Contact and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy in an Inuit community

The personal/group discrimination discrepancy involves disadvantaged group members rating discrimination directed at their group considerably higher than ratings of discrimination aimed at themselves personally as members of that group. This robust phenomenon has been found in samples of women, African Americans, and aboriginal people. In the present study, the authors used a sample of Inuit from a remote Arctic community to confirm the perceived discrepancy. However, ratings for perceived group discrimination were surprisingly low. The authors argue that geographical isolation may have led Inuit to be unaware of the impact of discrimination on their lives. In support of this argument, findings showed that group discrimination ratings were higher for Inuit who did have contact with mainstream Canadian culture. Implications for the traditional contact hypothesis are discussed.     

Now you see it, now you don't: explicit versus implicit measures of the personal/group discrimination discrepancy

When making explicit self-report ratings, members of status- and racial-minority groups report less personal experience with discrimination than that encountered by their group—a phenomenon called the personal/group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD). This study provides evidence, for the first time, that the PGDD may be, in part, a product of the procedure used to measure it. White women and men completed explicit and implicit measures of personal and group discrimination based on sex. The PGDD surfaced among women in the explicit measures, but not in the implicit measures. These findings suggest that explicit and implicit measures might provide different assessments of experience with discrimination.     

Defining Discrimination in the Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy

Members of low-status groups typically report that their group experiences more discrimination than they do personally, a phenomenon referred to as the personal/group discrimination discrepancy. It is hypothesized that manipulating the meaning of discrimination affects the personal/group discrimination discrepancy. In three studies, 301 female undergraduates (259 Whites; 42 non-Whites) from a large midwestern university read vignettes depicting discriminatory events that varied according to severity and frequency. Participants in high-frequency conditions perceived both more personal and group discrimination than low-frequency participants, and they showed smaller personal/group discrepancies. This effect was found for work-related discrimination and social sexism. Results indicate that severe and infrequent events are what people typically think of as discrimination and that using the term discrimination affects personal and group judgments. The importance of defining discrimination when investigating the personal/group discrimination discrepancy is discussed.     

When fiends become friends: the need to belong and perceptions of personal and group discrimination

The present article examines the role that the need to belong (NTB) plays in people's judgments of personal and group discrimination and in the attributions people make for potentially discriminatory evaluations. The authors hypothesized that the NTB motivates people to conclude that (a) whereas they rarely experience personal discrimination, (b) their fellow in-group members do experience discrimination. In Study 1, people high in the NTB reported experiencing lower than average levels of personal and higher than average levels of group discrimination. In Study 2, an experimental manipulation of the NTB yielded similar results. In Study 3, women who were motivated to be accepted by a bogus male participant were less likely to attribute his negative evaluations of their work to prejudice.     

The Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy: Responses to Experimentally Induced Personal and Group Discrimination

Abstract

Participants in research on discrimination consistently perceived a higher level of discrimination directed at their group as a whole than at themselves as individual members of that group. Explanations for this personal/group discrimination discrepancy are all based on the assumption that some form of perceptual distortion is operating. However, research has not allowed for any measure of the objective reality of people'S experiences with discrimination, and thus there has been no objective standard against which researchers can test for perceptual distortion. This study involved the experimental inducement of personal and group discrimination, alone and in combination, among female students. The results indicated that subjects responded to objective reality and that personal experiences with discrimination affected their perceptions at the group level more than the reverse.     

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.     

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.     

Gender Differences in Mental Health: The Mediating Role of Perceived Personal Discrimination

Why is women's mental health inferior to that of men? This study hypothesized that women's mental health is not as good as men's because women perceive more personal discrimination. It was confirmed that women obtained higher scores than did men on a subjective scale of psychological distress. Additionally, women perceived greater personal and group discrimination than did men. Perceived personal discrimination proved to be the more robust predictor of psychological distress. This was evident when results of a mediation analysis revealed that gender differences in subjective distress were mediated by the measure of perceived personal discrimination, but not by the measure of group discrimination.     

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.     

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.     

WHO CONSIDERS THEMSELVES VICTIMS OF DISCRIMINATION?

We focus on the general issue of how and why individuals might decide if they have been victims of gender discrimination and how social status differences between women and men may change the significance of experiencing gender discrimination. Because both self-protective and situational factors have been found to influence interpretation of prejudicial events, in the present study we explore several individual-difference factors that might differentially predict perceived gender discrimination in women and men. We found that, for men, low self-esteem and high personal assertiveness were related to higher ratings of personal discrimination. Low self-esteem was also related to men's perceptions of discrimination against men as a group. For women, high need for approval was negatively related to perceptions of personal discrimination whereas depression was positively related. Depression was also related to higher ratings of discrimination against women, as was feminism. We argue that perceptions of discrimination serve different purposes for structurally privileged and disadvantaged groups.     

Self-Esteem, Discrimination, and Coping Among Refugees: The Moderating Role of Self-Categorization

The present study examines the relationship between the personal self and ethnic identity among Iranian refugees living in the Netherlands. The extent to which participants considered themselves to be typical members of their ethnic minority group moderated the relationship between (a) personal self-esteem and ethnic self-esteem; (b) perceived personal discrimination and group discrimination; and (c) ethnic self-esteem and the use of emotion-focused and problem-focused strategies for coping with discrimination. Participants who saw themselves as typical Iranians showed a stronger association between personal and ethnic self-esteem, less personal/group discrimination discrepancy, and a relationship between ethnic self-esteem and coping with discrimination. In addition, participants favored problem-focused coping over emotion-focused coping, and perceived greater group discrimination than personal discrimination overall.     

When do women respond against discrimination? Exploring factors of subtlety,form, and focus

We examined the personal‐group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD), the tendency for women to recognize that others encounter sexism while simultaneously minimizing their own personal experiences with sexism, and the degree to which it (a) applies to all manifestations of discrimination, and (b) extends beyond perceptions of discrimination to taking action against it. Our findings replicated the PGDD when it comes to perceptions of discrimination, but this effect was reversed for behavioral action such that women were more likely to take action against discrimination when it was directed at them personally. We also disentangled the factors of subtlety (subtle vs. overt) and form (formal vs. interpersonal) by showing that women can reliably distinguish between these factors when determining their reactions to discrimination.     

MINIMIZING THE PERVASIVENESS OF WOMEN'S PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF GENDER DISCRIMINATION

Given the Rejection-Identification Model ( Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999 ), which shows that perceiving discrimination to be pervasive is a negative experience, it was suggested that there would be conditions under which women would instead minimize the pervasiveness of discrimination. Study 1 ( N = 91) showed that when women envisioned themselves in a situation of academic discrimination, they defined it as pervasive, but when they experienced a similar laboratory simulation of academic discrimination, its pervasiveness was minimized. Study 2 ( N = 159) showed that women who envisioned themselves experiencing discrimination minimized its pervasiveness more so than women reading about discrimination happening to someone else. Further, mediation analysis showed that minimizing the pervasiveness enhanced positive affect about personal discrimination. Implications for minimizing on both an individual and social level are discussed.     

The personal-group discrepancy: Is there a common information basis for personal and group judgment?

In contrast to motivational accounts of the personal-group discrepancy, results from this article suggest that the discrepancy is explained by aggregating different sets of comparison outcomes for either personal or group ratings. Results from a longitudinal study with East German (the minority group) and West German (the majority group) samples confirm the personal-group discrepancy and support our approach. First, social comparisons influenced evaluations of economic situation at both group and personal levels. Second, ratings of group versus personal economic situation were based on different sets of comparisons. Third, the mean structure of both sets of comparison outcomes mirrored the personal-group discrepancy. Fourth, an interaction between personal-group discrepancy and group status supported the authors' suggestions-concerning the direction of the discrepancy.     

Self-Presentation of Beliefs About Gender Discrimination and Feminism

This study examined whether college students' expressed beliefs about gender discrimination and feminism are due to concerns about self-presentation rather than an accurate reflection of their beliefs. Fifty-eight women and 45 men (82% Caucasian) completed scales measuring their beliefs about gender discrimination and feminism and responded to scenarios about hypothetical court cases involving discrimination. Participants were told their personal views would be either shared publicly or remain private during a small group discussion. Results showed that men expressed more belief in gender discrimination and feminism in the public groups compared to men in private groups and women. Responses to hypothetical court cases also showed some evidence of self-presentation. Implications for changes in self-identity and behavior toward incidents of gender discrimination are discussed.     

Sex differences in intellectual performance: analysis of a large cohort of competitive chess players

Only 1% of the world's chess grandmasters are women. This underrepresentation is unlikely to be caused by discrimination, because chess ratings objectively reflect competitive results. Using data on the ratings of more than 250,000 tournament players over 13 years, we investigated several potential explanations for the male domination of elite chess. We found that (a) the ratings of men are higher on average than those of women, but no more variable; (b) matched boys and girls improve and drop out at equal rates, but boys begin chess competition in greater numbers and at higher performance levels than girls; and (c) in locales where at least 50% of the new young players are girls, their initial ratings are not lower than those of boys. We conclude that the greater number of men at the highest levels in chess can be explained by the greater number of boys who enter chess at the lowest levels.     

Perceived discrimination is associated with poorer health and well‐being outcomes among Pacific peoples in New Zealand

Our study investigated the association between perceived discrimination and outcomes related to health and well‐being for Pacific adults in New Zealand. We examined personal and group discrimination from the 2013 wave of the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (n = 429 women and 196 men). Personal discrimination was associated with poorer health and well‐being outcomes (higher psychological distress and lower self‐esteem, subjective evaluation of health, satisfaction with life and personal well‐being). Group discrimination, in contrast, was associated with poorer well‐being but not health outcomes (lower subjective evaluation of health and personal well‐being). These findings corroborate previous research and highlight the corrosive effect of discrimination towards health and well‐being among Pacific communities in New Zealand.     

Personal initiative,commitment and affect at work

This paper reports two studies on the relationships between employees' personal initiative, affect and commitment. The results of Study 1 among 390 health care sector employees show that individuals' self‐rated personal initiative is related to affect as well as affective commitment to four distinguishable foci, namely the organization, supervisor, work‐group and career. Commitment explains unique variance in personal initiative, even when controlling for demographic variables and positive and negative work affect. As Study 1 relied solely on self‐report data, multi‐source data were gathered for Study 2 (N = 80). This allowed retesting the hypotheses using both self‐ and manager‐ratings of initiative. Results showed that commitment explains variance in both self‐ and manager‐rated initiative beyond demographics and affect. For self‐rated initiative, team commitment explains most variance, whereas for manager‐rated initiative, organizational commitment does.