Aarti Iyer

White Guilt and Racial Compensation: The Benefits and Limits of Self-Focus

In two studies, the authors investigated guilt as a response to group-based advantage. Consistent with its conceptualization as a self-focused emotion, White guilt was based in self-focused beliefs in racial inequality. Thus, guilt was associated with belief in White privilege (Study 1) and resulted from seeing European Americans as perpetrators of racial discrimination (Study 2). Just as personal guilt is associated with efforts at restitution, White guilt was predictive of support for affirmative action programs aimed at compensating African Americans. White guilt was not, however, predictive of support for noncompensatory efforts at promoting equality, such as affirmative action programs that increase opportunities (Study 2). In contrast, the other-focused emotion of group-based sympathy was a more general predictor of support for different affirmative action policies. Our findings demonstrate the benefits and limits of group-based guilt as a basis of support for social equality and highlight the value of understanding the specific emotions elicited in intergroup contexts.

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.

Maintaining group memberships: Social identity continuity predicts well-being after stroke

A survey study of patients recovering from stroke (N = 53) examined the extent to which belonging to multiple groups prior to stroke and the maintenance of those group memberships (as measured by the Exeter Identity Transitions Scales, EXITS) predicted well-being after stroke. Results of correlation analysis showed that life satisfaction was associated both with multiple group memberships prior to stroke and with the maintenance of group memberships. Path analysis indicated that belonging to multiple groups was associated with maintained well-being because there was a greater likelihood that some of those memberships would be preserved after stroke-related life transition. Furthermore, it was found that cognitive failures compromised well-being in part because they made it hard for individuals to maintain group memberships post-stroke. These findings highlight the importance of social identity continuity in facilitating well-being following stroke and, more broadly, show the theoretical contribution that a social identity approach to mental health can make in the context of neuropsychological rehabilitation.

Emotion in inter-group relations

The study of inter-group relations has seen a renewed emphasis on emotion. Various frameworks converge on the general conceptualisation of group-level emotions, with respect to their antecedent appraisals and implications for inter-group relations. However, specific points of divergence remain unresolved regarding terminology and operationalisation, as well as the role of self-relevance (e.g., self-categorisation, in-group identification) in moderating the strength of emotion that individuals feel about groups and their inter-relations. In this chapter we first present a typology of group-level emotions in order to classify current conceptual and empirical approaches, differentiating them along the dimensions of the (individual or group) subject and object of emotion. The second section reviews evidence for the claim that individuals feel stronger group-level emotions about things that are relevant to their self-concept, with emphasis on three indicators of self-relevance: domain relevance, self-categorisation as an in-group member, and in-group identification. Implications for, and future directions in, the study of emotion in inter-group relations are discussed.

How the disadvantaged appraise group-based exclusion: The path from legitimacy to illegitimacy

Although many forms of differential treatment based on group membership are perceived to be legitimate, disadvantaged group members’ responses to discrimination have been studied primarily in contexts in which such treatment is appraised as illegitimate. This has resulted in an impoverished understanding of differential group-based treatment and a failure to illuminate the processes by which discrimination can shift from being seen as legitimate to being viewed as illegitimate. We discuss the determinants of disadvantaged group members’ legitimacy appraisals and the de-legitimisation process, whereby forms of discrimination appraised as legitimate come to be increasingly perceived as illegitimate. Whether group-based exclusion is addressed collectively or individually depends on socio-structural factors such as the pervasiveness of discrimination, impermeability of intergroup boundaries, and the availability of cognitive alternatives to the status quo. We conclude that understanding the antecedents and consequences of legitimacy appraisals is necessary to develop a comprehensive account of disadvantaged group members’ experiences of group-based discrimination.

“It Will Not Always Be This Way” Cognitive Alternatives Improve Self-Esteem in Contexts of Segregation

In the context of school segregation in China, the authors propose that disadvantaged group members’ self-esteem should improve when they consider the prospect of a better future for the group (i.e., awareness of cognitive alternatives to the lower status position). A pilot study established that country workers’ children who were educated with city children (i.e., in integrated schools) reported higher self-esteem than country workers’ children who were educated separately (i.e., in segregated schools). Study 1 showed that self-esteem among country workers’ children was predicted by awareness of cognitive alternatives, but not by contact with city children. Study 2 experimentally manipulated cognitive alternatives, showing that self-esteem was enhanced when awareness of cognitive alternatives was high rather than low. Contact with city children again did not predict self-esteem. Findings demonstrate the importance of perceiving that social change is possible.

The difficulty of recognizing less obvious forms of group-based discrimination

Research on perceptions of discrimination has focused on group-based differential treatment that is widely accepted as being illegitimate (e.g., based on race or gender). The present research investigates how individuals interpret less obvious forms of group-based exclusion based on age (Study 1) and vision correction status (Study 2). We propose that individuals will not question the legitimacy of such treatment, unless they are provided with explicit cues to do so. Participants who merely encountered exclusion (baseline control) did not differ from those who were directed to consider the legitimate reasons for this treatment, with respect to perceived legitimacy, felt anger, and collective action intentions. In contrast, individuals who were directed to consider the illegitimate reasons for the exclusion perceived it to be less legitimate, felt more anger, and reported higher collective action intentions. Participants’ own status as potential victims or mere observers of the exclusion criterion did not influence their legitimacy perceptions or felt anger. Results suggest that when confronted with forms of group-based exclusion that are not commonly defined as discrimination, people do not perceive an injustice unless explicitly directed to seek it out.

Difference makes the heart grow fonder: Perceiving intergroup difference enhances minority groups’ willingness to integrate

Three studies examined how minority group members’ acculturation strategies are shaped by the extent to which they perceive differences between their cultural values and the values of majority society. In line with the creative distinctiveness hypothesis (Spears, Jetten, Scheepers, and Cihangir, 2009), perceived difference among country migrant workers in China was positively associated with endorsement of an integration strategy (Study 1). Among Chinese immigrants in Australia (Study 2), a positive association was found between perceived difference and willingness to integrate only among those who were less identified with the superordinate category. Study 3 manipulated Asian international students’ perceived cultural value difference between their group and the Australian majority, and replicated Study 2 findings. Especially among those who are less committed to the superordinate group, then, knowing how the minority group is different can facilitate willingness to integrate into the majority culture.