Prototypes and same-gender bias in perceptions of hiring discrimination

The present study investigated the relative importance of two explanations behind perceptions of gender discrimination in hiring: prototypes and same-gender bias. According to the prototype explanation, people perceive an event as discrimination to the extent that it fits their preconceptions of typical discrimination. In contrast, the same-gender bias explanation asserts that people more readily detect discrimination toward members of their own gender. In four experiments (n = 797), women and men made considerably stronger discrimination attributions, and were moderately more discouraged from seeking work, when the victim was female rather than male. Further, a series of regressions analyses showed beliefs in discrimination of women to be moderately correlated with discrimination attributions of female victims, but little added explanatory value of participant gender, stigma consciousness, or feminist identification. The results offer strong support for the prototype explanation.     

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.     

Stigma on my mind: Individual differences in the experience of stereotype threat

Stereotyped individuals vary in how chronically self-conscious they are of their stigmatized status, which Pinel (1999) has dubbed stigma consciousness. The current study investigated whether individual differences in stigma consciousness moderate the impact of gender stereotypes on the math performance of women. Results indicated that, under conditions designed to evoke stereotype threat (Steele, 1997), women high in stigma consciousness scored worse than women low in stigma consciousness on a math test. In the control (low threat) condition, stigma consciousness was unrelated to test performance. Possible mechanisms underlying this moderation are discussed.     

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.     

Utilization of global attributions in recognizing and responding to gender discrimination among college women

Although learned helplessness theories suggest that global attributions for gender discrimination may serve to promote feelings of helplessness about responding to discrimination, group consciousness theories suggest they may instead be a precursor to enhancing collective actions against discrimination. To examine this theoretical discrepancy, college women completed measures of attributions for gender discrimination, political consciousness (as measured by common fate), participation in collective action, and helplessness behavior among college women. To examine the unique role of global attributions, participants were included if they made external and unstable attributions for discrimination (N = 231). Structural equation modeling showed that recognizing discrimination occurs globally was associated with an increased sense of common fate, which in turn was related to greater collective action and less helplessness behavior. Theoretical (attributions in an intergroup context) as well as practical (institutional policies on publicizing discrimination) implications were discussed.     

Utilization of global attributions in recognizing and responding to gender discrimination among college women

Although learned helplessness theories suggest that global attributions for gender discrimination may serve to promote feelings of helplessness about responding to discrimination, group consciousness theories suggest they may instead be a precursor to enhancing collective actions against discrimination. To examine this theoretical discrepancy, college women completed measures of attributions for gender discrimination, political consciousness (as measured by common fate), participation in collective action, and helplessness behavior among college women. To examine the unique role of global attributions, participants were included if they made external and unstable attributions for discrimination (N = 231). Structural equation modeling showed that recognizing discrimination occurs globally was associated with an increased sense of common fate, which in turn was related to greater collective action and less helplessness behavior. Theoretical (attributions in an intergroup context) as well as practical (institutional policies on publicizing discrimination) implications were discussed.     

Why did you choose that person over me? Ingroup rejection and attributions to discrimination

The present research examined the attributions that people make when an individual rejects a member of his or her own group in favor of a member of an outgroup (i.e., ingroup rejection). Study 1 showed that Latinos rejected by an ingroup member (perpetrator) made more attributions to discrimination than Whites under similar circumstances. Study 2 showed that Latinos made more attributions to discrimination for ingroup rejection when the perpetrator was Latino as compared to when the perpetrator was White, whereas Whites' attributions to discrimination were relatively low regardless of perpetrator's ethnicity. Study 3 showed that priming loyalty norms increased attributions to discrimination among Latinos in response to ingroup rejection, but not in response to outgroup rejection. This research brings a new perspective to discrimination research by focusing on intragroup rejection and nonprototypical cases of discrimination.     

Stigma Consciousness and the Race Gap in College Academic Achievement

Stereotyped individuals vary in how chronically self-conscious they are of their stigmatized status, a variable called stigma consciousness. The present study examined whether stigma consciousness was negatively related to academic achievement in college for academically stigmatized (Black and Hispanic) students, but not for academically non-stigmatized (White and Asian) students. Results revealed that stigmatized students who were high in stigma consciousness had lower GPAs than stigmatized students who were low in stigma consciousness. Moreover, GPAs of stigmatized students who were low in stigma consciousness did not differ from those of non-stigmatized students. These results complement recent laboratory investigations of stigma consciousness among women and contribute to the literature on stereotype threat by extending the phenomenon to real-world academic performance.     

How status and stereotypes impact attributions to discrimination: The stereotype-asymmetry hypothesis

Past research suggests a status-asymmetry effect in attributions to discrimination such that people are more likely to make attributions to discrimination when the victim is from a lower status group than the perpetrator as compared to when the victim is from a higher status group than the perpetrator. The present studies test a stereotype-asymmetry effect, such that people are more likely to make attributions to discrimination when rejection occurs in a domain in which the victim is negatively rather than positively stereotyped. In Study 1 (observers) and Study 2 (victims), participants attributed rejection following a job interview to discrimination more when the victim was negatively stereotyped than when the victim was positively stereotyped. The stereotypicality of the domain was more important than the relative status of the victim and the perpetrator in determining judgments of discrimination. Thus stereotype-asymmetry is a key feature of the discrimination prototype.     

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.     

When Do Men and Women Make Attributions to Gender Discrimination? The Role of Discrimination Source

Two experiments examined the effects of discrimination source on men’s and women’s willingness to make attributions to a sexist experimenter or sexist rules. Students (161 male; 171 females) at a US university were exposed to a discriminatory person, discriminatory rule, or no discrimination. “Experiment 1” demonstrated individuals were less likely to make attributions to a sexist person than an unfair rule, and women were especially reluctant to indicate a person was responsible for their discrimination even when a person was the source. “Experiment 2” showed participants were less likely to indicate an experimenter, and even a rule, was sexist when there was a cost to the perpetrator (i.e., advisor would be notified of the perpetrator’s actions) for making such attributions.     

It's all good: Children's personality attributions after repeated success and failure in peer and computer interactions

The present study examined children's use of behavioural outcome information to make personality attributions in social and non‐social contexts. One hundred and twenty‐eight 3‐ to 6‐year‐olds were told about a story actor who engaged in primarily successful or primarily unsuccessful interactions with several different people (social context) or several different computers (non‐social context). Subsequently, children made behavioural predictions and trait attributions about the actor. Findings indicated that participants were more likely to use past information to make behavioural predictions and trait attributions when hearing about primarily successful than primarily unsuccessful interactions, although there were age‐related differences in trait attribution as a function of success and trait type. There was no support for differential use of information across contexts, as participants' predictions and attributions were similar regardless of hearing about interactions with computers or humans. Factors involved in the development of impression formation are discussed.     

Stigma towards psychosis: Cross‐cultural differences in prejudice,stereotypes, and discrimination in White British and South Asians

Public stigma towards people with mental health problems has been demonstrated in Western societies. Little is known about non‐Western cultures and whether cultures differ in their perceptions of people with mental health problems. Aim of this study was to examine cultural differences in prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination towards people with psychosis. Participants were from White British and South Asian backgrounds (N = 128, aged 16–20 years) recruited from two schools and colleges in the United Kingdom. They completed a cross‐sectional survey on affective, cognitive, and behavioural dimensions of stigma. Results revealed significant cultural differences on all three stigma dimensions. South Asians attributed higher anger (prejudice) and dangerousness (stereotypes) to people with psychosis than White British. They also reported lower willingness to help, greater avoidance, and higher endorsement of segregation (discrimination). The effects of ethnic group on helping intentions, avoidance, and segregation endorsement were mediated by anger and by dangerousness. Understanding cultural differences in stigma towards psychosis will be important for designing stigma interventions as well as treatments for people with different cultural backgrounds.     

The role of attribution of motivation in producing postsuppressional rebound

Three studies demonstrated that postsuppressional rebound (PSR) may be both reduced and enhanced by manipulating people's attributions about why they experience difficulty during suppression. Telling participants that suppression failures indicate a high motivation to use the suppressed construct produced more PSR than telling them that suppression failures indicate a low motivation to use the construct (Study 1). Telling participants that an external stimulus would make suppression easy produced more PSR than telling them that it would make suppression difficult (Study 2). Telling participants that suppressing a stereotype is difficult and unindicative of prejudice eliminated PSR (Study 3). These results support the notion that PSR occurs because people infer from the difficulty experienced during suppression and from suppression failures that they are motivated to use the suppressed construct.     

Stigma Consciousness in the Classroom: A Comparison of Pakistani Women’s Motivation and Well-being in Science and Non-science Fields of Study

Drawing from the Stereotyped Task Engagement Process (Smith, Educational Psychology Review, 16: 177–206, 2004) we compared undergraduate women in Pakistan majoring in science (51%) and non-science (49%) on their self-reported academic experiences. Results showed women in science fields who were gender atypical reported higher levels of stigma consciousness. This stigma consciousness influenced academic motivation and well-being, particularly as a function of field of study and gender typicality. Specifically, performance-avoidance goal adoption was highest and well being was lowest among atypical women who were high in stigma consciousness studying science especially compared to those in non-science fields who were more gender-typical and less stigma conscious. Implications for enhancing the academic experience for all women in the face of stigma are discussed.     

Stigma consciousness modulates cortisol reactivity to social stress in women

The aim of the current study was to examine whether stigma consciousness shapes cortisol responses to social stress among women in the laboratory. Undergraduate women (N = 45) completed background measures and then participated in a public speaking task, with assessments of cortisol prior to the stressor as well as 20 and 40 minutes post stressor onset. Results from multilevel models revealed that women higher in stigma consciousness evidenced blunted cortisol reactivity following social stress across the study session compared to women lower in stigma consciousness. This interaction was robust to adjustment for a number of covariates, including demographic (e.g., age), physiological (e.g., menstrual cycle), and psychological (e.g., depressive symptomatology) factors. Potential explanations for observed cortisol patterns are discussed, including hyporeactivity of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis and elevated anticipatory stress. In conclusion, implications for health disparities research are considered.     

Depression, self-esteem, and complex attributions for life problems

Past research has suggested that mild and moderate depression are associated with increased attributional processing and a tendency to make complex attributions involving two or more causes. The present research tested the hypothesis that depression and low self-esteem are associated with a tendency to make attributions to multiple causes when faced with life problems. The results were used to demonstrate that the tendency to make multiple attributions for specific life problems accounts for unique variance in depression and self-esteem scores, even after removing variance due to general attributional style. The findings are discussed with reference to the need for multidimensional models of attribution in depression and attributional retraining efforts to include an emphasis on individual differences in the number of multiple attributions made by people.     

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.