Michael T. Schmitt

Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being.

The processes involved in well-being maintenance among African Americans who differed in their attributions to prejudice were examined. A rejection-iden tification model was proposed where stable attributions to prejudice represent rejection by the dominant group. This results in a direct and negative effect on well-being. The model also predicts a positive effect on well-being that is mediated by minority group identification. In other words, the generally negative consequences of perceiving oneself as a victim of racial prejudice can be somewhat alleviated by identification with the minority group. Structural equation analyses provided support for the model and ruled out alternative theoretical possibilities. Perceiving prejudice as pervasive produces effects on well-being that are fundamentally different from those that may arise from an unstable attribution to prejudice for a single negative outcome.

The Consequences of Perceived Discrimination for Psychological Well-Being: A Meta-Analytic Review

In 2 meta-analyses, we examined the relationship between perceived discrimination and psychological well-being and tested a number of moderators of that relationship. In Meta-Analysis 1 (328 independent effect sizes, N = 144,246), we examined correlational data measuring both perceived discrimination and psychological well-being (e.g., self-esteem, depression, anxiety, psychological distress, life satisfaction). Using a random-effects model, the mean weighted effect size was significantly negative, indicating harm (r = -.23). Effect sizes were larger for disadvantaged groups (r = -.24) compared to advantaged groups (r = -.10), larger for children compared to adults, larger for perceptions of personal discrimination compared to group discrimination, and weaker for racism and sexism compared to other stigmas. The negative relationship was significant across different operationalizations of well-being but was somewhat weaker for positive outcomes (e.g., self-esteem, positive affect) than for negative outcomes (e.g., depression, anxiety, negative affect). Importantly, the effect size was significantly negative even in longitudinal studies that controlled for prior levels of well-being (r = -.15). In Meta-Analysis 2 (54 independent effect sizes, N = 2,640), we examined experimental data from studies manipulating perceptions of discrimination and measuring well-being. We found that the effect of discrimination on well-being was significantly negative for studies that manipulated general perceptions of discrimination (d = -.25), but effects did not differ from 0 when attributions to discrimination for a specific negative event were compared to personal attributions (d = .06). Overall, results support the idea that the pervasiveness of perceived discrimination is fundamental to its harmful effects on psychological well-being.

The Meaning and Consequences of Perceived Discrimination in Disadvantaged and Privileged Social Groups

The subjective meaning and consequences of perceived discrimination depend on the position of ones group in the social structure. For members of disadvantaged groups, attributions to prejudice are likely to be internal, stable, uncontrollable, and convey widespread exclusion and devaluation of ones group. For members of privileged groups, the meaning of attributions to prejudice is more localized. Because of such meaning differences, attributions to prejudice are considerably more harmful for the psychological well-being of members of disadvantaged groups than they are for members of privileged groups. According to the Rejection-Identification Model (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999), members of disadvantaged groups cope with the pain of attributions to prejudice by increasing identification with their disadvantaged group. We conclude with an exploration of the social contextual factors that can affect how the disadvantaged cope, and a discussion of the challenges facing future research on attributions to prejudice.

Perceiving Discrimination Against One’s Gender Group has Different Implications for Well-Being in Women and Men

Using structural equation modeling, the authors tested theoretical predictions concerning the effects of perceived discrimination against one’s gender on psychological well-being in women and men. Results were highly supportive of the Rejection-Identification Model, with perceptions of discrimination harming psychological well-being among women but not among men. The results also support the Rejection-Identification Model’s prediction that women partially cope with the negative well-being consequences of perceived discrimination by increasing identification with women as a group. In contrast, perceived discrimination was unrelated to group identification among men. The authors found no support for the hypothesis that perceptions of discrimination have self-protective properties among the disadvantaged. Results are consistent with the contention that the differential effects of perceived discrimination among women and men are due to differences in the groups’ relative positions within the social structure.

Rebels with a Cause: Group Identification as a Response to Perceived Discrimination from the Mainstream

Two studies involving people with body piercings tested the hypothesis that perceived discrimination increases group identification. In Study 1, group identification mediated the positive relationship between perceived discrimination and attempts to differentiate the ingroup from the mainstream. In Study 2, perceived discrimination against people with body piercings was manipulated and was found to increase group identification. Support was found for the prediction that group identification mediates the relationship between perceptions of discrimination and collective self-esteem. Results demonstrate the importance of group identification for both the meaning of group membership and its consequences for well-being among members of disadvantaged groups.

Attitudes toward group‐based inequality: Social dominance or social identity?

In five studies we explored how the context in which people think about the social structure and the implications of the social structure for ones in-group affect attitudes toward inequality. In Studies 1 and 2 we found that social dominance orientation (SDO) scores reflect attitudes toward specific types of inequality that are salient in context. Consistent with social identity theory, in Studies 3 to 5 we found that SDO scores reflected the interests of specific group identities. Indeed, when we compared existing privileged and disadvantaged groups, and when we manipulated in-group status, we found that participants held more positive attitudes toward inequality when the in-group was privileged, compared to when the in-group was disadvantaged. Across all of our studies, results were consistent with the contention that attitudes toward inequality are group-specific and depend on the social-structural position of salient in-groups. We discuss the implications of our findings for social dominance theory.

Inequality as Ingroup Privilege or Outgroup Disadvantage: The Impact of Group Focus on Collective Guilt and Interracial Attitudes

Among members of privileged groups, social inequality is often thought of in terms of the disadvantages associated with outgroup membership. Yet inequality also can be validly framed in terms of ingroup privilege. These different framings have important psychological and social implications. In Experiment 1 (N = 110), White American participants assessed 24 statements about racial inequality framed as either White privileges or Black disadvantages. In Experiment 2 (N = 122), White participants generated examples of White privileges or Black disadvantages. In both experiments, a White privilege framing resulted in greater collective guilt and lower racism compared to a Black disadvantage framing. Collective guilt mediated the manipulation’s effect on racism. In addition, in Experiment 2, a White privilege framing decreased White racial identification compared to a Black disadvantage framing. These findings suggest that representing inequality in terms of outgroup disadvantage allows privileged group members to avoid the negative psychological implications of inequality and supports prejudicial attitudes.

The Internal and External Causal Loci of Attributions to Prejudice

In two studies, the authors examined the causal loci of attributions to prejudice. Participants were asked to consider a situation in which they were rejected. Whether the rejection was attributable to an exclusively external cause or attributable to bias against one’s gender group was manipulated. In contrast to the existing view that attributions to prejudice are external, results from both studies supported the prediction that attributions to prejudice also have a substantial internal component. In Study 2, the authors examined the affective consequences of attributions for rejection and found that for women, attributions to prejudice were more harmful than an exclusively external attribution. For men, however, attributions to prejudice were less harmful than an exclusively external attribution. Results are discussed in terms of the ways in which attributions to prejudice differ from purely external attributions.

Collective Guilt as Distress over Illegitimate Intergroup Inequality

We examine how appraisals of the legitimacy of gender inequality affect mens experience of collective guilt. We tested two potential routes by which perceiving intergroup inequality as legitimate might undermine collective guilt: via reductions in empathy for the disadvantaged outgroup or via reductions in the distress experienced when confronted with the suffering of the outgroup. In the first study (N= 52), we measured legitimacy appraisals, and in the second experimental study (N= 73) we manipulated the legitimacy of gender inequality. In both studies, reductions in self-focused distress mediated the effect of legitimacy appraisals on collective guilt, while other-oriented empathy did not. These effects suggest that collective guilt is a self-focused emotion that emerges when members of a dominant group perceive their relationship with a disadvantaged outgroup to be illegitimate.

Feeling Threatened About the Future Whites’ Emotional Reactions to Anticipated Ethnic Demographic Changes

In many Western countries, the proportion of the population that is White will drop below 50% within the next century. Two experiments examined how anticipation of these future ethnic demographics affects current intergroup processes. In Study 1, White Americans who viewed actual demographic projections for a time when Whites are no longer a numerical majority felt more angry toward and fearful of ethnic minorities than Whites who did not view future projections. Whites who viewed the future projections also felt more sympathy for their ingroup than Whites in the control condition. In Study 2, the authors replicated the effects for intergroup emotions with a sample of White Canadians. White Canadians who thought about a future in which Whites were a numerical minority appraised the ingroup as more threatened, which mediated the effect of condition on intergroup emotions. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for race relations in increasingly diverse societies.