Brenda Major

Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma.

Although several psychological theories predict that members of stigmatized groups should have low global self-esteem, empirical research typically does not support this prediction. It is proposed here that this discrepancy may be explained by considering the ways in which membership in a stigmatized group may protect the self-concept It is proposed that members of stigmatized groups may (a) attribute negative feedback to prejudice against their group, (b) compare their outcomes with those of the ingroup, rather than with the relatively advantaged outgroup, and (c) selectively devalue those dimensions on which their group fares poorly and value those dimensions on which their group excels. Evidence for each of these processes and their consequences for self-esteem and motivation is reviewed. Factors that moderate the use of these strategies and implications of this analysis for treatment of stigmas are also discussed. For more than three decades, social psychological research on prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination has examined both the content of stereotypes about a variety of social groups

Putting Gender Into Context: An Interactive Model of Gender-Related Behavior.

A model that describes conditions influencing the display of gender-related behavior is presented as a supplement to existent models of sex differences. Whereas many previous models stress the importance of distal factors, our model emphasizes the degree to which gender-related behavior is variable, proximally caused, and context dependent. More specifically, we propose that gender-related behaviore are influenced by the expectations of perceivers, self-systems of the target, and situational cues. This model of gender-related behavior builds on theory and data in the areas of (a) expectancy confirmation processes and (b) self-verification and self-presentation strategies. Support for the model is presented, and suggestions are offered for its future development.

Social stigma: The affective consequences of attributional ambiguity

Two experiments investigated the hypothesis that the stigmatized can protect their self-esteem by attributing negative feedback to prejudice. Fifty-nine women participated in the 1st experiment. Women who received negative feedback from a prejudiced evaluator attributed the feedback to his prejudice and reported less depressed affect than women who received negative feedback from a nonprejudiced evaluator. In the 2nd experiment, 38 Black and 45 White students received interpersonal feedback from a White evaluator, who cither could see them or could not. Compared with Whites, Blacks were more likely to attribute negative feedback to prejudice than positive feedback and were more likely to attribute both types of feedback to prejudice when they could be seen by the other student. Being seen by the evaluator buffered the self-esteem of Blacks from negative feedback but hurt the self-esteem of Blacks who received positive feedback.

From social inequality to personal entitlement: The role of social comparisons, legitimacy appraisals, and group membership.

Publisher Summary This chapter highlights the role that social comparison processes and attributions of responsibility play in translating social inequality into beliefs about personal and collective entitlement. The chapter illustrates the importance of entitlement as an explanatory construct in understanding the ways in which members of different social groups react to their socially distributed outcomes. This chapter organizes into a systematic framework current knowledge about the psychological antecedents and consequences of beliefs about entitlement. The chapter addresses the ways in which social comparison processes and attributions contribute to the development of a lesser sense of personal entitlement among members of objectively disadvantaged groups. Social comparison biases tend to prevent awareness of disadvantage, and attribution biases tend to legitimize disadvantage. As a result, what “is” has a marked tendency to become what “ought” to be. These processes are illustrated through a program of research on the origins of gender differences in personal entitlement to pay. Gender differences in entitlement are proposed to underlie the finding that women and men typically do not differ in their life, job, or marital satisfaction, despite situations at work and at home that are disadvantageous for women compared to the situations of men. The chapter considers the reason for members of other disadvantaged groups; for example, African—Americans; expressing discontent with their objectively unjust situations. The situational and personal factors that prompt people to compare with advantaged outgroups and that lead them to question the legitimacy of outcome distributions result in elevated entitlement among the disadvantaged and correspondingly higher levels of discontent.

The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations

Part I: Introduction: 1. Emerging perspectives on the psychology of legitimacy John T. Jost and Brenda Major Part II. Historical Perspectives on Sociological and Psychological Theories of Legitimacy: 2. Theories of legitimacy Morris Zelditch, Jr 3. Reflections on social and psychological processes of legitimization and delegitimization Herbert C. Kelman Part III. Cognitive and Perceptual Processes in the Appraisal of Legitimacy: 4. A perceptual theory of legitimacy: policies, prejudice, social institutions, and moral value Chris Crandall and Ryan Beasley 5. Blame it on the group: entitativity, subjective essentialism, and social attribution Vincent Yzerbyt and Anouk Rogier 6. Status vs. quo: naive realism and the search for social change and perceived legitimacy Robert J. Robinson and Laura Kray Part IV. The Tolerance of Injustice: Implications for Self and Society: 7. Tolerance and personal deprivation James M. Olson and Carolyn Hafer 8. Legitimacy and the construal of social advantage Brenda Major and Toni Schmader 9. Individual upward mobility and the perceived legitimacy of intergroup relations Naomi Ellemers 10. Restricted intergroup boundaries: tokenism, ambiguity and the tolerance of injustice Stephen C. Wright Part V. Sterotyping, Ideology and the Legitimation of Inequality: 11. The emergence of status beliefs: from structural inequality to legitimizing ideology Cecilia L. Ridgeway 12. Ambivalent stereotypes as legitimizing ideologies: differentiating paternalistic and envious prejudice Peter Glick and Susan T. Fiske 13. Legitimizing ideologies: the social dominance approach Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin, Christopher M. Federico, and Felicia Pratto 14. The (il)legitimacy of intergroup bias: from social reality to social resistance Russell Spears, Jolanda Jetten and Bertjan Doosje 15. Conflicts of legitimation among self, group, and system: the integrative potential of system justification theory John T. Jost, Diana Burgess and Cristina Mosso Part VI. Institutional and Organizational Processes of Legitimation: 16. The architecture of legitimacy: constructing accounts of organizational controversies Kimberly D. Elsbach 17. A psychological perspective on the legitimacy of institutions and authorities Tom R. Tyler 18. License to kill: violence and legitimacy in expropriative social relations Mary R. Jackman.

Coping with Negative Stereotypes about Intellectual Performance: The Role of Psychological Disengagement:

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that members of negatively stereotyped groups psychologically disengage their self-esteem from feedback received in stereotype-relevant domains. In both experiments, African American and European American college students received performance feedback on a bogus intelligence test and completed measures of self-esteem. In Experiment 1, European American students had higher self-esteem after success than after failure, whereas African American students had similar levels of self-esteem regardless of feedback. Whether the test had been described as racially biased or culturally fair had no effect. Experiment 2 examined the extent to which lesser responsivity among African Americans is the result of chronic disengagement from intelligence tests or situational disengagement initiated by priming racial stereotypes. Results indicate that both chronic disengagement and racial priming engender less responsivity to negative performance feedback among African American, but not European American, students. Performance expectancies, self-evaluations, and beliefs about test bias are discussed as possible mediators of this relationship.

Abortion as stigma : Cognitive and emotional implications of concealment

This study examined the stigma of abortion and psychological implications of concealment among 442 women followed for 2 years from the day of their abortion. As predicted, women who felt stigmatized by abortion were more likely to feel a need to keep it a secret from family and friends. Secrecy was related positively to suppressing thoughts of the abortion and negatively to disclosing abortion-related emotions to others. Greater thought suppression was associated with experiencing more intrusive thoughts of the abortion. Both suppression and intrusive thoughts, in turn, were positively related to increases in psychological distress over time. Emotional disclosure moderated the association between intrusive thoughts and distress. Disclosure was associated with decreases in distress among women experiencing intrusive thoughts of their abortion, but was unrelated to distress among women not experiencing intrusive thoughts.

Group Identification Moderates Emotional Responses to Perceived Prejudice

Two studies tested the prediction that group identification (importance of the group in the self-concept) moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-evaluative emotions (depression and self-esteem). In Study 1, women low in gender identification experienced less depressed emotion and higher self-esteem if a negative evaluation was due to sexism than when it was not. The self-evaluative emotions of women high in gender identification were not buffered by attributions to sexism. In Study 2, ethnic identification and depressed emotions were positively related when Latino-Americans read about pervasive prejudice against the ingroup but were negatively related when they read about prejudice against an outgroup. Both studies demonstrated that for highly group identified individuals, prejudice against the ingroup is a threat against the self. Thus, the self-protective strategy of attributing negative feedback to discrimination may be primarily effective for individuals who do not consider the group a central aspect of self.

Coping With Ethnic Stereotypes in the Academic Domain: Perceived Injustice and Psychological Disengagement

Psychological disengagement is the defensive detachment of self-esteem from a particular domain. In the academic arena, disengagement can result from devaluing academic success or discounting the validity of academic outcomes. We review evidence for ethnic differences in these two processes of psychological disengagement and present results of a multiethnic study examining perceived ethnic injustice and academic performance as predictors of devaluing and discounting. Among African American students, beliefs about ethnic injustice (but not academic performance) predicted greater discounting and devaluing. Among European American students, poor academic performance (but not beliefs about ethnic injustice) predicted greater devaluing and discounting. Among Latino/a students, beliefs about ethnic injustice were associated with greater discounting, whereas poorer academic performance was associated with increased devaluing.

Perceiving personal discrimination: The role of group status and legitimizing ideology

It was hypothesized that relative group status and endorsement of ideologies that legitimize group status differences moderate attributions to discrimination in intergroup encounters. According to the status-legitimacy hypothesis, the more members of low-status groups endorse the ideology of individual mobility, the less likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from higher status group members to discrimination. In contrast, the more members of high-status groups endorse individual mobility, the more likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from lower status group members to discrimination. Results from 3 studies using 2 different methodologies provide support for this hypothesis among members of different high-status (European Americans and men) and low-status (African Americans, Latino Americans, and women) groups.