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.     

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.     

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.     

Social Identity, Modern Sexism, and Perceptions of Personal and Group Discrimination by Women and Men

Perceptions of gender-related discrimination against the self and group were examined in women and men, with a focus on the predictive utility of modern sexism and 3 dimensions of social identification (ingroup ties, centrality, and ingroup affect). Questionnaires were completed by 321 undergraduates (206 women and 115 men), of whom 78% self-identified as White and 10% as Asian. Higher levels of personal and group discrimination tended to be perceived by high-neosexism men and low-neosexism women. The centrality of gender identification was positively related to men's personal-level perceptions of discrimination, whereas effects of the emotional facets of social identity—ingroup ties and ingroup affect—occurred jointly with both gender and modern sexism. The results are discussed with reference to social identity theory and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy.     

Women's emotional responses to the pervasiveness of gender discrimination

In two experiments we found that women exhibited worse psychological well‐being in a context in which gender discrimination was pervasive compared to a context in which is was rare. In Study 1, women who read an essay suggesting that sexism is pervasive reported lower self‐esteem than women who read an essay suggesting that sexism is rare. In Study 2, we examined the effects of the pervasiveness of sexism when women were making an attribution for a single negative outcome. Women who attributed a negative evaluation to pervasive sexism exhibited less positive self‐esteem and affect compared to women who could attribute the negative evaluation to an isolated instance of discrimination or to a non‐sexist, external cause. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Expectations about the future and the emotional consequences of perceiving prejudice

Three studies tested the hypothesis that possessing a pessimistic outlook on life moderates the effects of perceiving sexism on emotions and self-esteem. Across all studies, a pessimistic outlook on life (either dispositionally held or experimentally induced) served as a source of emotional vulnerability among women (Studies 1-3) and men (Study 1) faced with evidence of sexism directed against their gender group. Study 3 demonstrated that one's outlook on life influences emotional adjustment to prejudice through the cognitive appraisal process. Relative to optimists, pessimists appraised sexism as more stressful and believed they possessed fewer resources for coping with it. This research emphasizes the importance of examining sources of vulnerability and resilience in understanding emotional responses to prejudice.     

Attributions to discrimination and self-esteem: Impact of group identification and situational ambiguity

This study examined group identification and situational ambiguity as moderators of attributions to discrimination and self-esteem following negative feedback. As predicted, high gender-identified women made more discrimination attributions than low identified women when situational prejudice cues were ambiguous, but not when prejudice cues were absent or overt. Also as predicted, women exposed to overt prejudice cues had higher self-esteem than those exposed to ambiguous cues or no prejudice cues. The relationship between discrimination attributions and self-esteem was positive among women exposed to overt prejudice but negative among those exposed to no prejudice. Across conditions, however, the more that women discounted ability as a cause of their negative feedback (i.e., blamed discrimination more than ability), the higher their self-esteem. Results qualify and extend prior research and demonstrate that personal and situational factors moderate both the tendency to make attributions to discrimination and the consequences of those attributions for self-esteem.     

Group identification moderates attitudes toward ingroup members who confront discrimination

Three studies examined the hypothesis that group identification moderates African Americans’, Asian Americans’, and women’s attitudes toward fellow ingroup members who challenge an outgroup member’s discriminatory comments or who do not speak up about the comments. Highly identified racial minorities expressed more positive attitudes toward ingroup members who confronted discriminatory comments compared to those who did not confront; whereas weakly identified minorities did not express different attitudes across the two conditions. Among women, the weakly identified expressed more negative attitudes toward other women who confronted discrimination relative to those who did not confront; whereas highly identified women did not differentially evaluate ingroup members in the two conditions. The less women identified with their group, the more negatively they evaluated ingroup members who confronted sexism. This research highlights the important role of group identification in understanding how members of devalued groups respond toward ingroup members who take a stand against discrimination.     

The negative impact of perceiving discrimination on collective well‐being: the mediating role of perceived ingroup status

Previous research has found that, among stigmatized group members, perceiving discrimination against the ingroup simultaneously yields a positive indirect effect on self‐worth (mediated by ingroup identification) and a negative direct effect (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999). This study not only replicated these effects with a sample of women, but also revealed that the negative direct effect was mediated by perceived status of the ingroup: as perceived discrimination increased, perceived ingroup status decreased, which in turn lowered collective self‐worth. Perceiving discrimination also increased the accessibility of the stigmatized group's devalued status. A new direction for future research may be to consider when stigmatized group members might affirm the ingroup rather than protect self‐worth. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

How social context moderates the self-evaluative emotions experienced due to health risk behaviour

When people are confronted with the potential negative physical outcomes of their own health risk behaviour, they experience a self-threat. This threat is felt as negative self-evaluative emotions. We hypothesise that the threat will lead to more private self-evaluative emotions (e.g. regret) in a private social context, whereas more public self-evaluative emotions (e.g. embarrassment) will be felt in a public social context with negative norms. Consistent with our hypotheses, we show that participants anticipate feeling more private self-evaluative emotions when confronted with the negative consequences of their unhealthy behaviour when alone, and more public self-evaluative emotions when in a group (Study 1). They further anticipate more public self-evaluative emotions in response to a health self-threat when the group norm is negative, and more private self-evaluative emotions when the group norm is lenient (Study 2). Finally, in a cross-sectional study amongst smokers, we show that private but not public negative self-evaluative emotions concerning their own smoking habits are positively correlated with the intent to quit smoking (Study 3). These studies show that a distinction needs to be made between public and private self-evaluative emotions, in terms of their antecedents and effects. Theoretical implications and further lines of research are discussed.     

How social context moderates the self-evaluative emotions experienced due to health risk behaviour

When people are confronted with the potential negative physical outcomes of their own health risk behaviour, they experience a self-threat. This threat is felt as negative self-evaluative emotions. We hypothesise that the threat will lead to more private self-evaluative emotions (e.g. regret) in a private social context, whereas more public self-evaluative emotions (e.g. embarrassment) will be felt in a public social context with negative norms. Consistent with our hypotheses, we show that participants anticipate feeling more private self-evaluative emotions when confronted with the negative consequences of their unhealthy behaviour when alone, and more public self-evaluative emotions when in a group (Study 1). They further anticipate more public self-evaluative emotions in response to a health self-threat when the group norm is negative, and more private self-evaluative emotions when the group norm is lenient (Study 2). Finally, in a cross-sectional study amongst smokers, we show that private but not public negative self-evaluative emotions concerning their own smoking habits are positively correlated with the intent to quit smoking (Study 3). These studies show that a distinction needs to be made between public and private self-evaluative emotions, in terms of their antecedents and effects. Theoretical implications and further lines of research are discussed.     

群际情绪理论及其研究

群际情绪理论认为, 群际情绪是当个体认同某一社会群体, 群体成为自我的一部分时, 个体对内群体和外群体的情绪体验。群际情绪借用社会认同方法, 采用集体自我的概念作为其理论的源点, 认知评价、情绪、行为倾向是群际理论的三件套; 群际水平的情绪不同于个体水平的情绪; 群际情绪取决于群体认同水平; 群际情绪弥散于整个群体; 群际情绪有助于激发和调节群内、群际态度和行为。新近的研究也为群际理论提供了一定的证据, 群际情绪理论为消解偏见和改善群际关系提供了一个崭新的框架。     

Ambivalent Sexism and the Sexual Double Standard

The sexual double standard is the notion that women are evaluated negatively and men positively for engaging in similar sexual behaviors. Because traditional, gender-based stereotypes are reflected in the attitudes that people hold towards men and women, it is likely that sexism plays a part in the manifestation of the double standard. The goal of the present study is to investigate the relationship between sexism (prejudice against individuals based on their gender) and the sexual double standard. There are two types of sexism: hostile (negative prejudice) and benevolent (positive prejudice). We hypothesized that participants displaying high levels of either type of sexism would be most likely to exhibit the sexual double standard. A US-sample of 232 undergraduates from a Southwestern university completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI) and the Ambivalence Towards Men Inventory (AMI) and then evaluated a hypothetical target individual who reported having zero, one or 12 sexual partners. Results show that participants’ sexist attitudes towards men and women were related to their exhibition of the sexual double standard. Specifically, men and women’s hostile attitudes towards targets of their own gender were related to negative evaluations of highly sexually active targets of the same gender, while men and women’s benevolent attitudes towards the opposite gender were related to positive evaluation of highly sexually active targets of the opposite gender. Implications of the present results and directions for future research are discussed.     

Categorization and communication in the face of prejudice: when describing perceptions changes what is perceived

In the face of prejudice against an ingroup, common ground for communication exists when people use similar social categories to understand the situation. Three studies tested the hypothesis that describing perceptions of prejudice can fundamentally change those perceptions because communicators account for the common ground in line with conversational norms. When women (Study 1), African Americans (Study 2), and Americans (Study 3) simply thought about suspected prejudice against their ingroup, categorization guided their perceptions: Participants assimilated their views of the prejudiced event toward the perceptions of ingroup members but contrasted away from the perceptions of outgroup members. Conversely, when participants described their perceptions, they contrasted away from the given category information and actually arrived at the opposite perceptions as those who merely thought about the prejudiced event. Study 3 identified an important qualification of these effects by showing that they were obtained only when participants could assume their audience was familiar with the common ground. Implications are discussed for understanding the role of communication in facilitating and inhibiting collective action about prejudice.     

Distancing oneself from negative attributes and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy

The personal/group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD) refers to greater reporting of discrimination at the group than personal level. We examined whether the PGDD is one example of people's general tendency to distance themselves from negative attributes related to the social categories to which they belong, and whether this tendency varies as a function of ingroup identification. Female undergraduates (n=87) rated the extent to which positive and negative attributes, including being discriminated against, characterized themselves personally and women as a social category. As expected, negative attributes, including discrimination, were more strongly associated with the category than with the self, whereas positive attributes were more strongly associated with the self than with the category. Women who were lower in group identification were especially likely to show these discrepancy effects. The implications for personal and social identity are discussed.     

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.     

White selves: conceptualizing and measuring a dominant-group identity

This article addresses the nature and measurement of White racial identity. White identification is conceptualized as an automatic association between the self and the White ingroup; this association is fostered through social exposure to non-Whites and serves to link self- and ingroup evaluations. Four studies validated a measure of White identification against criteria derived from this model. In Study 1, the White Identity Centrality Implicit Association Test (WICIAT) predicted response latencies in a task gauging self-ingroup merging. In Study 2, the WICIAT correlated with census data tapping exposure to non-Whites. In Studies 3 and 4, the WICIAT predicted phenomena associated with the linking of self- and ingroup evaluations: identity-related biases in intergroup categorization (Study 3) and self-evaluative emotional reactions to ingroup transgressions (Study 4). Together, the findings shed light on the antecedents and consequences of White identity, an often-neglected individual difference construct.     

The costs of caring: Gender identification increases threat following exposure to sexism

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.