Drawing from the rejection-identification model, acculturation, and acceptance threat literatures, we examined how Indigenous and mainstream identification influence the effect of discrimination on ...acculturative and physical stress. A community sample of 126 Indigenous Alaskans reported discrimination, identification with Indigenous Alaskans and mainstream Americans, and acculturative and physical stress. As perceptions of personal discrimination increased, so did Indigenous identification and reports of acculturative and physical stress. Contrary to the rejection-identification hypothesis, Indigenous identification did not reduce the effect of discrimination on stress. Instead, following personal discrimination, Indigenous and mainstream identification interacted to predict acculturative stress. As Indigenous identification increased, so did acculturative stress - particularly among those who strongly identified with mainstream culture. These associations were not present for group-based discrimination. Thus, experiencing personal rejection from mainstream society may be particularly stressful for Indigenous people who strongly identify with their ethnic group, placing them at higher risk for mental and physical illness.
Three studies (N1 = 1,019; N2 = 312; N3 = 494) tested whether seeing intergroup relations as inherently antagonistic shaped advantaged social groups’ allyship intentions. More specifically, we tested ...whether endorsing zero‐sum beliefs related to their willingness to support system‐challenging and system‐supporting collective action. Zero‐sum beliefs were negatively correlated with system‐challenging and positively correlated with system‐supporting collective action intentions. Zero‐sum beliefs were more common among advantaged than disadvantaged groups and translated into lower allyship intentions. Advantaged group members with higher levels of zero‐sum beliefs were also more likely to experience anger and fear when considering the demographic racial shift in the United States. Increased fear was associated with greater support for system‐supporting and lower support for system‐challenging collective action. We find consistent evidence that advantaged group members see intergroup relations as a zero‐sum game and that these beliefs are negatively related to their intentions to become allies.
Interpersonal conversation about civic issues lays groundwork for cooperation and collective action, yet such conversation is uncommon. Across three studies (total N = 2,066), we find that (a) ...hesitation to discuss a civic topic is predicted by forecasted discomfort about such conversations (Study 1), (b) individuals tend to overestimate discomfort in such future civic conversations (Study 1), (c) forecasted discomfort is lower for those with greater experience discussing the topic (Study 2) and after a formal discussion experience, especially for those with little prior experience (Study 3), and (d) this negative relationship between experience and forecasted discomfort can be explained by greater perceived ability to discuss the topic (i.e., self-efficacy; Studies 2 and 3). Collectively, results show that forecasted discomfort is associated with reduced willingness to engage in civic conversation, and topic-relevant discussions can reduce forecasted discomfort by boosting self-efficacy, particularly for those for whom discussing the topic is novel.
Sexist humor may be more difficult to confront than serious expressions of sexism because humor disguises the biased nature of the remark. The present research investigated whether delivering a ...sexist remark as a joke, compared to a serious statement, tempered perceptions that the speaker was sexist which, in turn, made women less likely to confront. Using a computer-mediated instant messaging paradigm, women were randomly assigned to receive the same sexist remark phrased either in a serious manner or as a joke. We recorded how women actually responded to the sexist remark and coded for confrontation. In Experiments 1 (195 women) and 2 (134 women) we found that humor decreased perceptions that the speaker was sexist. Furthermore, as perceptions that the perpetrator was sexist decreased, women’s confronting also decreased. Experiment 2 demonstrated an additional consequence of reducing the perceived sexism of the perpetrator—it increased tolerance of sexist behavior perpetrated against an individual woman and sexual harassment more generally. Interestingly, the indirect effects only appeared when women at least moderately endorsed hostile sexism. For hostile sexists, failure to identify sexism reduced confrontation and increased tolerance for sexual harassment and sexist behavior. Contrary to popular belief, humor can actually make sexist messages more dangerous and difficult to confront than serious remarks.
One-minute papers allow students to process what they learned during class and improve student performance. However, this activity can become monotonous and takes significantly longer than the name ...implies. The research described here tests the effectiveness of a briefer, more flexible version of this technique to increase the perceived relevance of the material and, in turn, performance. Students were randomly assigned to either self-generate a reflective response or answer a content-specific question generated by the instructor at the end of class. Students positively evaluated the brief reflective response activity. Moreover, answering the self-generated reflective responses was associated with greater perceived relevancy of course material to students’ daily lives compared to answering the content-specific questions. Perceived relevancy, in turn, was associated with higher examination grades. Thus, brief reflective responses are a useful tool to increase meaningful connections to course material which enhances examination performance.
Two-phase testing assesses individual performance (phase 1) and then allows collaborative learning within small groups (phase 2). While groups typically outperform individuals, less is known about ...the social decision schemes that influence member collaboration. In a classroom setting, we compared individual and group performance on a standard test versus a two-phase test (Study 1 n = 180, Study 2 n = 60) to determine the impact of collaborative testing on recalling factual and application based test items. We also assessed various aspects of group dynamics (e.g. liking). Both studies showed several benefits to collaborative testing with few costs: students enjoyed collaborative testing and the performance benefits were stronger for lower scoring students and integrative versus factual test items.
Majority-group members expect to dislike those who confront them for prejudiced behavior. Yet if majority-group members are susceptible to the same social constraints as minority-group members, then ...their public responses to confrontation should be similarly inhibited. A tempered response to confrontation could smooth a potentially problematic social interaction, thereby producing an outcome that is better than expected. Female confederates confronted men during an interpersonal interaction and then had a second conversation. When interpersonally confronted, men reported equally positive evaluations of a sexist and gender-neutral confronter and confrontational interaction. Additionally, after the sexist confrontation, men's compensatory efforts increased mutual liking and this mutual liking then reduced men's use of sexist language. Thus, social forces also constrain those who are confronted as prejudiced, thereby positively influencing intergroup relations.
Expect the Unexpected Mallett, Robyn K; Wilson, Timothy D; Gilbert, Daniel T
Journal of personality and social psychology,
02/2008, Letnik:
94, Številka:
2
Journal Article
Recenzirano
People often expect interactions with outgroup members to go poorly, but little research examines the accuracy of these expectations, reasons why expectations might be negatively biased, and ways to ...bring expectations in line with experiences. The authors found that intergroup interactions were more positive than people expected them to be (Pilot Study, Study 1). One reason for this
intergroup forecasting error
is that people focus on their dissimilarities with outgroup members (Study 1). When the authors focused White participants' attention on the ways they were similar to a Black participant, their intergroup expectations changed to match their positive experiences (Studies 2 & 3). Regardless of focus, Whites expected to have pleasant intragroup interactions, and they were accurate (Study 4).
We examine the degree to which women and men use humor to confront sexist jokes. We also test the social benefits and perceived effectiveness of confronting with humor. One-hundred-sixty-four (46% ...female) participants read about a male coworker who made a sexist joke and reported how they would respond in an open-ended format. Women were more likely than men to say they would respond with humor. Specifically, 16% of women, compared to 4.5% of men, spontaneously provided a humorous confrontation. Participants then read a second scenario that asked them to imagine a male friend making a sexist joke. We manipulated the confronter’s gender and the type of confrontation (humorous versus serious) in the scenario. Confronters who used a humorous (versus serious) response were rated as more likeable but less effective. People often hesitate to confront sexism for fear of social repercussions. Given that humorous confrontation reduces social backlash, it might be worth slightly lower perceived effectiveness to increase overall rates of confronting sexism.
We examined majority group members' collective action on behalf of a minority group, focusing on the role of outgroup perspective taking and group-based guilt. As expected, outgroup perspective ...taking was positively associated with heterosexuals' collective action in response to hate crimes against non-heterosexuals and Whites' action in response to hate crimes against Blacks (Studies 1 and 2). This association was partially mediated by group-based guilt (Studies 2 and 3). We also examined the role of group-based anger; although it directly related to collective action, it did not mediate the association between perspective taking and collective action. Finally, we manipulated outgroup perspective taking to demonstrate its causal role in the subsequent outcomes (Study 3).
PDF