Group identification moderates emotional responses to perceived prejudice

Two studies tested the prediction that group identification (importance of the group in the self-concept) moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-evaluative emotions (depression and self-esteem). In Study 1, women low in gender identification experienced less depressed emotion and higher self-esteem if a negative evaluation was due to sexism than when it was not. The self-evaluative emotions of women high in gender identification were not buffered by attributions to sexism. In Study 2, ethnic identification and depressed emotions were positively related when Latino-Americans read about pervasive prejudice against the ingroup but were negatively related when they read about prejudice against an outgroup. Both studies demonstrated that for highly group identified individuals, prejudice against the ingroup is a threat against the self. Thus, the self-protective strategy of attributing negative feedback to discrimination may be primarily effective for individuals who do not consider the group a central aspect of self.     

Is the world a just place? Countering the negative consequences of pervasive discrimination by affirming the world as just

Two studies (a) explored the role of pervasiveness of discrimination (pervasive vs. rare) in determining targets' responses to discrimination, and (b) examined the extent to which threats to participants' worldview can account, in part, for detrimental effects of pervasive discrimination. As predicted, across both studies, pervasiveness of discrimination moderated the relationship between attributions to prejudice for failure to obtain a job and psychological well-being (depressed affect and state self-esteem). When discrimination was presented as pervasive, attributions to prejudice related to lower state self-esteem and greater depressed affect. When discrimination was portrayed as rare, attributions to prejudice were related to higher state self-esteem and unrelated to depressed affect. Study 2 further showed that being able to affirm the world as just countered the negative consequences of pervasive discrimination, whereas it did not influence responses to discrimination that was perceived as rare.     

Self-Handicapping in the Classroom: The Effects of Claimed Self-Handicaps on Responses to Academic Failure

The hypothesis that self-handicapping is in the service of self-esteem protection was examined in a naturalistic setting. College students were assessed for individual differences in self-handicapping and attributional style at the beginning of the term. Prior to the first exam they had an opportunity to claim handicaps that might hamper their performance on the exam. After receiving feedback that they had performed poorly on the exam, all students completed measures of mood, self-esteem, and performance attributions. Support for the hypothesis was found for men but not for women. Level of self-handicapping interacted with sex of subject such that high self handicapping among men predicted claimed handicapping prior to the exam and more external attributions for poor performance and higher self-esteem following feedback. Among women, the relations between self-handicapping tendencies and claimed handicaps and performance attributions were weaker than for men. In addition, unlike men's, women's post feedback self-esteem was unrelated to claimed handicaps and performance attributions. Potential mechanisms underlying sex differences in self-handicapping and responses to negative feedback are discussed.     

It's not my fault: when and why attributions to prejudice protect self-esteem

This study tested the hypothesis that awareness of the possibility of being a target of discrimination can provide individuals with a means of self-esteem protection when they are faced with negative outcomes. Men and women contemplated being rejected from a course due to sexism, personal deservingness, or an exclusively external cause. Regardless of gender, participants in the sexism condition blamed themselves less, attributed the rejection less to internal causes, and anticipated feeling less depressed than those in the personal deservingness condition. Furthermore, the more participants discounted the rejection--blamed it more on discrimination than themselves--the less depressed emotions they anticipated feeling. Discounting did not buffer participants from feeling hostility or anxiety. These findings advance our understanding of when and why attributions to prejudice protect emotional well-being.     

The Effects of Self-Esteem,Task Label,and Performance Feedback on Goal Setting,Certainty, and Attribution

An identical task was labeled as either difficult or easy. Bogus performance feedback was given to each subject at random after the first work period. Subjects were divided into high or low self-esteem groups based on a median split in their scores on the self-esteem measure. The results showed that subjects set lower goals in the difficult condition than they did in the easy condition in the first period; however, no difference was found in the second period. Subjects with high self-esteem had higher certainty than those with low self-esteem in the second period. Subjects in the positive feedback group made higher ability and effort attributions than those in the negative feedback group.     

An experimental study of the correlates and consequences of perceiving oneself to be the target of gender discrimination

An experimental methodology was used to test hypotheses concerning the effects of contextual, cognitive-developmental, and individual difference factors on children’s views of whether they have been the target of gender discrimination and the possible consequent effect of such views on two forms of state self-esteem: performance and social acceptance. Children (N = 108, 5-11 years of age) completed theory of mind and gender attitude measures and a drawing task. Next, children received feedback that was designed to appear either gender biased (discrimination condition) or nonbiased (control condition). Children’s attributions for the feedback and state self-esteem were assessed. As expected, children reported having been the target of gender discrimination more often in the discrimination condition than in the control condition. Older and more cognitively advanced children made fewer attributions to discrimination than their peers. Perceptions of discrimination were associated with higher performance state self-esteem and, among egalitarian children, lower social state self-esteem.     

Prejudice and self-esteem: A transactional model

This paper reviews three theoretical models of how prejudice affects the self-esteem of its targets. The stimulus-response model assumes that prejudice has a direct, negative effect on self-esteem. The stimulus-perception-response model recognises that perceptions of prejudice may not directly mirror experiences with prejudice, but predicts that the subjective perception of being a target of prejudice has a direct, negative effect on self-esteem. Both of these models are found to be inadequate. We propose a third, transactional model, which assumes that individuals do not respond in uniform way to being the target of prejudice. Rather, this model contends that self-esteem and emotional responses to prejudice are determined by cognitive appraisals of prejudicial events and coping strategies used in response to these events; these processes, in turn, are shaped by personal, situational, and structural factors. Experiments are presented showing that self-esteem in response to perceived prejudice is moderated by presence or absence of threats to personal identity, clarity of prejudices cues in the situation, ingroup identification, dispositional optimism, endorsement of legitimising ideologies, and group status. We argue that a transactional model of responses to prejudice emphasises sources of resistance as well as vulnerability among targets of prejudice.     

Perceived discrimination as worldview threat or worldview confirmation: implications for self-esteem

In 3 studies, the authors tested the hypothesis that discrimination targets' worldview moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-esteem among devalued groups. In Study 1, perceiving discrimination against the ingroup was negatively associated with self-esteem among Latino Americans who endorsed a meritocracy worldview (e.g., believed that individuals of any group can get ahead in America and that success stems from hard work) but was positively associated with self-esteem among those who rejected this worldview. Study 2 showed that exposure to discrimination against their ingroup (vs. a non-self-relevant group) led to lower self-esteem, greater feelings of personal vulnerability, and ingroup blame among Latino Americans who endorsed a meritocracy worldview but to higher self-esteem and decreased ingroup blame among Latino Americans who rejected it. Study 3 showed that compared with women informed that prejudice against their ingroup is pervasive, women informed that prejudice against their ingroup is rare had higher self-esteem if they endorsed a meritocracy worldview but lower self-esteem if they rejected this worldview. Findings support the idea that perceiving discrimination against one's ingroup threatens the worldview of individuals who believe that status in society is earned but confirms the worldview of individuals who do not.     

Dispositional Hardiness And Women'S Well-Being Relating To Gender Discrimination: The Role Of Minimization

Three studies examined whether personality-based hardiness would be associated with mental health benefits in contexts of gender discrimination. Hardy women encountering both a laboratory simulation and a hypothetical scenario of discrimination showed greater self-esteem and less negative affect than low hardy women. However, these benefits were mediated by the use of specific attributions, suggesting that well-being in hardy women may have been achieved through minimizing the pervasiveness of discrimination. The third study showed this mediation pattern occurred only for participants exposed to higher threat scenarios versus lower threat scenarios of discrimination. Thus, minimizing the pervasiveness of discrimination may have been a threat-reducing tool for high hardy women. Bandura's (1997) self-efficacy theory was used as a possible explanation for this finding.     

The Role of Hardiness in Moderating the Relationship Between Global/Specific Attributions and Actions Against Discrimination

In this study, we proposed that individual differences in hardiness may moderate the relationship between global attributions and actions against discrimination. Specifically, global attributions were expected to predict decreased endorsement of actions to combat discrimination among low hardy women. In contrast, global attributions were expected to predict increased endorsement of actions among high hardy women. High and low hardy women were exposed to a laboratory situation of discrimination, and their attributions for, and responses to, discrimination were then assessed. Results showed the expected interaction, but in the opposite direction: among low hardy women, global attributions predicted stronger endorsement of action. Among high hardy women, specific attributions predicted stronger endorsement of action. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Gender Differences in Persistence and Attributions in Stereotype Relevant Contexts

The present research was designed to examine the effects of gender math stereotypes on performance attributions and persistence. Two experiments tested whether stereotypes guided men’s and women’s reactions to negative or positive feedback on an alleged test of verbal or math ability. In Study 1, attributions to ability were influenced by gender stereotypes: women were more sensitive to feedback on a test that was described as a test of their math ability than when the same test was described as a test of their verbal ability, whereas men showed the opposite pattern. Study 2 replicated these findings for negative feedback and further showed that gender differences in attributions to ability mediated the gender difference in persistence in the math domain following an alleged failure on a math test. The implications of stereotype-consistent attributions for women’s persistence in quantitative fields are discussed.     

Belief in the Controllability of Weight and Attributions to Prejudice Among Heavyweight Women

The perceived controllability of weight is a central feature of prejudice against heavyweight people, but its role in the experience of prejudice is not well established. Heavyweight women (N=66, mean age = 38 years) were exposed to information about cardiovascular health or the uncontrollability of weight and then wrote a persuasive health-related essay. All participants received a negative evaluation on the essay quality from a male evaluator whom they believed could see them or not. Belief in the uncontrollability of weight led to more attributions for the feedback to the evaluator's prejudice but only when the participants thought that they were visible. The results are discussed in terms of the stigma of overweight.     

You're Just Saying That Because I'm a Woman: Stigma Consciousness and Attributions to Discrimination

This study adds to tests of the construct validity of stigma consciousness by asking if people high in stigma consciousness demonstrate a greater tendency than people low in stigma consciousness to make attributions to discrimination. In a study that approached this question from both an individual difference and a situational perspective, women high or low in stigma consciousness made attributions for a negative evaluation, ostensibly written by a male peer. Under control conditions, women low in trait stigma consciousness demonstrated less of a tendency to make attributions to discrimination than women high in trait stigma consciousness. When they experienced a situationally induced increase in stigma consciousness, however, participants low in trait stigma consciousness demonstrated just as great a tendency to make attributions to discrimination as their high stigma conscious counterparts. The results provide further validation for the stigma consciousness construct, and raise questions about who benefits from attributions to discrimination.     

Do You See What I See? Effects of Group Consciousness on African American Women's Attributions to Prejudice

This study examined the effects of three types of group consciousness among African American women ( ethnic , feminist , and womanist ) on prejudice attributions and appraised personal significance ( centrality ) of a negative intergroup event. African American female college students  ( N = 123)  imagined themselves in an audiotaped scenario in which they overheard two European American male classmates make negative evaluations of them. The scenario provided no cause for the negative evaluations and no references to race or gender. Multiple regression analyses revealed that higher ethnic and womanist consciousness were related to increased prejudice attributions and greater centrality appraisals  ( p  <.05)  , while feminism had no effect. Results suggest that womanist consciousness may be more relevant than traditional feminist consciousness in predicting African American women's perceptions of prejudice.     

The power of affirming group values: Group affirmation buffers the self-esteem of women exposed to blatant sexism

Extending the group affirmation literature to the domain of prejudice, this study investigated whether group affirmation buffers the self-esteem of women exposed to blatant sexism. In accordance with Self-Affirmation Theory and group affirmation research, we hypothesized that when one aspect of the collective self is threatened (gender identity), self-esteem can be maintained via the affirmation of an alternative aspect of the collective self. In a 2 × 2 between-participants design, female students were randomly assigned to read about discrimination directed toward women or a non-self-relevant disadvantaged group (the Inuit). All then participated in a (fictitious) second study, in which half completed a group affirmation manipulation (wrote about the top three values of a self-defining group) and half completed a control writing exercise. The self-esteem of women who were threatened by sexism, but group affirmed, was protected from the negative effects of perceiving sexism.     

Relationships between gender self-esteem,sexual prejudice,and trans prejudice in cisgender heterosexual college students

Our understanding of sexual prejudice, or prejudice against gay men, lesbian women, bisexual people, and other sexual minorities, has improved substantially over the last few decades. Less is known about the factors that predict trans prejudice, or prejudice against trans people. Using the framework of social identity theory, we examined the relationship between gender self-esteem, sexual prejudice toward gay men and lesbian women, and trans prejudice in a sample of 391 self-identified cisgender heterosexual students from a Midwestern university in the United States. Compared to women, men reported more sexual prejudice, trans prejudice, more prejudice toward gay men than lesbian women, and more violence toward, teasing of, and discomfort around trans women than trans men. Whereas both men and women reported more teasing of trans women than of trans men, men reported more discomfort around trans women and women reported more discomfort around trans men. Gender self-esteem significantly predicted sexual prejudice and trans prejudice in men but not women. Consistent with other research, our results indicate that men's sexual prejudice and trans prejudice may be motivated by similar factors, whereas the predictors of women's prejudice may be more specific to the type of prejudice.     

Racism or Sexism? Attributional Ambiguity and Simultaneous Membership in Multiple Oppressed Groups1

This study examines short‐term psychological effects of prejudice attributions on African American women. Black female college students (N= 112) imagined themselves in an audiotaped scenario in which White male students made negative evaluations of them. Participants completed self‐report measures of psychological stress and state self‐esteem after they rated the likely contributions of various causal attributions to the negative evaluations. Attributions included personal characteristics of the participant and classmates, as well as 3 kinds of prejudice: racism, sexism, and ethgender prejudice (the interaction of racism and sexism). Attributions to racism and ethgender prejudice predicted increased stress and decreased state social self‐esteem. Results contradict assertions that prejudice attributions are self‐protective and imply that prejudice might involve internal and external causal dimensions.     

Weight discrimination in helping behavior

IntroductionAlthough obesity stigma is pervasive, relatively little research has examined the extent to which the discrimination obese individuals experience extends to helping behavior.ObjectivesThe purpose of the current set of experiments was to determine whether strangers help heavy individuals less than non-heavy individuals, and to examine the impact that moderating cues (e.g., justifying or suppressing prejudice, Crandall & Eshleman, 2003) of weight-based discrimination and gender might have on helping behavior.Study 1The first study was an experiment conducted online through MTurk. Participants rated their willingness to support a proposed charity event and their perceptions of the event organizer, whose picture was manipulated to be heavy or non-heavy. We found evidence that people were less willing to help and held more negative perceptions of heavy (than non-heavy) individuals.Study 2The second study was a field experiment in which confederates either wearing or not wearing obesity prosthetics solicited help from others on a college campus. Relative to the non-heavy, heavy individuals again were less likely to be helped and received more impolite interpersonal treatment, as rated by observers. Additionally, women were denigrated more than men for being heavy, but cues that suppressed discrimination helped increase the amount of help received and the politeness of strangers.ConclusionThe overt and subtle discrimination overweight individuals experience extends to situations when they are asking for help, and this is especially the case for heavy women. However, displaying stereotype-inconsistent cues benefit overweight individuals by increasing the likelihood of them being helped and treated well.     

From "in the air" to "under the skin": cortisol responses to social identity threat

The authors examined women's neuroendocrine stress responses associated with sexism. They predicted that, when being evaluated by a man, women who chronically perceive more sexism would experience more stress unless the situation contained overt cues that sexism would not occur. The authors measured stress as the end product of the primary stress system linked to social evaluative threat-the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal cortical axis. In Study 1, female participants were rejected by a male confederate in favor of another male for sexist reasons or in favor of another female for merit-based reasons. In Study 2, female participants interacted with a male confederate who they learned held sexist attitudes or whose attitudes were unknown. Participants with higher chronic perceptions of sexism had higher cortisol, unless the situation contained cues that sexism was not possible. These results illustrate the powerful interactive effects of chronic perceptions of sexism and situational cues on women's stress reactivity.