position in a work group, varying whether the decision invoked biased, ideological assumptions about parenthood. As expected, ideology drove mothers' (but not fathers’) labeling. Mothers were less likely to label biased treatment against them as discriminatory when they were conservative and when they subscribed to separate spheres and ideal worker ideologies. Mothers who labeled their treatment as discriminatory had more negative work attitudes than those who did not, but also tended to appeal the decision. Ideology thus shapes whether people label discrimination when it occurs as well as their subsequent work attitudes and justice-seeking behaviors.
