June 2007
·
16 Reads
This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.
June 2007
·
16 Reads
October 2003
·
14 Reads
January 2003
·
1,035 Reads
·
107 Citations
European Review of Social Psychology
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 indirectly, that is via perceptions on the part of the stigmatised. In the latter case the outcomes are caused or amplified by perceptions on the part of the victim that he or she is the target of discrimination. This chapter focuses on current research concerning factors that influence the perception of discrimination and its indirect influence on individuals. We review work from our own lab as well as from the field more broadly, focusing on research that attempts to explain contextual and individual variability in how events that are potentially due to discrimination are initially perceived, subsequently interpreted, and then publicly reported or withheld.
June 2002
·
371 Reads
·
111 Citations
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
This research examined the association between religiousness and humility. Participants in Studies 1 and 2 completed measures of religiousness, socially desirable responding, and their own and other people’s adherence to biblical commandments. Participants in Study 2 also rated how characteristic nonreligious positive and negative trait terms were of the self and others. Humility was operationalized as the magnitude of difference between individuals’ evaluations of self and other. Overvaluing the self in relation to others or undervaluing others in relation to the self was considered evidence of less humility. Participants rated the self to be more adherent to biblical commandments than others (the holier-than-thou effect) and rated the self to be more positive and less negative than others (the self-other bias). In both studies, intrinsic religiousness was associated with an increase in the tendency to rate the self as more adherent to biblical commandments than others. Quest was associated with a slight decrease in the magnitude of the holier-than-thou effect. Religious motivations did not account for unique variation in the general self-other bias. Irrespective of motivations for being religious, however, highly religious people (i.e., upper thirds on general religiousness and religious fundamentalism) more so than less religious people (i.e., lower thirds on general religiousness and religious fundamentalism) rated the self to be better on nonreligious attributes than others.
... 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). ...
January 2003
European Review of Social Psychology
... -Using the HEXACO model (Ashton & Lee, 2007), Silvia et al. (2014) found a positive relationship with the factor honesty-humility and with its facet fairness. In contrast, an earlier study on humility (Rowatt et al., 2002) did not find a link with fundamentalism when this was operationalized as self-versus other-rating on religious characteristics (e.g., following religious commandments), but fundamentalists considered themselves as better than others in non-religious attributes (e.g., more intelligent, athletic, loyal). It must be critically noted that there is a fundamental lack of theory and discussion of the findings (e.g., what does it mean when fundamentalism and extraversion correlate?). ...
June 2002
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion