Heather J. Smith

Understanding why the justice of group procedures matters : A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-value model

Procedural justice research has documented many positive consequences of fair decision-making procedures and treatment by authorities. However, it is unclear why these effects of procedural justice occur. The group-value model proposes that fair procedures matter because they communicate two symbolic messages about group membership:(a) whether individuals are respected members of a group and (b) whether they should feel pride in the group as a whole. These messages are conveyed by 3 relational aspects ofthe actions ofauthorities-actions that indicate neutrality, trustworthiness, and status recognition. Results from 4 different studies provide evidence that:(a) relational aspects of fair procedures communicate group-relevant information, and (b) this information mediates the influence of procedural judgments on group-oriented behaviors and feelings of self-esteem.

Relative Deprivation: A Theoretical and Meta-Analytic Review

Relative deprivation (RD) is the judgment that one is worse off compared to some standard accompanied by feelings of anger and resentment. Social scientists use RD to predict a wide range of significant outcome variables: collective action, individual achievement and deviance, intergroup attitudes, and physical and mental health. But the results are often weak and inconsistent. The authors draw on a theoretical and meta-analytic review (210 studies composing 293 independent samples, 421 tests, and 186,073 respondents) to present a model that integrates group and individual RD. RD measures that (a) include justice-related affect, (b) match the outcome level of analysis, and (c) use higher quality measures yield significantly stronger relationships. Future research should focus on appropriate RD measurement, angry resentment, and the inclusion of theoretically relevant situational appraisals. Such methodological improvements would revitalize RD as a useful social psychological predictor of a wide range of important individual and social processes.

Relative Deprivation: Is It Just Me?: The Different Consequences of Personal and Group Relative Deprivation

Two professors discover that their salary is significantly lower than the salaries for faculty members at institutions with less stringent job requirements. One professor immediately joins the faculty union and actively participates in rallies and strike actions. The other professor redoubles her efforts to receive grants and merit pay. Why might these professors react so differently to the same disadvantage? According to relative deprivation theory, the same disadvantage framed in different ways will lead to different reactions. If the professor views herself as a representative faculty member deprived in comparison to faculty at other institutions (group relative deprivation), she should be motivated to support collective action. However, if the professor views herself as a unique individual deprived in comparison to other individual faculty (personal relative deprivation), she should be motivated to pursue individualistic opportunities. Unfortunately, the initial promise of relative deprivation (RD) as an explanation for collective behavior has not been fulfilled. Some investigations strongly support RD models (e.g., Abrams, 1990; Pettigrew, 1978; Runciman, 1966; Vanneman & Pettigrew, 1972; Walker & Mann, 1987), but others do not (e.g., Gaskell & Smith, 1984; Thompson, 1989). In response to these inconsistencies, previous literature reviews have sought to clarify the theoretical antecedents and components of the concept (Crosby, 1976; Martin, 1986; Walker & Pettigrew, 1984), or to dismiss its value completely (e.g., Finkel & Rule, 1986; Gurney & Tierney, 1982). However, dismissing the usefulness of RD may be premature.

Relative Deprivation: Fifty Years of Relative Deprivation Research

psychology, sociology, and other social sciences for more than half a century. This popularity reflects RD’s usefulness for explaining numerous paradoxes (Tyler, Boeckmann, Smith, & Huo, 1997). Why were African American soldiers stationed in the southern United States more satisfied than African American soldiers stationed in the northern United States during World War II (Stouffer, Suchman, DeVinney, Star, & Williams, 1949)? Why did the 1960s urban riots in the United States occur when they did (Miller, Bolce, & Halligan, 1977)? Why aren’t working women who earn less than their male colleagues more angry (Crosby, 1982)? The list could continue. The common theme among the answers to these questions is that people’s reactions to objective circumstances depend on their subjective comparisons. African American soldiers compared their situation with the situation for local African Americans (a situation much worse in the South than in the North). The urban riots followed a period of economic and political gain for minorities that ironically created a discrepancy between their expectations and a reality that was not improving quickly enough. And, most working women compare their situation with other working women, not with their male colleagues. Obviously, a concept that can explain so many different phenomena is one worth having in the armory of the social sciences. However, research on RD has progressed only fitfully. The construct of RD was first articulated by Stouffer and his colleagues (Stouffer et al., 1949) to explain a series of unexpected relationships between feelings of satisfaction and one’s position in the army. The seductive nature of RD as a post hoc explanation led to a wide range of applications and definitions. Unfortunately, many attempts to test one

More Than a Feeling Discrete Emotions Mediate the Relationship Between Relative Deprivation and Reactions to Workplace Furloughs

A key insight from investigations of individual relative deprivation (IRD) is that people can experience objective disadvantages differently. In this study, university faculty (N = 953) who reported greater IRD in response to a mandatory furlough (i.e., involuntary pay reductions) were more likely to (a) voice options designed to improve the university (voice), (b) consider leaving their job (exit), and (c) neglect their work responsibilities (neglect), but were (d) less likely to express loyalty to the university (loyalty). Consistent with the emotions literature, (a) anger mediated the relationship between IRD and voice, (b) fear between IRD and exit, (c) sadness between IRD and neglect, and (d) gratitude between IRD and loyalty. IRD was inversely associated with self-reported physical and mental health via these different emotional pathways. These results show how discrete emotions can explain responses to IRD and, in turn, contribute to organizational viability and the health of its members.

Relative Deprivation How Subjective Experiences of Inequality Influence Social Behavior and Health

Discussions of the impact of growing inequality have focused on objective indicators. Focusing on what individuals have or do not have can be misleading without understanding how they subjectively interpret the availability of resources. Relative deprivation (RD) occurs when individuals compare themselves with better-off others and conclude that they do not deserve their disadvantage. These upward comparisons, whether imposed or chosen, can damage people’s emotions, behavior, and even mental and physical health. How people respond to RD depends on whether they (a) experience the disadvantage directed toward them as a unique individual or as a member of a group (e.g., ethnic category, occupation), (b) feel anger or another emotion (e.g., sadness), and (c) view the system (e.g., workplace, nation) as open to change. Mobility interventions (e.g., housing and school vouchers) may have unexpected adverse consequences that direct improvements to the local infrastructure and community do not. Costs of RD (including physical illness) increase if people cannot address perceived inequities effectively. RD explains why simply enumerating resources and opportunities does not fully explain how relative disadvantage produces outcomes ranging from social protest to illness. Insights from psychological science that show how individuals respond to social inequities can inform policies for building communities and improving well-being.

Looking up and Seeing Green Women’s Everyday Experiences With Physical Appearance Comparisons

Psychological research documents the extent to which physical appearance comparisons are associated with negative emotional experiences, but researchers typically study physical appearance comparisons isolated from other comparison experiences. As part of a signal-contingent experience sampling design, 87 female undergraduate students recorded whether they had made any comparison about any topic after they received a text message at three randomly chosen times a day for 7 days. In contrast to other comparisons, physical appearance comparisons were more likely to be upward contrasts to dissimilar targets associated with increased envy, less inspiration, less pride, and less anxiety. Women who reported more demographically similar close friends reported more envy following physical appearance comparisons in contrast to women who reported more demographically diverse close friends. Women who associated their body with a better quality of life reported more inspiration and less envy following physical appearance comparisons. More demographically diverse close friends and a more positive body image may protect women from the negative emotional consequences associated with physical appearance comparisons. These data indicate that the positive benefits for interpersonal judgments associated with close cross-group friends extend to intrapersonal reactions to physical appearance comparisons.

Teaching About Implicit Prejudices and Stereotypes A Pedagogical Demonstration

Social psychology instructors from five distinct state universities in California examined the effect of incorporating the implicit association test (IAT) in a teaching module on students’ perceived knowledge of implicit biases and motivation to control prejudice. Students (N = 258) completed a knowledge survey on prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination and a motivation to control prejudice scale before (Time 1) and after (Time 2) a teaching module on implicit and explicit prejudice that included taking the IAT. Results showed that students’ perceived knowledge of implicit biases increased after completing the teaching module. In addition, the more students displayed an implicit bias against African Americans (relative to European Americans), the more they reported mastering course material about implicit biases and the more they indicated being internally motivated to control prejudice (at Time 2). These findings suggest that using the IAT as a teaching tool might be a beneficial learning experience, in particular for individuals who display relatively pronounced implicit biases.

Disapproved, but Tolerated: The Role of Respect in Outgroup Tolerance

We conducted two studies to test the hypothesis that respect for disapproved outgroups increases tolerance toward them. In Study 1, we employed a panel sample of supporters of the Tea Party movement in the United States and found that Tea Party supporters’ respect for homosexuals and Muslims as equal fellow citizens positively predicted Tea Party supporters’ tolerance toward these groups. There was no indication that alternative recognition processes (i.e., achievement recognition or need recognition) played a similar role in the development of tolerance. Study 2 replicated the respect–tolerance link with the experimental method and a more comprehensive measure of tolerance. In particular, it demonstrated that the link also holds with regard to tolerance in the public or political sphere. The wider implications of our research for societal pluralism are discussed.

Cultural Values Moderate the Impact of Relative Deprivation

Relative deprivation (RD) is the judgment that one or one’s ingroup is worse off compared with some relevant standard coupled with feelings of dissatisfaction, anger, and resentment. RD predicts a wide range of outcomes, but it is unclear whether this relationship is moderated by national cultural differences. Therefore, in the first study, we used national assessments of individual-collectivism and power distance to code 303 effect sizes from 31 different countries with 200,578 participants. RD predicted outcomes ranging from life satisfaction to collective action more strongly within individualistic nations. A second survey of 6,112 undergraduate university students from 28 different countries confirmed the predictive value of RD. Again, the relationship between individual RD and different outcomes was stronger for students who lived in more individualistic countries. Group-based RD also predicted political trust more strongly for students who lived in countries marked by lower power distance. RD effects, although consistent predictors, are culturally bounded. In particular, RD is more likely to motivate reactions within individualistic countries that emphasize individual agency and achievement as a source of self-worth.