社会公平感对不同阶层目标达成的影响及其过程

基于目标追求理论和社会阶层心理学的相关理论, 本文通过3个研究, 逐步深入地考察了社会公平感对不同阶层个体目标达成的影响作用及其过程。研究1为相关研究, 考察了高低阶层成人被试的教育领域社会公平感与为孩子进行教育投入的目标承诺及目标达成之间的关系; 研究2为准实验研究, 通过操纵公平或不公平教育情境启动公平感, 考察其对高低阶层中学生的学习目标承诺与目标达成的影响; 研究3为实验研究, 通过实验操纵社会公平感和社会阶层, 考察社会公平感对高低阶层大学生的实验任务目标承诺和目标达成的影响。研究发现, 社会公平感通过正向影响低阶层者的目标承诺, 进而正向影响其目标达成; 而对于高阶层者来说, 变量之间这些关系则不显著。这表明：相对于高阶层来说, 低阶层者的目标追求易受社会公平感的影响; 低阶层者的社会公平感水平越高, 其追求目标的动机水平就越高, 进而越有利于目标达成。     

Procedural fairness enacted by societal actors increases social trust and social acceptance among ethnic minority members through the promotion of sense of societal belonging

Although procedural fairness has been studied frequently during the past decades, little work has focused explicitly on how procedural fairness affects members of ethnic minorities in the context of multicultural decision-making processes. The aim of the present study was to investigate how perceptions of procedurally fair treatment of fellow minority members by societal actors impact the individual’s sense of societal belongingness, which we define as the feeling that he/she is a valued member of society at large, and how this in turn is related to social trust and social well-being. Three samples of African American and Hispanic American respondents from the United States were collected (total N = 570). Two experimental studies and one questionnaire study were conducted. Experimental manipulation of procedural fairness climate was shown to impact sense of societal belongingness among minority members (Study 1), whereas manipulating sense of societal belongingness itself led to an increase in social trust and social acceptance (Study 2). Study 3 (A self-report survey), finally, affirmed the entire hypothesized mediation model. The present research provides further evidence for the importance of procedural fairness for ethnic minorities. Our research showed that when societal actors enact procedural fairness they may strengthen minority members’ societal belongingness, which in turn may influence their social trust and feelings of being socially accepted.     

Beyond contact: intergroup contact in the context of power relations

This work investigated how group-based power affects the motivations and preferences that members of advantaged and disadvantaged groups bring to situations of contact. To measure the preferred content of interactions, desires to address particular topics in intergroup contact were assessed for both experimental groups (Study 1) and real groups (Study 2). As predicted, across both studies, the desire to talk about power was greater among members of disadvantaged than of advantaged groups. This difference was mediated by motivation for change in group-based power. Study 2 further demonstrated that more highly identified members of disadvantaged groups wanted to talk about power more. Members of advantaged groups generally preferred to talk about commonalities between the groups more than about group-based power, and this desire was greater with higher levels of identification. However, perceiving that their group's advantage was illegitimate increased the desire of advantaged group members to address power in intergroup interactions.     

Warm or competent? Improving intergroup relations by addressing threatened identities of advantaged and disadvantaged groups

Applying the Needs‐Based Model of Reconciliation to contexts of group disparity, two studies examined how messages from outgroup representatives that affirmed the warmth or competence of advantaged or disadvantaged groups influenced their members' intergroup attitudes. Study 1 involved natural groups differing in status; Study 2 experimentally manipulated status. In both studies, advantaged‐group members responded more favorably, reporting more positive outgroup attitudes and willingness to change the status quo toward equality, to messages reassuring their group's warmth. Disadvantaged‐group members responded more favorably to messages affirming their group's competence. Study 2 further demonstrated that the effectiveness of reassuring a disadvantaged group's competence stemmed from restoring its threatened dimension of identity, irrespective of a change of the status quo. In line with Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), these results indicate that beyond the competition over tangible resources, groups are concerned with restoring threatened dimensions of their identities. Exchanging messages that remove identity‐related threats may promote not only positive intergroup attitudes but also greater willingness to act collectively for intergroup equality. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Irony of Harmony: Intergroup Contact Can Produce False Expectations for Equality

ABSTRACT— Positive intergroup contact has been a guiding framework for research on reducing intergroup tension and for interventions aimed at that goal. We propose that beyond improving attitudes toward the out-group, positive contact affects disadvantaged-group members' perceptions of intergroup inequality in ways that can undermine their support for social change toward equality. In Study 1, participants were assigned to either high- or low-power experimental groups and then brought together to discuss either commonalities between the groups or intergroup differences. Commonality-focused contact, relative to difference-focused contact, produced heightened expectations for fair (i.e.,  egalitarian) out-group behavior among members of disadvantaged groups. These expectations, however, proved unrealistic when compared against the actions of members of the advantaged groups. Participants in Study 2 were Israeli Arabs (a disadvantaged minority) who reported the amount of positive contact they experienced with Jews. More positive intergroup contact was associated with increased perceptions of Jews as fair, which in turn predicted decreased support for social change. Implications for social change are considered.     

E pluribus unum: Dual identity and minority group members' motivation to engage in contact, as well as social change

Recent work on social change illustrates that disadvantaged-group members are sometimes less influenced by prejudice-reduction strategies than are advantaged-group members, and interventions to improve intergroup relations (e.g., commonality) can sometimes have the unintended consequence of reducing social-change motivations among members of disadvantaged groups. Focusing on disadvantaged groups' (i.e., racial/ethnic minorities) orientations toward advantaged groups, the present research experimentally investigated the potential of dual, relative to common, identity to produce greater willingness to engage in contact, while maintaining social change motivation. Relative to common identity, dual identity produced not only greater willingness to engage in contact, which was mediated by perceptions of shared values, but also greater social change motivation, mediated by decreased optimism about future relations. Thus, for dual identity, enhancing approach motivation (willingness for contact) does not necessarily undermine social change motivation. Implications for intergroup relations and more broadly social change are discussed.     

The effect of intergroup contact on solidarity‐based collective action is mediated by reductions in SDO

This paper explores the impact of positive and negative intergroup contact on advantaged group members’ willingness to engage in collective action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups, and the mediational role of social dominance orientation (SDO) in this process. SDO captures an individual’s ideological support for inequality. If contact is going to promote collective action to reduce inequality among the advantaged group, it must be expected to influence their ideological beliefs about hierarchy. In Study 1, only positive, and not negative contact was found to be associated with Whites’ support for the Black Lives Matter movement, mediated by reductions in SDO. In Study 2, both positive and negative contact were associated, respectively, with more or less support for collective action to protect the rights of European immigrants during Brexit negotiations. While positive contact was associated with reduced SDO and more support for collective action among British nationals, negative contact was associated with increased SDO and lower support for collective action.     

Zero-sum beliefs shape advantaged allies’ support for collective action

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.     

The effect of group status on children's hierarchy-reinforcing beliefs

Members of advantaged groups are more likely than members of disadvantaged groups to think, feel, and behave in ways that reinforce their group's position within the hierarchy. This study examined how children's status within a group-based hierarchy shapes their beliefs about the hierarchy and the groups that comprise it in ways that reinforce the hierarchy. To do this, we randomly assigned children (4–8 years; N = 123; 75 female, 48 male; 21 Asian, 9 Black, 21 Latino/a, 1 Middle-Eastern/North-African, 14 multiracial, 41 White, 16 not-specified) to novel groups that differed in social status (advantaged, disadvantaged, neutral third-party) and assessed their beliefs about the hierarchy. Across five separate assessments, advantaged-group children were more likely to judge the hierarchy to be fair, generalizable, and wrong to challenge and were more likely to hold biased intergroup attitudes and exclude disadvantaged group members. In addition, with age, children in both the advantaged- and disadvantaged-groups became more likely to see membership in their own group as inherited, while at the same time expecting group-relevant behaviors to be determined more by the environment. With age, children also judged the hierarchy to be more unfair and expected the hierarchy to generalize across contexts. These findings provide novel insights into how children's position within hierarchies can contribute to the formation of hierarchy-reinforcing beliefs.

Research Highlights

• A total of 123 4–8-year-olds were assigned to advantaged, disadvantaged, and third-party groups within a hierarchy and were assessed on seven hierarchy-reinforcing beliefs about the hierarchy.
• Advantaged children were more likely to say the hierarchy was fair, generalizable, and wrong to challenge and to hold intergroup biases favoring advantaged group members.
• With age, advantaged- and disadvantaged-group children held more essentialist beliefs about membership in their own group, but not the behaviors associated with their group.
• Results suggest that advantaged group status can shape how children perceive and respond to the hierarchies they are embedded within.

     

We'll never get past the glass ceiling! Meta‐stereotyping,world‐views and perceived relative group‐worth

This article examines the implications of perceived negativity from members of a dominant outgroup on the world views and perceived relative group worth of members of disadvantaged groups. We hypothesized that concerns about the negative opinions a dominant outgroup is perceived to hold of the ingroup (i.e., meta‐stereotypes) would undermine group members' views about societal fairness. We expected this trend to be mediated by recall of previous personal experiences of discrimination. We further hypothesized that members' views about societal fairness would predict their perception of the ingroup's worth relative to the outgroup – such that undermined views about societal fairness would be associated with lower perceived ingroup worth relative to the outgroup. Taken jointly, results from two studies using two real intergroup contexts support these hypotheses and are discussed in terms of their implications for the social mobility of members of disadvantaged groups.     

Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: testing the multiculturalism hypothesis

Following social identity theory, the author hypothesized that members of minority groups are more likely than majority group members to endorse multiculturalism more strongly and assimilationist thinking less strongly. In addition, the multiculturalism hypothesis proposes that the more minority groups endorse the ideology of multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the more (or less) likely they will be to identify with their ethnic in-group and to show positive in-group evaluation. In contrast, the more majority group members endorse multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the less (or more) likely they are to identify with their ethnic group and to show negative out-group evaluation. Results from 4 studies (correlational and experimental) provide support for this hypothesis among Dutch and Turkish participants living in the Netherlands.     

Anger and guilt about ingroup advantage explain the willingness for political action

Three studies examined non-Aboriginal Australians' guilt and anger about their ingroup's advantage over structurally disadvantaged Aborigines. Study 1 showed that participants who perceived their ingroup as relatively advantaged perceived this inequality as unfair and felt guilt and anger about it. Anger, and to a lesser degree guilt, predicted the willingness to engage in political action regarding ingroup advantage. Study 2 showed both guilt and anger to be relatively self-focused because both were associated with appraising the ingroup's (rather than the government's) discrimination as responsible for ingroup advantage. Study 3 examined on participants especially willing to engage in political action to bring about systemic compensation to Aborigines. Anger about ingroup advantage was a potent predictor. Although guilt was associated with the abstract goal of systemic compensation, guilt did not explain willingness for political action. Results underline the importance of examining specific group-based emotions in intergroup relations.     

The role of threat,emotions, and prejudice in promoting collective action against immigrant groups

In two studies we assessed the role of distinctiveness threat, group‐based emotions (angst, fear, and anger), and prejudice on people's willingness to engage in collective action against immigrant groups. In Study 1 (N = 222) White British participants were either informed that in the next 40 years the proportion of immigrants in the UK is unlikely to change (control condition) or that there will be more immigrants than White British people living in Britain (threat condition). We obtained support for a sequential multiple mediator model in which threat predicted British people's willingness to engage in collective action via the emotions first and then prejudice. This finding was replicated in Study 2 with an Italian sample (N = 283). These results enhance understanding of when and why advantaged groups undertake collective action against disadvantaged groups by demonstrating that distinctiveness threats and emotions promote such actions.     

May the odds be ever in your favor: The Hunger Games and the fight for a more equal society. (Negative) Media vicarious contact and collective action

Various studies have found that reading books about positive interactions between ingroup and outgroup characters, known as media vicarious contact, can reduce prejudice. Focusing on the fantasy saga of The Hunger Games, we examined the effects of negative vicarious contact on collective action across two studies. Specifically, we tested whether reading about fantasy characters living in a postapocalyptic conflictual society with large social disparities between advantaged and disadvantaged groups leads advantaged group members to display greater willingness to engage in collective action on behalf of the disadvantaged group. Results from Study 1 (correlational survey in the United Kingdom and United States) and Study 2 (experimental intervention in Italy) revealed that reading The Hunger Games is indirectly associated with greater collective action intentions via increased anger toward injustice. In both studies social dominance orientation (SDO) acted as a moderator, but in opposite directions: mediation was significant for low-SDOs in Study 1, and for high-SDOs in Study 2. Results are discussed in relation to the importance of media vicarious contact via book reading for social change, and to the need to identify the contextual conditions allowing to anticipate the specific moderation pattern that is more likely to emerge.     

Perceptions of ethnic discrimination by minority and majority early adolescents in the Netherlands

This research investigates perceptions of discrimination among ethnic majority and minority group early adolescents (aged between 10 and 12 years) living in the multi‐ethnic context of the Netherlands. In two studies (N = 679 and N = 2630), personal and group discrimination was examined in terms of name‐calling and social exclusion, and in relation to ethnic identity and family allocentrism. All early adolescents reported more group than personal discrimination. The personal‐group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD) was found independently of ethnic group, gender, allocentrism, and ethnic identity. Hence, the PGDD seems a more general phenomenon that already exists among early adolescents and across different domains. However, minority group participants perceived far more discrimination overall than majority group early adolescents, and the Turkish participants reported more discrimination than the Moroccan and Surinamese early adolescents. Furthermore, family allocentrism was positively related to perceived discrimination among all ethnic groups in Study 2 and among the Dutch in Study 1. In agreement with ethnic identity development models, strength of ethnic identity was not related to perceived discrimination. Ethnic identity was, however, positively related to allocentrism. In both studies, ethnic minority group participants had higher scores for allocentrism and for ethnic identity than majority group participants. In addition, boys had stronger ethnic identity than girls and ethnic identity was negatively associated with perceived discrimination for the boys but not for the girls. It is concluded that in order to understand early adolescents' perception of discrimination it is necessary to pay attention to basic (cognitive) tendencies that cross ethnic lines, to cultural and status differences between the majority group and ethnic minorities as a category and between ethnic minority groups, and to within‐group differences or individual level variables.     

Understanding the motivational consequences of extreme school violence through the lens of mortality salience: the case of academic self-stereotyping in math

We conducted an investigation into a determinant of academic motivation that has implications for how we respond to school violence and tragedy. We conducted two studies to examine whether exposure to messages related to the salience of one’s own mortality cause people to align their own academic beliefs more closely with stereotypical beliefs about their social groups. When exposed to graffiti images that contained messages such as R.I.P. (i.e., rest in peace), males and females in Study 1 expressed math attitudes that resembled the American stereotype of male superiority and female inferiority in this domain. In Study 2, writing about death caused participants to express ethnic stereotype-consistent math attitudes. As one example, our studies highlight a potential psychological barrier associated with student advancement in STEM careers (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). These findings indicate that death reminders, even when they do not follow from direct exposure to school trauma, may impact the academic motivation of stereotypically disadvantaged groups. With the larger goal of reducing psychological barriers associated with inequality in the pursuit of STEM career pathways, these studies are intended to spur further examination of how cases of extreme violence in schools potentially can affect patterns of academic motivation. Even in its early stages, this research should provide new considerations for educational policy-makers aiming to design damage control protocols in response to extreme school violence.     

Testing the status-legitimacy hypothesis: Predicting system justification using objective and subjective socioeconomic status in China and the United States

The status-legitimacy hypothesis proposes that those who are most disadvantaged by unequal social systems are even more likely than members of more advantaged groups to provide ideological support for the very social system that is responsible for their disadvantages. Li, Yang, Wu, and Kou (2020, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin) sought to expand the generalizability of this hypothesis by testing it in China, addressing inconsistencies surrounding the empirical support for this hypothesis by postulating that the construct of status should be separated into an objective and subjective status marker. They reported that objective socioeconomic status (SES; income and education) negatively predicted system justification, while subjective SES positively predicted system justification. In the present study we attempt to replicate and extend the work of Li et al. in a cross-cultural comparison of demographic stratified quota online samples in China and the United States. We test the status-legitimacy hypothesis using objective and subjective SES to predict system justification using cross-sectional and cross-lagged regression analyses. We received partial support for Li et al.'s findings. Specifically, subjective SES positively predicted system justification for both societies during cross-sectional and cross-lagged longitudinal analyses. However, we failed to replicate Li et al.'s findings surrounding objective SES in China during cross-sectional and cross-lagged analyses.     

Motivation for Education and Work in Young Muslim Women: The Importance of Value for Ingroup Domains

Much work has focused on how stereotypes and discrimination negatively affect well-being, motivation, and performance in disadvantaged groups. Relatively little work has identified positive factors that contribute to motivation/performance. We focus on identity-affirmation as a positive force, presenting two studies on the effect of value by others for domains of importance to Muslims on young Muslim women's perspective on education/work. The results show how respecting identity domains that are central and salient for members of religious/ethnic minority groups maintains motivation in education/work, and secures majority-group identification. Rather than hampering societal integration, the results show that distinctive identities can be harnessed as positive sources.     

Coalition or derogation? How perceived discrimination influences intraminority intergroup relations

Five studies explored how perceived societal discrimination against one's own racial group influences racial minority group members' attitudes toward other racial minorities. Examining Black-Latino relations, Studies 1a and 1b showed that perceived discrimination toward oneself and one's own racial group may be positively associated with expressed closeness and common fate with another racial minority group, especially if individuals attribute past experiences of discrimination to their racial identity rather than to other social identities (Study 1b). In Studies 2-5, Asian American (Studies 2, 3, and 4) and Latino (Study 5) participants were primed with discrimination against their respective racial groups (or not) and completed measures of attitudes toward Black Americans. Participants primed with racial discrimination expressed greater positivity toward and perceived similarity with Blacks than did participants who were not primed. These results suggest, consistent with the common ingroup identity model (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000), that salient discrimination against one's own racial group may trigger a common "disadvantaged racial minority" (ingroup) identity that engenders more positive attitudes toward and feelings of closeness toward other racial minorities.     

Health-Related Hindrance of Personal Goals of Adolescents with Cancer: The Role of the Interaction of Race/Ethnicity and Income

This study examined the interaction of race/ethnicity and income to health-related hindrance (HRH) of personal goals of adolescents with cancer. Adolescents (N = 94) receiving treatment for cancer completed a measure of HRH, (including identification of personal goals, rating the impact of health on goal pursuit, and ratings of goal appraisals). The interaction of race/ethnicity and income on HRH was examined. Goal content and appraisal were compared by race/ethnic groups. The interaction between race/ethnicity and income was significant in predicting HRH, with HRH increasing for minority adolescents as income increases and HRH decreasing for white adolescents as income increases. Higher income minority adolescents reported the most goals. Low income minorities reported the least difficult goals. Goal content did not differ between groups. Sociodemographic factors contribute to HRH in adolescents with cancer. Structural and psychosocial support during treatment to maintain goal pursuit may improve psychosocial outcomes.