Miguel M. Unzueta

An unconscious desire for hierarchy? The motivated perception of dominance complementarity in task partners.

In 6 studies, the authors examined the perception of dominance complementarity, which is the perception of a target as different from the self in terms of dominance. The authors argue that these perceptions are motivated by the desire for positive task relationships. Because dominance complementarity bodes well for task-oriented relationships, seeing dominance complementarity allows one to be optimistic about a work relationship. As evidence that perceptions of dominance complementarity are an instance of motivated perception, the authors show that complementary perceptions occur when participants think about or expect task-oriented relationships with the target and that perceptions of dominance complementarity are enhanced when individuals care about the task component of the relationship.

Deny, Distance, or Dismantle? How White Americans Manage a Privileged Identity

Social scientists have traditionally argued that whiteness—the attribute of being recognized and treated as a White person in society—is powerful because it is invisible. On this view, members of the racially dominant group have the unique luxury of rarely noticing their race or the privileges it confers. This article challenges this “invisibility thesis,” arguing that Whites frequently regard themselves as racial actors. We further argue that whiteness defines a problematic social identity that confronts Whites with 2 psychological threats: the possibility that their accomplishments in life were not fully earned (meritocratic threat) and the association with a group that benefits from unfair social advantages (group-image threat). We theorize that Whites manage their racial identity to dispel these threats. According to our deny, distance, or dismantle (3D) model of White identity management, dominant-group members have three strategies at their disposal: deny the existence of privilege, distance their own self-concepts from the White category, or strive to dismantle systems of privilege. Whereas denial and distancing promote insensitivity and inaction with respect to racial inequality, dismantling reduces threat by relinquishing privileges. We suggest that interventions aimed at reducing inequality should attempt to leverage dismantling as a strategy of White identity management.

Diversity is what you want it to be: how social-dominance motives affect construals of diversity.

We propose that diversity is a malleable concept capable of being used either to attenuate or to enhance racial inequality. The research reported here suggests that when people are exposed to ambiguous information concerning an organization’s diversity, they construe diversity in a manner consistent with their social-dominance motives. Specifically, anti-egalitarian individuals broaden their construal of diversity to include nonracial (i.e., occupational) heterogeneity when an organization’s racial heterogeneity is low. By contrast, egalitarian individuals broaden their construal of diversity to include nonracial heterogeneity when an organization’s racial heterogeneity is high. The inclusion of occupational heterogeneity in perceptions of diversity allows people across the spectrum of social-dominance orientation to justify their support for or opposition to hierarchy-attenuating affirmative-action policies. Our findings suggest that diversity may not have a fixed meaning and that, without a specific delineation of what the concept means in particular contexts, people may construe diversity in a manner consistent with their social motivations.

Diversity Is in the Eye of the Beholder: How Concern for the In-Group Affects Perceptions of Racial Diversity

The reported studies suggest that concern for the in-group motivates Asian Americans and African Americans to define diversity specifically, that is, as entailing both minorities’ numerical and hierarchical representation, while motivating White Americans to define diversity broadly, that is, as entailing either minorities’ high numerical and/or hierarchical representation in an organization. Studies 2–4 directly assess if a concern for the in-group affects conceptions of diversity by measuring Black and White participants’ racial identity centrality, an individual difference measure of the extent to which individuals define themselves according to race. These studies suggest that the tendency to conceive diversity in ways protective of the in-group is especially pronounced among individuals who identify strongly with their racial in-group.

“Tall Poppies” and “American Dreams” Reactions to Rich and Poor in Australia and the United States

A comparative study conducted in Australia and the United States examined people’s responses to protagonists who were either born rich or poor and who ended up either rich or poor as adults. Results reveal some cross-cultural similarities and some differences. Specifically, people in both countries perceive initially poor and subsequently rich individuals as more competent and likeable than initially rich and subsequently poor individuals, but these differences were greater in the American context than in the Australian context. In addition, being exposed to someone who was born rich (vs. born poor) led Americans to perceive the economic system as more fair and legitimate, but it led Australians to perceive the system as less fair and legitimate.

Diverse According to Whom? Racial Group Membership and Concerns about Discrimination Shape Diversity Judgments

People often treat diversity as an objective feature of situations that everyone perceives similarly. The current research shows, however, that disagreement often exists over whether a group is diverse. We argue that diversity judgments diverge because they are social perceptions that reflect, in part, individuals’ motivations and experiences, including concerns about how a group would treat them. Therefore, whether a group includes in-group members should affect how diverse a group appears because the inclusion or apparent exclusion of in-group members signals whether perceivers can expect to be accepted and treated fairly. Supporting our claims, three experiments demonstrate that racial minority group members perceive more diversity when groups included racial in-group members rather than members of other racial minority groups. Moreover, important differences exist between Asian Americans and African Americans, which underscore the need for more research to explore uniqueness rather than commonalities across racial minority groups.

Perceiving Ethnic Diversity on Campus Group Differences in Attention to Hierarchical Representation

A field study tested whether Asian and White students use different criteria when judging the racial and ethnic diversity of their university. The university under study had roughly equal numbers of Asians and Whites, but Asians were heavily concentrated in the student body and had relatively low numbers in high-status university positions (the faculty and administration). Results showed that, as long as the student body was deemed diverse, the status asymmetry did not prevent Whites from regarding their university as diverse or from opposing efforts to increase racial and ethnic diversity on campus. Asians, by contrast, were attentive to the status asymmetry: they incorporated faculty/administrative diversity into their judgments of the university and saw diversity in the student body as a reason to increase diversity in high-status positions. The results suggest that people perceive and support diversity in ways that align with the interests of their ethnic in-groups.