No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
High Power Mindsets Reduce Gender Identification and Benevolent Sexism Among Women (But Not Men)
Abstract
We examine how feelings of power affect gender identification and the endorsement of sexism. Participants wrote essays about a time when they felt powerful or powerless (Studies 1–3) or about an event unrelated to power (Studies 2–3). Then, they reported how much they identified with their gender group. When primed with high power, women reported lower levels of gender identification, as compared to those primed with low power (Studies 1–2) and to a control condition (Studies 2–3). In Study 3, we also found that women primed with high power endorsed benevolent (but not hostile) sexism less than women in both the low power and control conditions (Study 3). Power had no impact on men's gender identification or sexism.
... Similarly, women who believe they hold a lower position in a highly-competitive social hierarchy tend to perceive a greater need DOES POWERLESSNESS MOTIVATE SEXISM? 8 for protection and resources, and in turn, endorse benevolent sexism more strongly (Radke et al., 2018; also see Overall & Hammond, 2018). Conversely, women who recall a time they personally felt higher power subsequently rejected benevolent sexism more than women in a control condition (Vial & Napier, 2017). Critically, this prior research relies on the untested premise that benevolent sexism is appealing to women as a source of power because women live in contexts that limit their power or control. ...
... Although the longitudinal effect size was small, the statistical test was very conservative and provides directional evidence that women who feel relatively more powerless subsequently endorse benevolent sexism more strongly over time. These results provide direct support for the previously untested assumption underlying many studies that women endorse benevolent sexism to overcome social conditions that limit their power, such as seeking protection from benevolent ideologies when their safety or career opportunities are threatened (e.g., Glick et al., 2000;Radke et al., 2018;Vial & Napier, 2017). Extending ambivalent sexism theory and prior research, the longitudinal within-person effects indicated DOES POWERLESSNESS MOTIVATE SEXISM? 17 that women who feel powerless are motivated to attain power within the domain that is accessible within the confines of gender prescriptions: Benevolent sexism emphasizes women's power in relationship domains as well as men's responsibility to use their economic, legal, and political privileges to care for women. ...
People who feel powerless are motivated to gain power, which may include men endorsing hostile sexism to affirm societal power or women endorsing benevolent sexism to affirm power in relationships. We used four waves of an annual longitudinal panel sample (N = 58,405) to test whether within-person changes in powerlessness predicted subsequent changes in men's hostile sexism and women's benevolent sexism. Results from a random intercept cross-lagged panel model indicated that men who generally felt more powerless tended to endorse hostile sexism, but within-person tests did not provide directional evidence linking men's powerlessness with hostile sexism. By contrast, women who generally felt more powerless endorsed benevolent sexism more strongly, and small within-person lagged effects indicated that upward deviations in women's powerlessness in one year predicted stronger endorsement of benevolent sexism the following year. These results provide novel evidence that powerlessness motivates women's benevolent sexism and their toleration of gender inequalities.
... For example, power was found to reduce compassion (van Kleef et al., 2008), attention to others' emotions (Galinsky et al., 2006), empathic accuracy (Kraus et al., 2010), an accurate understanding of alliances (Brion & Anderson, 2013), and to be associated with social distance (Magee & Smith, 2013). Moreover, women imagining the self in a powerful position reported reduced gender identification and increased endorsement of sexism (Vial & Napier, 2017). Why is it that the powerful attend less to the perspectives of others? ...
Contrary to expectations about solidarity and sisterhood between women, women managers sometimes distance themselves from junior women in the workplace when facing identity threat, that is, the feeling that one's social identity—such as race or gender—is devalued or undermined. For example, women managers might distance themselves from lower status junior women by seeing themselves as more masculine and career committed than their junior women colleagues. To advance our understanding of how to combat self‐group distancing, the present research proposed and tested whether taking the perspective of junior women would attenuate these ingroup‐distancing tendencies in women managers. Findings from a field study and an experimental study indicated that women managers reported greater self‐distancing from junior women (on masculine trait perceptions) compared to women employees. As predicted, this effect was attenuated for women managers with high levels of perspective‐taking (Study 1) and for women who were experimentally led to take the perspective of junior women (Study 2). For ratings of career commitment and support for affirmative actions, we did not replicate the self‐ingroup distancing effect reported in the literature. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.
... Because social identity is a rather stable construct and its facets are related to one another, it might be challenging to develop accurate and strong manipulations of different social identity facets. Nevertheless, some studies have manipulated social identity (e.g., Jetten et al., 2001) or specific facets of social identity (e.g., Shih et al., 1999;Vial & Napier, 2017). Such manipulations might be an important step toward better understanding of the causal relations between social identity and well-being and the mechanisms that underlie these relations among men and women. ...
Does strong gender identity help or harm one's well-being? Previous research suggests that acceptance of one's social group and feelings of belongingness to the group are positively related to well-being, regardless of the group's social status. However, there are inconsistent findings about the relation between well-being and how central the group is to one's identity (centrality), especially among disadvantaged groups (e.g., women). In Studies 1 to 10 (total N = 5,955), we clarified these relations by controlling for shared variance between distinct gender identity aspects. Acceptance and belongingness were positively related to a range of well-being variables. Centrality was negatively related to well-being. These results were consistent across genders. Studies 11 to 14 (total N = 2,380) found that the negative relation between gender centrality and well-being might be mediated by perceived pressure to conform to the masculine role among men and perceived gender inequality among women. These results uncover a burden of strong gender identity.
... Alanyazında sistemi meşrulaştırma kuramı ve toplumsal cinsiyet arasındaki bağlantıyı inceleyen araştırmalardan hareketle (örn., Jost ve Kay, 2005;Sibley, Overall ve Duckitt, 2007;Vial ve Napier, 2017), toplumsal cinsiyet rollerinin kültür bağlamında bir yansıması olan namusu bir sistem olarak ele almak mümkündür. Toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliğinin belirgin görüldüğü sistemlerden biri olan namus kültürlerinde kadınlar, davranışlarının erkekler tarafından kontrol edilmesi ve kadınların da erkek otoritesine itaat etmesi yollarıyla namusu korunan aile üyeleri olarak konumlandırılmaktadır (bkz. ...
Öz
Bu çalışmanın amacı, sistemi meşrulaştırma kuramı (Jost ve Banaji, 1994) temelinde, bireylerin toplumdaki namus düzenini meşrulaştırma eğilimlerini değerlendiren namus sistemini meşrulaştırma (NSM) ölçeğini geliştirmektir. Bu amaçla; namusla ilgili alanyazın, raporlar ve haberlerdeki söylemlerden yola çıkılarak 28 maddelik bir havuz oluşturulmuştur. Çalışmanın örneklemi, 275’i kadın 158’si erkek olmak üzere toplam 433 (Ort.yaş = 31.77, S = 7.61) yetişkin katılımcıdan oluşmaktadır. Açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri sonuçları, toplam varyansın %52.34’ünü açıklayan 10 maddelik tek faktörlü bir yapı ortaya koymuştur. Maddelerin aldıkları faktör yükleri .67 ve .79 arasında, madde-toplam korelasyonları ise .58 ve .72 arasında değişmektedir. Ayrıca, NSM ölçeğinin iç tutarlık katsayısının .90 olduğu bulunmuştur. Ölçeğin namusla ilgili diğer değişkenler (namusu onaylama, namus adına kadına uygulanan şiddete yönelik tutumlar) ve diğer sistemi meşrulaştırma ideolojileri (cinsiyet sistemini meşrulaştırma, korumacı ve düşmanca cinsiyetçilik) ile anlamlı ilişkisi ölçeğin geçerli olduğuna işaret etmektedir. Elde edilen bulgular ışığında, NSM ölçeğinin ilgili alanyazında kullanılmak için geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.
Anahtar kelimeler
Sistemi meşrulaştırma, namus, toplumsal cinsiyet, ölçek geliştirme
... Another form of security in relationships relevant to sexism is dyadic power. Benevolent sexism is theorized to appeal to women because it offers women power within the relationship that offsets the personal costs that accompany holding relatively low power outside of the home (see Glick & Fiske, 1996;Jackman, 1994;Overall & Hammond, 2018;Vial & Napier, 2017). Yet, existing research has shown that women who endorse benevolent sexism prioritise their relationships above their own independence, ambition, and personal success (e.g., Chen et al., 2009;Rudman & Heppen, 2003; also see Over- ...
Ambivalent sexism theory recognizes that sexist attitudes maintain gender inequalities via sociocultural and close relationship processes. This review advances established work on sociocultural processes by showing how people's need for relationship security is also central to the sources and functions of sexism. Men's hostile sexism—overtly derogatory attitudes toward women—involves insecurities about women exploiting men's relational dependence. Accordingly, men's hostile sexism predicts relational aggression when their dependence on partners is risky. Men's benevolent sexism—patronizing and protective attitudes toward women—offers men relationship security by idealizing traditional gender roles in romantic relationships. Benevolent sexism also appeals to women who seek the security of a devoted partner, but requires women to invest in their relationship at the expense of their independence. Our relationship science perspective reveals that romantic (in)security is critical to why people adopt sexist attitudes and why sexist attitudes create differential costs and benefits for women and men.
... Feeling powerful may not enhance the relationship between social media activism and offline activism among men as it did for women in this study. Feelings of power have been shown to reduce perspectivetaking and empathy (Galinsky et al., 2006;van Kleef et al., 2008), and men exposed to the same power manipulation used in the current study report higher benevolent sexism than women (Vial & Napier, 2017). If men who feel powerful are more sexist than women, and less empathetic, they may also be unlikely to act for women. ...
We argue that the often-used critique of social media activism as merely a ‘feel-good’ mechanism can be countered by conceptualizing social media activism as a necessary type of collective action (i.e., consensus mobilization), incorporating theory on the benefits of positive feelings for activism, and by examining how power may affect these relationships. Women from two different samples (MTurk and university) were randomly assigned to recall a high- versus low-power experience, view real-world events of sexism, and then complete questionnaires assessing endorsement of social media activism, positive affect, and collective action intentions. A dual moderated mediation analyses at the second stage of mediation showed equivalency across two samples, at which point the single moderated mediation model was tested on the combined sample. The model was significant, such that among those in the high-power condition, endorsing social media activism was associated with greater positive affect, which in turn predicted greater collective action intentions. Among those in the low-power condition, however, this indirect effect was not significant. This study provides counter-evidence to the ‘slacktivism’ critique, contributes to theories of collective action, power and their integration, and identifies a possible intervention to enhance the effectiveness of social media activism.
... Likely at least in part for this reason, they typically either do not directly test whether gender moderates the effects of these manipulations on individuals' feelings of power (e.g., Anderson and Galinsky 2006;De Dreu and Van Kleef 2004;Small et al. 2007) and/or seem under-powered to do so (e.g., Anderson et al. 2012, Studies 3 and 4;Guinote et al. 2010;Overbeck and Park 2001). In other recent research (Vial and Napier 2017), no moderation by gender was found, but the power measures posed a somewhat different question incorporating a situational attribution for feelings of power (e.g., how much the situation made individuals feel powerful). Anderson et al. (2012) did not find that gender moderated the effects of power position when it was operationalized in terms of relationships (e.g., power in relationship with a friend versus parent), but in one study with a large sample size (Study 5), they found that trait dominance (although not socioeconomic status) was more strongly related to feelings of power for women than for men. ...
Three online experiments were conducted to determine whether gender differences in feelings of power are most evident in objectively lower or higher power situations (total n = 1360; Studies 1 and 2: 238 and 771 U.S. MTurk respondents respectively; Study 3: 351 Canadian university students). We focused on evaluating whether men’s and women’s responses were in line with a cushioning account, whereby the higher power generally accorded to men as a group essentially serves as a back-up power source for men in lower power positions. We also evaluated support for a ceiling account, whereby women’s feelings of power are limited in higher power positions. Results were consistent with the cushioning account: Men reported feeling more powerful than women did when imagining or recalling occupying a lower power position and in a control baseline, but no gender difference was evident under higher power conditions. Results further revealed that women’s feelings of power were more variable across lower versus higher power positions than were men’s and indicated that women’s feelings of power are quite responsive to situationally afforded high power when it is available. Overall our findings suggest that occupying a higher power role eradicates gender differences in feelings of power that are otherwise evident and thus has an equalizing effect. © 2018 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
O objetivo desta pesquisa é identificar o efeito dos indicadores econômico-financeiros no preço das ações de empresas listadas na B3. A amostra foi composta de oito indicadores relacionados a liquidez, rentabilidade,
lucratividade e endividamento de doze empresas distribuídas entre os setores de utilidade pública, saúde e materiais básicos. Foram analisados os dados trimestrais, primeiramente no período de 2010 a 2018 e posteriormente de 2019 a 2020, período relacionado a pandemia do COVID-19. Os modelos analisados foram em mínimos quadrados ordinários para dados empilhados (POLS), dados em painel com efeitos aleatórios e efeitos fixos. Para a primeira análise, foi aplicado o modelo de dados em painel com efeitos fixos, apresentando significância estatística para os indicadores de liquidez, rentabilidade, lucratividade e endividamento. Na segunda análise, foi aplicado o modelo de POLS, também apresentando significância estatística para os indicadores de liquidez, rentabilidade, lucratividade e endividamento. Quanto ao efeito dos indicadores econômico financeiros no preço das ações, houve efeitos
positivos, negativos ou nenhum efeito, variando entre os indicadores e modelos analisados.
Palavras-chave: Preço das ações; Indicadores econômico-financeiros; Mercado de capitais; Dados em painel;
Regressão
According to ambivalent sexism theory (Glick & Fiske, 1996), the coexistence of gendered power differences and mutual interdependence creates two apparently opposing but complementary sexist ideologies: hostile sexism (HS; viewing women as manipulative competitors who seek to gain power over men) coincides with benevolent sexism (BS; a chivalrous view of women as pure and moral, yet weak and passive, deserving men’s protection and admiration, as long as they conform). The research on these ideologies employs the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, used extensively in psychology and allied disciplines, often to understand the roles sexist attitudes play in reinforcing gender inequality. Following contemporary guidelines, this systematic review utilizes a principled approach to synthesize the multidisciplinary empirical literature on ambivalent sexism. After screening 1,870 potentially relevant articles and fully reviewing 654 eligible articles, five main domains emerge in ambivalent sexism research (social ideologies, violence, workplace, stereotypes, intimate relationships). The accumulating evidence across domains offers bottom-up empirical support for ambivalent sexism as a coordinated system to maintain control over women (and sometimes men). Hostile sexism acts through the direct and diverse paths of envious/resentful prejudices, being more sensitive to power and sexuality cues; Benevolent sexism acts through prejudices related to interdependence (primarily gender-based paternalism and gender-role differentiation), enforcing traditional gender relations and being more sensitive to role-related cues. Discussion points to common methodological limitations, suggests guidelines, and finds future avenues for ambivalent sexism research.
The confrontation of prejudicial acts and comments promotes multiple benefits, most notably the prevention of future prejudicial remarks and the reduction of stereotype use. Research, however, consistently shows low rates of confronting prejudice, particularly regarding sexism. Here, we examine whether personal sense of power, known to increase action and activate the behavioral approach system, increases the likelihood of confronting a sexist remark. In Study 1, we demonstrate that for both women and men, self-reported power is associated with a higher frequency of confronting sexism. In Study 2, we manipulate women’s sense of power (i.e., high power, low power, or control) and subsequently present an opportunity to confront a sexist remark. Results show that women primed to feel powerful were more likely to confront the sexist remark and expressed greater disagreement with the comment, compared to women primed to feel powerless. Implications for the confronting literature and behavior are discussed.
Underdeveloped nations are focused on entering the list of developed nations. To do this, they try to meet the criteria. Education and academia are the focus of attention for many countries, and Pakistan is one of them. In this study, the authors examined those hidden factors that create hurdles and reduce the backbone of academia. Employees, either male or female, play an essential role in the productivity and performance of firms. Unfortunately, because of traditional schools of thought and the strong influence of culture in Pakistan, women face a variety of barriers in the workplace. The study highlights those gaps and checks the impact of glass ceilings as well as gender discrimination on women's careers in the educational sector of Pakistan and the State of Azad Jammu & Kashmir. This study is critical in determining why it plays a crucial role in how women do not reach the advancement level when put side-by-side with male employees. Furthermore, high power distance culture is viewed as a moderator that has a negative impact on glass ceilings and women's career advancement. Data was collected from 355 female employees in middle and upper-level positions. The result has been analyzed by a structural equation model with the help of AMOS. The study's finding support existing literature demonstrating how high power distance mitigates the negative effects of glass ceilings, gender discrimination, and women's careers in the educational sector.
The current study explored the relationships between parenting styles and problematic internet use (PIU) in male adolescents from Israeli-Arab families. In the research literature, little is known about the role played by parenting in relation to children’s PIU in Arab societies. One hundred and eighty male adolescents whose age ranges from 12 to 16 (M=13.92, S.D.=1.42) reported their internet behavior and their parents’ parenting styles. Controlling for the participants’ age, family size, and grades, parenting styles explained 24% of the variance in PIU scores, with authoritarian parenting being the only significant unique predictor. A further analysis of covariance revealed that adolescents who perceived their parents as authoritative scored lower than their counterparts in PIU. Our findings suggest that while Israeli-Arab male adolescents might benefit from authoritative parenting at home, it is the parental authoritarian practices and behaviors per se that should be targeted as part of PIU intervention and prevention efforts.
The purpose of this research was to explore the experience of some informants regarding the phenomenon of queen bee in Indonesia. Our study used qualitative method with case study approach. Data was gathered using in-depth interview on seven informants. The result shows that the queen bee leader did intimidating and mostly not supporting the career of her subordinate woman. Besides, the queen bee leader make distance not only to her subordinate which are female, but also to her female colleagues at work. Queen bee leader tend to give preferential treatment to men. This phenomenon has more negative impacts than positive impacts. The negative impact caused by the queen bee phenomenon is that it can cause victim to be feel intimidatied and stressed, the work atmosphere becomes less conducive, uncomfortable, disrupts the operations of the company. While the positive impact of the existence of the queen bee leader is the job need to be due became quicker to be completed.
Separate literatures exist on social power, status, and hierarchy on the one hand, and the self on the other, but important points of intersection have emerged over the past several decades. This paper reviews recent developments at the interface between social power (and related constructs) and the self. These developments orbit around two broad questions. First, how does social power influence self-expression (e.g. does power enhance or diminish subjective feelings of authenticity)? And second, does social power shift one's orientation toward the self or toward others (e.g. does power lead people to construe the self in more independent or interdependent terms)? I conclude by suggesting possible future directions on the link between social power and self-related processes and phenomena.
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has prioritized increasing equality between men and women. This research investigates whether equality initiatives are reflected in residents’ attitudes toward women. Five hundred eighty-four Arab participants completed measures of ambivalent sexism, religiosity, and political conservatism, and reported stereotypes about women. Results suggest that Arab participants score similarly on measures of hostile and benevolent sexism to participants from other countries high in economic and political gender inequality; and measures of hostility and benevolence correlate with social attitudes as they do elsewhere around the globe. However, unlike in other datasets exploring contexts of high gender inequality, Arab women score significantly lower on benevolent sexism than men. We explore these findings in light of political and legal policies that have different implications for women’s empowerment in the public and private spheres.
This research examined whether threats to masculinity both inspired men’s efforts to reestablish their power over women via the promotion of ideologies that implicitly subordinate women and occurred when men were outperformed by women in masculine domains. Masculinity was threatened by telling men they scored like women on a gender knowledge test (Rudman & Fairchild, 2004), which sequentially led to more concern about how they were perceived by others, increased anger, and the increased endorsement of social dominance orientation (Study 1a) and benevolent sexism (Study 1b). Study 2 additionally shows that men experienced threats to masculinity when outperformed by women in masculine domains; when outperformed by a woman, men reported more concern about how they looked to others, which predicted increased anger and the subsequent sexualization of the woman. The findings link masculinity threats to the promotion of ideologies that implicitly subordinate women; the consequences of these linkages are discussed.
In reporting Implicit Association Test (IAT) results, researchers have most often used scoring conventions described in the first publication of the IAT (A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, & J. L. K. Schwartz, 1998). Demonstration IATs available on the Internet have produced large data sets that were used in the current article to evaluate alternative scoring procedures. Candidate new algorithms were examined in terms of their (a) correlations with parallel self-report measures, (b) resistance to an artifact associated with speed of responding, (c) internal consistency, (d) sensitivity to known influences on IAT measures, and (e) resistance to known procedural influences. The best-performing measure incorporates data from the IAT's practice trials, uses a metric that is calibrated by each respondent's latency variability, and includes a latency penalty for errors. This new algorithm strongly outperforms the earlier (conventional) procedure.
Research suggests that threatening men’s masculinity can lead to negative attitudes and aggressive behaviors. The current research expands on these findings by examining the effects of masculinity threats on attitudes about social inequality regarding women and gay men. Across studies, we predicted that men whose masculinity was threatened (compared to non-threatening controls) would be more accepting of social inequities that disadvantage women and gay men. Three hundred forty-four male students at a large northeastern U.S. university were randomly assigned to either (a) take a test about gender knowledge (Study 1 and 2) or (b) proofread either a gender knowledge test or university knowledge test (Study 2). Feedback on the test was altered to either threaten or assure masculinity. Following the test or proofreading task, men indicated their discomfort, anger (Study 2 only), and acceptance of discrimination and group-based inequality in society. In both studies identification with gender was measured as a potential moderator. The results of Study 1 (N = 160) showed that the masculinity manipulation only affected denial of discrimination against gay men, but this effect seemed to be related to the salience of gender rather than threatened masculinity. Study 2 (N = 184) added a gender salience comparison for clarification and replicated the results of Study 1, indicating that masculinity threats and assurances have effects independent of gender salience. In Study 1, men who were threatened and highly identified with their gender accepted more group-based inequality. The practical and social implications of these findings are discussed.
The present research examines individuals’ concern for the ingroup when they move from a socially disadvantaged inherited background (in terms of gender, ethnicity, and nationality) to a higher social standing through individual achievement. Studies 1-2 show that the status inconsistency between the disadvantaged and the achieved groups undermines concern for the disadvantaged ingroup. Studies 3-4 demonstrate that this lower concern for the ingroup is concomitant with maintaining the identification with the low-status ingroup and the increase of the identification with the achieved group. These findings suggest that low concern for the ingroup is not explained by a decrease in identification with the disadvantaged, but rather by an increase in identification with the high-status group.
Are the rich more unethical than the poor? To answer this question, the current research introduces a key conceptual distinction between selfish and unethical behavior. Based on this distinction, the current article offers 2 novel findings that illuminate the relationship between social class and unethical behavior. First, the effects of social class on unethical behavior are not invariant; rather, the effects of social class are moderated by whether unethical behavior benefits the self or others. Replicating past work, social class positively predicted unethical behavior; however, this relationship was only observed when that behavior was self-beneficial. When unethical behavior was performed to benefit others, social class negatively predicted unethical behavior; lower class individuals were more likely than upper class individuals to engage in unethical behavior. Overall, social class predicts people's tendency to behave selfishly, rather than predicting unethical behavior per se. Second, individuals' sense of power drove the effects of social class on unethical behavior. Evidence for this relationship was provided in three forms. First, income, but not education level, predicted unethical behavior. Second, feelings of power mediated the effect of social class on unethical behavior, but feelings of status did not. Third, two distinct manipulations of power produced the same moderation by self-versus-other beneficiary as was found with social class. The current theoretical framework and data both synthesize and help to explain a range of findings in the social class and power literatures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
This research examines male and female perceivers’ reactions to a female target who a)
confronted sexism non-aggressively, b) confronted sexism aggressively (by slapping the
perpetrator) or c) did not confront sexism. Results (N = 152) indicated that, overall, both
women and men responded most favorably to the female target who confronted nonaggressively.
Non-aggressive confrontation was perceived as relatively unthreatening for
women and relatively threatening for men, whereas the remaining responses were all
perceived as threatening for women. Results were further moderated by participants’ a priori
levels of gender identification: women who were weakly identified with their gender and men
who were highly identified with their gender were less supportive of aggressive
confrontations. Implications regarding the optimal way to confront sexism are discussed.
According to ambivalent sexism theory (AST; Glick & Fiske, 1996; 2001), sex-ism combines complementary gender ideologies, held by both men and women worldwide, which serve to justify social hierarchy. This chapter reviews how be-nevolent and hostile attitudes toward women operate in concert, ultimately main-taining gender inequity. Research specifi cally targets the relationship between sexism and system justifi cation, as endorsed and enacted by men and women. Hostile and benevolent beliefs map onto widely held prescriptions and proscrip-tions for men and women; these beliefs shape men's and women's interactions in the private sphere (i.e., the home, close relationships). Finally, these system justifying beliefs extend to the workplace and impede women from progressing in the public sphere. We yield to none in our admiration, veneration, and respect for woman. We recognize in her admirable and adorable qualities and sweet and noble infl uence which make for the betterment of man-kind and the advancement of civilization.
This article reviews evidence that manhood is seen as a precarious social status that is both difficult to achieve and tenuously held. Compared with womanhood, which is typically viewed as resulting from a natural, permanent, and biological developmental transition, manhood must be earned and maintained through publicly verifiable actions. Because of this, men experience more anxiety over their gender status than women do, particularly when gender status is uncertain or challenged. This can motivate a variety of risky and maladaptive behaviors, as well as the avoidance of behaviors that might otherwise prove adaptive and beneficial. We review research on the implications of men's precarious gender status across the domains of risk-taking, aggression, stress and mental health, and work–life balance. We further consider how work on precarious manhood differs from, and can add to, work on individual differences in men's gender role conflict. In summary, the precarious manhood hypothesis can integrate and explain a wide range of male behaviors and phenomena related to the male gender role. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved)
Two studies involving people with body piercings tested the hypothesis that perceived discrimination increases group identification. In Study 1, group identification mediated the positive relationship between perceived discrimination and attempts to differentiate the ingroup from the mainstream. In Study 2, perceived discrimination against people with body piercings was manipulated and was found to increase group identification. Support was found for the prediction that group identification mediates the relationship between perceptions of discrimination and collective self-esteem. Results demonstrate the importance of group identification for both the meaning of group membership and its consequences for well-being among members of disadvantaged groups.
In two experiments, we investigate how individuals' levels of power and status interact to determine how they are perceived by others. We find that power and status have similar, positive, effects on judged dominance. We also find that power has a negative effect on perceived warmth, but status moderates this “power penalty”: high power without status is associated with low warmth, but power with status is judged warm. Consequently, we find high status individuals, regardless of power level, are perceived positively – dominant and warm – whereas high power–low status individuals are judged most negatively — dominant and cold (Experiments 1 and 2). As a result, perceivers expect positive interactions with high status individuals, but negative interactions with high power, low status individuals (Experiment 2). These findings provide insight into power and status social judgments, and further our understanding of similarities and differences between these distinct, yet related, constructs.
In four studies, effects of self-perceived or public-perceived threats to group status or group distinctiveness on self-stereotyping (defined as similarity to prototypical in-group members) were investigated for people with high or low in-group identification. The main prediction was that high and low identifiers will respond differentially when their group's status or distinctiveness is threatened such that self-stereotyping is reduced for low identifiers but enhanced for high identifiers. Although the four studies investigated different comparison groups and different kinds of group threat, the results of all studies provided support for the prediction, and this was confirmed by a meta-analysis. This supports the authors' argument that the initial level of group identification determines whether group members are likely to set themselves apart from the rest of their group or to show group solidarity when their identity as group members is threatened.
Hierarchy is such a defining and pervasive feature of organizations that its forms and basic functions are often taken for granted in organizational research. In this review, we revisit some basic psychological and sociological elements of hierarchy and argue that status and power are two important yet distinct bases of hierarchical differentiation. We first define power and status and distinguish our definitions from previous conceptualizations. We then integrate a number of different literatures to explain why status and power hierarchies tend to be self‐reinforcing. Power, related to one’s control over valued resources, transforms individual psychology such that the powerful think and act in ways that lead to the retention and acquisition of power. Status, related to the respect one has in the eyes of others, generates expectations for behavior and opportunities for advancement that favor those with a prior status advantage. We also explore the role that hierarchy‐enhancing belief systems play in stabilizing hierarchy, both from the bottom up and from the top down. Finally, we address a number of factors that we think are instrumental in explaining the conditions under which hierarchies change. Our framework suggests a number of avenues for future research on the bases, causes, and consequences of hierarchy in groups and organizations.
It was hypothesized that, in natural group contexts, low-status in-group membership would be highly accessible, whereas membership
to high-status groups would not. Therefore, gender group membership was predicted to be more accessible for women than for men. It
was further hypothesized that the high accessibility of gender group membership would lead to stronger self-stereotyping for women
than for men. To measure the accessibility of gender group membership, participants performed a Gender Self-Categorization
Implicit Association Test (Studies 1 and 2), measuring the strength of automatic associations between the self and the gender in-group.
Participants also performed a Self-Stereotyping Implicit Association Test (Study 2), assessing the strength of automatic associations
between the self and the stereotypical traits of the in-group. As expected, implicit gender self-categorization and implicit gender
self-stereotyping were stronger for women than for men. Importantly, implicit gender self-categorization mediated the relation
between gender and self-stereotyping. Therefore, implicit gender self-categorization was the mechanism underlying stronger implicit
self-stereotyping by women.
Social power can be construed as opportunity (focusing on the possibility of one's own goal achievement resulting from the control over others' outcomes) or as responsibility (focusing on the implications of one's own actions resulting from the control over others' outcomes). Four experiments tested the impact of different construals of social power on the attraction of power. Due to the salience of the possibility for goal achievement, power construed as opportunity was expected to be more attractive than power construed as responsibility. This effect was predicted to be particularly pronounced among individuals with a strong promotion orientation, because of their focus on gains and achievements. Results supported these predictions and indicate that future research should take different construals of power into account.
We propose that asymmetric dependence between individuals (i.e., power) produces asymmetric social distance, with high-power individuals feeling more distant than low-power individuals. From this insight, we articulate predictions about how power affects (a) social comparison, (b) susceptibility to influence, (c) mental state inference and responsiveness, and (d) emotions. We then explain how high-power individuals' greater experienced social distance leads them to engage in more abstract mental representation. This mediating process of construal level generates predictions about how power affects (a) goal selection and pursuit, (b) attention to desirability and feasibility concerns, (c) subjective certainty, (d) value-behavior correspondence, (e) self-control, and (f) person perception. We also reassess the approach/inhibition theory of power, noting limitations both in what it can predict and in the evidence directly supporting its proposed mechanisms. Finally, we discuss moderators and methodological recommendations for the study of power from a social distance perspective.
Prejudice and discrimination against women has become increasingly subtle and covert (N. V. Benokraitis & J. R. Feagin, 1986). Unlike research on racism, little research about prejudice and discrimination against women has explicitly examined beliefs underlying this more modern form of sexism. Support was found for a distinction between old-fashioned and modern beliefs about women similar to results that have been presented for racism (J. B. McConahay, 1986; D. O. Sears, 1988). The former is characterized by endorsement of traditional gender roles, differential treatment of women and men, and stereotypes about lesser female competence. Like modern racism, modern sexism is characterized by the denial of continued discrimination, antagonism toward women's demands, and lack of support for policies designed to help women (for example, in education and work). Research that compares factor structures of old-fashioned and modern sexism and racism and that validates our modern sexism scale is presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The processes involved in well-being maintenance among African Americans who differed in their attributions to prejudice were examined. A rejection–identification model was proposed where stable attributions to prejudice represent rejection by the dominant group. This results in a direct and negative effect on well-being. The model also predicts a positive effect on well-being that is mediated by minority group identification. In other words, the generally negative consequences of perceiving oneself as a victim of racial prejudice can be somewhat alleviated by identification with the minority group. Structural equation analyses provided support for the model and ruled out alternative theoretical possibilities. Perceiving prejudice as pervasive produces effects on well-being that are fundamentally different from those that may arise from an unstable attribution to prejudice for a single negative outcome.
The authors present a theory of sexism formulated as ambivalence toward women and validate a corresponding measure, the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI). The ASI taps 2 positively correlated components of sexism that nevertheless represent opposite evaluative orientations toward women: sexist antipathy or
Hostile Sexism (HS) and a subjectively positive (for sexist men) orientation toward women,
Benevolent Sexism (BS). HS and BS are hypothesized to encompass 3 sources of male ambivalence: Paternalism, Gender Differentiation, and Heterosexuality. Six ASI studies on 2,250 respondents established convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity. Overall ASI scores predict ambivalent attitudes toward women, the HS scale correlates with negative attitudes toward and stereotypes about women, and the BS scale (for nonstudent men only) correlates with positive attitudes and stereotypes about women. A copy of the ASI is provided, with scoring instructions, as a tool for further explorations of sexist ambivalence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
We tested a Dual Process Motivational Model of Ambivalent Sexism and gender differences in intimate partner preferences. Meta-analysis of 32 samples (16 with men, 16 with women; N = 5,459) indicated that Benevolent Sexism in women was associated with greater preferences for high-resource partners (r = .24), whereas Hostile Sexism in men was associated with stronger preferences for physically attractive partners (r = .20). Study 2 examined the ideological correlates of this gender difference (N = 249 men, 243 women). For women, Right-Wing Authoritarianism was associated with greater preferences for high-resource partners, mediated by Benevolent Sexism. For men, Social Dominance Orientation was associated with greater preferences for attractive partners, mediated by Hostile Sexism. These findings indicate that women’s desire for high-resource partners is related to a protection and security-provision motive, whereas men’s desire for attractive partners is related to a dominance-based status-marker motive. Gender differences in these dual motives have implications for understanding the reciprocal reinforcement of gender inequality. We argue that they exacerbate gender inequality by decreasing women’s immediate motivation for direct access to resources (because they may be provided for by men) and promoting instead goals in women relating to the maintenance of an attractive appearance valued by men.
Women's self-identification with social power was assessed in three studies using the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998). In Experiment 1, women held weaker implicit and explicit associations between self and power than did men. Experiment 2 demonstrated that women assigned to a high power group have stronger implicit self-power associations than do women in a low power group. Experiment 3 showed that women assigned to a high power role have stronger implicit self-masculine associations than do women assigned to a low power role, but social power did not affect explicit associations with masculinity. These studies suggest that gender differences in implicit self-concept may be malleable depending on context and social roles. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
To explain differences in women's endorsement of sexist beliefs, we introduce the gender identity model (GIM). Based on social identity theory (SIT) and social role theory (SRT), we combine strength of gender identification and identity content and propose that different types of gender identity can be distinguished, which are predicted to relate to different levels of women's endorsement of sexist beliefs and engagement in collective action. Results of a correlational study and two experiments support the assumptions of the model: women reject Benevolent (BS), Hostile (HS), and Modern Sexisms (MS) and participate in collective action in particular when they are highly identified with the category women and have, at the same time, internalized progressive identity contents. In contrast, gender role preference has weaker or no effects on sexist beliefs and collective action when women are low identified with their gender in-group. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This research examines how consumers' spending on themselves versus others can be affected by temporary shifts in their states of power. Five experiments found that individuals experiencing a state of power spent more money on themselves than on others, whereas those experiencing a state of powerlessness spent more money on others than on themselves. This effect was observed using a variety of power manipulations (hierarchical roles, print advertisements, episodic recall, and mental role-playing), across spending intentions and actual dollars spent, and among college and national samples. We propose that this effect occurs because power and powerlessness affect the psychological utility of self versus others, and this in turn affects the monetary worth allocated to spending on self versus others. The research makes novel contributions to appreciating how the spending on the self versus others varies as a function of psychological states and increases our understanding of the role of power in consumer behavior.
The current research explores why people desire power and how that desire can be satisfied. We propose that a position of power can be subjectively experienced as conferring influence over others or as offering autonomy from the influence of others. Conversely, a low-power position can be experienced as lacking influence or lacking autonomy. Nine studies show that subjectively experiencing one’s power as autonomy predicts the desire for power, whereas the experience of influence over others does not. Furthermore, gaining autonomy quenches the desire for power, but gaining influence does not. The studies demonstrated the primacy of autonomy across both experimental and correlational designs, across measured mediation and manipulated mediator approaches, and across three different continents (Europe, United States, India). Together, these studies offer evidence that people desire power not to be a master over others, but to be master of their own domain, to control their own fate.
Gender identity reflects people’s understanding of themselves in terms of cultural definitions of female and male. In this article, we identify two traditions of research on gender identity that capture different aspects of masculine and feminine gender roles. The classic personality approach to gender identity differentiates communal from agentic traits and interests. The gender self-categorization approach comprises identification with the social category of women or men. Based on the compatibility principle, each approach should predict behaviors within the relevant content domain. Thus, personality measures likely predict communal and agentic behaviors, whereas gender self-categorization measures likely predict group-level reactions such as ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation. Researchers have the option of using one or the other conception of gender identity, depending on their particular question of interest. Relying primarily on research conducted in the U.S., we show that both traditions provide insight into the ways that gendered self concepts link the social roles of women and men with their individual cognitions, emotions, and behaviors.
Social scientists have traditionally argued that whiteness-the attribute of being recognized and treated as a White person in society-is powerful because it is invisible. On this view, members of the racially dominant group have the unique luxury of rarely noticing their race or the privileges it confers. This article challenges this "invisibility thesis," arguing that Whites frequently regard themselves as racial actors. We further argue that whiteness defines a problematic social identity that confronts Whites with 2 psychological threats: the possibility that their accomplishments in life were not fully earned (meritocratic threat) and the association with a group that benefits from unfair social advantages (group-image threat). We theorize that Whites manage their racial identity to dispel these threats. According to our deny, distance, or dismantle (3D) model of White identity management, dominant-group members have three strategies at their disposal: deny the existence of privilege, distance their own self-concepts from the White category, or strive to dismantle systems of privilege. Whereas denial and distancing promote insensitivity and inaction with respect to racial inequality, dismantling reduces threat by relinquishing privileges. We suggest that interventions aimed at reducing inequality should attempt to leverage dismantling as a strategy of White identity management.
© The Author(s) 2014.
The processes involved in well-being maintenance among African Americans who differed in their attributions to prejudice were examined. A rejection-identification model was proposed where stable attributions to prejudice represent rejection by the dominant group. This results in a direct and negative effect on well-being. The model also predicts a positive effect on well-being that is mediated by minority group identification. In other words, the generally negative consequences of perceiving oneself as a victim of racial prejudice can be somewhat alleviated by identification with the minority group. Structural equation analyses provided support for the model and ruled out alternative theoretical possibilities. Perceiving prejudice as pervasive produces effects on well-being that are fundamentally different from those that may arise from an unstable attribution to prejudice for a single negative outcome.
It is often expected that the first women to advance in male-dominated fields will promote other women who follow them. Two studies test the hypothesis that some women show this expected pattern of promoting women but that others show the opposite pattern, favoring men over women. In two studies, women's gender identification moderated the extent to which they favored men over women when they advanced in a male-dominated field. Specifically, the weaker women's gender identification, the more favoritism they showed for a male relative to a female subordinate. Gender identification did not moderate women's behavior in a context in which women were not underrepresented, pointing to the power of the situation in eliciting this relationship. Implications for the advancement of women in male-dominated fields are discussed.
The current research examines how power affects performance in pressure-filled contexts. We present low-power-threat and high-power-lift effects, whereby performance in high-stakes situations suffers or is enhanced depending on one's power; that is, the power inherent to a situational role can produce effects similar to stereotype threat and lift. Three negotiations experiments demonstrate that role-based power affects outcomes but only when the negotiation is diagnostic of ability and, therefore, pressure-filled. We link these outcomes conceptually to threat and lift effects by showing that (a) role power affects performance more strongly when the negotiation is diagnostic of ability and (b) underperformance disappears when the low-power negotiator has an opportunity to self-affirm. These results suggest that stereotype threat and lift effects may represent a more general phenomenon: When the stakes are raised high, relative power can act as either a toxic brew (stereotype/low-power threat) or a beneficial elixir (stereotype/high-power lift) for performance.
© 2015 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.
Previous research revealed that one way by which members of minority groups resist disadvantage is through strategic “self-group distancing” by evaluating this group negatively, describing themselves according to outgroup stereotypes and supporting the status hierarchy, hereby limiting societal change. Drawing upon recent work on the Queen Bee phenomenon among women at work, we explain self-group distancing as a coping response of low identified minority employees who experience social identity threat. Whereas queen bee behavior is often discussed as a response typical for women, new experimental data are presented revealing similar responses among ethnic minority employees. In parallel to queen bees, low identified Hindustanis reported less positive ingroup affect and presented themselves as more stereotypically Dutch when reminded of ethnic bias—but not in a control condition. This suggests that the Queen Bee phenomenon exemplifies a more generic individual mobility response to group disadvantage experienced by minority groups at work.
In an attempt to explain the stability of hierarchy, we focus on the perspective of the powerless and how a subjective sense of dependence leads them to imbue the system and its authorities with legitimacy. In Study 1, we found in a nationally representative sample of U.S. employees that financial dependence on one's job was positively associated with the perceived legitimacy of one's supervisor. In Study 2, we observed that a general sense of powerlessness was positively correlated with the perceived legitimacy of the economic system. In Studies 3 and 4, priming experimental participants with feelings of powerlessness increased their justification of the social system, even when they were presented with system-challenging explanations for race, class, and gender disparities. In Study 5, we demonstrated that the experience of powerlessness increased legitimation of governmental authorities (relative to baseline conditions). The processes we identify are likely to perpetuate inequality insofar as the powerless justify rather than strive to change the hierarchical structures that disadvantage them.
Although past research has noted the importance of both power and gender for understanding volubility—the total amount of time spent talking—in organizations, to date, identifying the unique contributions of power and gender to volubility has been somewhat elusive. Using both naturalistic data sets and experiments, the present studies indicate that while power has a strong, positive effect on volubility for men, no such effect exists for women. Study 1 uses archival data to examine the relationship between the relative power of United States senators and their talking behavior on the Senate floor. Results indicate a strong positive relationship between power and volubility for male senators, but a non-significant relationship for female senators. Study 2 replicates this effect in an experimental setting by priming the concept of power and shows that though men primed with power talk more, women show no effect of power on volubility. Mediation analyses indicate that this difference is explained by women’s concern that being highly voluble will result in negative consequences (i.e., backlash). Study 3 shows that powerful women are in fact correct in assuming that they will incur backlash as a result of talking more than others—an effect that is observed among both male and female perceivers. Implications for the literatures on volubility, power, and previous studies of backlash are discussed.
The current research explores how roles that possess power but lack status influence behavior toward others. Past research has primarily examined the isolated effects of having either power or status, but we propose that power and status interact to affect interpersonal behavior. Based on the notions that a) low-status is threatening and aversive and b) power frees people to act on their internal states and feelings, we hypothesized that power without status fosters demeaning behaviors toward others. To test this idea, we orthogonally manipulated both power and status and gave participants the chance to select activities for their partners to perform. As predicted, individuals in high-power/low-status roles chose more demeaning activities for their partners (e.g., bark like a dog, say “I am filthy”) than did those in any other combination of power and status roles. We discuss how these results clarify, challenge, and advance the existing power and status literatures.
Four dimensions of group consciousness that figure prominently in relative deprivation and resource mobilization/solidarity theories of social movements were measured in three national cross-section sample surveys over the decade of the 1970s by the Institute for Social Research. These dimensions-identification, discontent, withdrawal of legitimacy, and collective orientation-were applied to the gender consciousness of women. In all but one of these dimensions, women's gender consciousness was comparatively weak. It was not as pronounced as the group consciousness of other subordinate categories, nor was it distinctly subordinate because men expressed similar views. A structural interpretation of this comparative weakness is offered. Women did become more group conscious between 1972 and 1983. The increase was particularly pronounced with regard to their discontent about the relative political power of men and women and their views about the legitimacy of gender disparities.
Although power is considered by many to be a fundamental way people organize social relationships, we know little about the psychological experience of being powerful, or the underlying mechanisms through which power affects individuals. In this paper, we review evidence suggesting that power creates a subjective sense of separation and distinctiveness from others, such that high power individuals have more independent self construals than low power individuals. We also review research demonstrating that power is related to the quantity of interconnections with others, such that high power individuals have more interdependent relational structures than low power individuals. We argue that independent self construals and interdependent relational structures occur simultaneously, and mutually reinforce one another. We review current research that acknowledges both dimensions of power, and propose specific mechanisms that underlie the relationship between independent self construal and interdependent relational structures.
The current research examined whether group identification moderates the extent to which perceived ingroup discrimination is threatening, as indexed by physiological and self-report measures. Women read and gave a speech summarizing an article describing sexism as prevalent or rare. They then completed a distraction task and sat for a recovery period. Cardiovascular reactivity (CVR) was used to index threat experienced on an automatic level and self-reported anxiety was used to index threat experienced on a controlled level. Regardless of group identification, participants in the prevalent sexism (vs. rare sexism) condition exhibited a pattern of CVR consistent with threat during the speech and reported greater anxiety post-speech. During recovery, however, highly identified participants in the prevalent sexism condition exhibited a sustained threat pattern of CVR and reported higher anxiety post-recovery compared to low identifiers. High group identification may heighten the psychological and physiological burden of discrimination.
This research applies a social identity perspective to situations of stereotype threat. It was hypothesized that individuals would be more susceptible to the performance-inhibiting effects of stereotype threat to the extent that they are highly identified with the group to which a negative stereotype applies. A quasi-experimental study with male and female college students revealed that individual differences in gender identification (i.e., importance placed on gender identity) moderated the effects of gender identity relevance on women's (but not men's) math performance. When their gender identity was linked to their performance on a math test, women with higher levels of gender identification performed worse than men, but women with lower levels of gender identification performed equally to men. When gender identity was not linked to test performance, women performed equally to men regardless of the importance they placed on gender identity.
Accession Number: 2012-17735-007. First Author & Affiliation: Rucker, Derek D.; Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, US. Other Publishers: Lawrence Erlbaum. Release Date: 20120903. Publication Type: Journal, (0100); Peer Reviewed Journal, (0110); . Media Covered: Electronic. Document Type: Journal Article. Language: English. Major Descriptor: Consumer Attitudes; Consumer Behavior; Interpersonal Control. Minor Descriptor: Cognition. Classification: Consumer Attitudes & Behavior (3920) . Population: Human (10); Male (30); Female (40); . Age Group: Adulthood (18 yrs & older) (300) . Methodology: Empirical Study; Experimental Replication; Quantitative Study. References Available: Y.. Page Count: 17.. Issue Publication Date: Jul, 2012. Publication History: First Posted Date: Jul 2, 2011; Accepted Date: Jun 8, 2011; Revised Date: Jun 4, 2011; First Submitted Date: Feb 17, 2011. Copyright: Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.. Society for Consumer Psychol
According to the basic assumption underlying this article, people are more likely to participate in protest the more they feel that a group they identify with is treated unjustly. Depersonalization and the politicization of group identification are discussed as two processes that mediate the relationship between group identification and protest participation. Empirical evidence from three studies is discussed. In a study among people older than 55, participation in unions for the elderly appears to be correlated strongly with identification with the elderly. In a study of participation in peaceful protest among South African citizens, indicators of identification appeared to be correlated with protest participation, and finally, Dutch farmers were more likely to participate in farmers' protest the more they identified with other farmers. Results from the latter, longitudinal study suggest a recursive relationship between identity and protest participation: Group identification fosters protest participation and protest participation reinforces group identification.
Five experiments investigated the effect of power on social distance. Although increased social distance has been suggested to be an underlying mechanism for a number of the effects of power, there is little empirical evidence directly supporting this claim. Our first three experiments found that power increases social distance toward others. In addition, these studies demonstrated that this effect is (a) mediated by self-sufficiency and (b) moderated by the perceived legitimacy of power—only when power is seen as legitimate, does it increase social distance. The final two studies build off research showing that social distance is linked to decreased altruism and find an interaction between power and legitimacy on willingness to help others. The authors propose that the concept of social distance offers a synthesizing lens that integrates seemingly disparate findings in the power literature and explains how power can both corrupt and elevate.
Mfost of social psychology's theories of the self fail to take into account the significance of social identification in the definition of self. Social identities are self-definitions that are more inclusive than the individuated self-concept of most American psychology. A model of optimal distinctiveness is proposed in which social identity is viewed as a reconciliation of opposing needs for assimilation and differentiation from others. According to this model, individuals avoid self-construals that are either too personalized or too inclusive and instead define themselves in terms of distinctive category memberships. Social identity and group loyalty are hypothesized to be strongest for those self-categorizations that simultaneously provide for a sense of belonging and a sense of distinctiveness. Results from an initial laboratory experiment support the prediction that depersonalization and group size interact as determinants of the strength of social identification.
Two experiments were conducted to investigate some of the factors affecting social identification. In Experiment 1 ingroup identification was measured for subjects who were members of high or low status groups with either permeable or impermeable boundaries, and who received high, average or low ability feedback. The main results are that (1) members of high status groups show more ingroup identification than members of low status groups (2) members of low status groups with permeable boundaries identify less with their group than members of low status groups with impermeable boundaries and (3) in low status groups ingroup identification decreases as group members have higher individual ability. In Experiment 2, in addition to manipulating group status and individual ability, permeability was further differentiated into separate possibilities for upward and downward mobility. The most important results of Experiment 2 are that (1) members of high status groups show more ingroup identification than members of low status groups and (2) group members with high individual ability identify less with their group when upward mobility is possible than when upward mobility is not possible. These results are discussed in relation to social identity theory.
Consistency in the self-concept across social contexts has been linked to various positive outcomes, including felt authenticity and well-being. Based on theories of social power (e.g., Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson, 2003), we predicted that high-power individuals, disposed to greater control of their environments and freedom of self-expression, would exhibit greater self-concept consistency relative to their low-power counterparts. Across three studies, measured and manipulated high-power participants showed elevated self-concept consistency in terms of greater coherence and consistency in their spontaneous self-descriptions (Studies 1 and 2), and less variability in trait ratings of themselves across different contexts (Study 3), relative to low-power participants. Moreover, high-power participants' tendency to be more consistent in their self-concept explained their higher reports of authenticity relative to low-power participants (Study 3). Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for health and well-being, and for power differences in other cultural contexts.
Incorporating input from others can enhance decision quality, yet often people do not effectively utilize advice. We propose that greater power increases the propensity to discount advice, and that a key mechanism explaining this effect is elevated confidence in one’s judgment. We investigate the relationships across four studies: a field survey where working professionals rated their own power and confidence and were rated by coworkers on their level of advice taking; an advice taking task where power and confidence were self-reported; and two advice taking experiments where power was manipulated. Results consistently showed a negative relationship between power and advice taking, and evidence of mediation through confidence. The fourth study also revealed that higher power participants were less accurate in their final judgments. Power can thus exacerbate the tendency for people to overweight their own initial judgment, such that the most powerful decision makers can also be the least accurate.
This study investigated the effects of sex membership and its salience on individuals' self-stereotyping and the motivation to define oneself positively (self-enhancement). Bem's (1981) gender-schema and Markus's (1977) self-schema theories were interpreted within the framework of inter group relations, which emphasized their respective bipolar and unipolar structures. The use men and women made of these cognitive schemas, as well as of self-enhancement, was tested by examining latencies in self-descriptions on the BSRI attributes (Bem, 1974). Subjects described themselves and rated the stereotypicality and the positiveness of these attributes in one of two situations. A situation stressed a personal level of categorization (the individual setting), another a social level (the group setting). The first hypothesis was that the situations influence individuals' selection of specific self-defining strategies. Results supported this expectation when considering the motivational strategy and the gender-schema. Self-enhancement was slightly more used in the individual than the group setting, and the gender-schema was salient only in the group setting. The second hypothesis was that distinct self-stereotyping processes occur as a function of the sex of the subjects. Support for this hypothesis was again found only for the gender-schema, with women displaying this schema more than men. Sex differences in schematic thinking were interpreted as ensuing from status positions of women and men in the social structure.
The nature of women's and men's gender-derived social identification was examined with a focus on the relationships between aspects of identity and gender-related ideology. Measures of social identification, sex-role ideology, and the perception of women's collective disadvantage were completed by 171 women and 91 men who categorized themselves as either traditional, non-traditional or feminist. Factor analysis provided support for a multidimensional conception of gender-derived social identification, with viable subscales reflecting in-group ties, cognitive centrality, and in-group affect. For self-identified non-traditional and feminist women, the cognitive centrality of gender was greater, and more consistently related to gender-related ideology, than for traditional women. Traditional men reported stronger in-group ties and more positive gender-linked affect than did non-traditional men, but men's levels of identification were generally weakly related to gender-related ideology. The utility of considering both multiple dimensions and ideological correlates of group identification is discussed with reference to social identity theory
Previous research on system justification theory suggests that beliefs that rationalize inequalities are related to subjective
well-being. We examine how “complementary” (hostile and benevolent) justifications of gender inequality may serve a palliative
function for both men and women. Using multilevel modeling and data from 32 countries (N’s = 362 to 5160), we find that relationships between hostile and benevolent justifications and life satisfaction are moderated
by the degree of gender inequality at the national level. In relatively egalitarian nations, individuals who endorse “complementary”
justifications are higher on life satisfaction compared to those who endorse an exclusively hostile justification. In nations
with high gender inequality, there is no difference in life satisfaction for those who endorse exclusively hostile vs. complementary
justifications.
KeywordsSystem justification-Complementary stereotypes-Subjective well-being