Goal Preference Shapes Confrontations of Sexism

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Volumn 40, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 646-656

  Mallett, Robyn K ^a   Melchiori, Kala J ^a  

^a LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

confrontation; goals; liking; respect; sexism; sexual harassment

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ASSERTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; JOB FINDING; MOTIVATION; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SEXISM; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ASSERTIVENESS; FEMALE; GOALS; HUMANS; JOB APPLICATION; SEXISM; UNITED STATES; WOMEN; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84898677816     PISSN: 01461672     EISSN: 15527433     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146167214521468     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Bergkvist L.,Rossiter J. R.The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs.Journal of Marketing Research. 2007;44:175-184.
2. Bergsieker H. B.,Shelton J. N.,Richeson J. A.To be liked versus respected: Divergent goals in interracial interactions.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2010;99:248-264.
3. Carvallo M.,Pelham B. W.When fiends become friends: The need to belong and perceptions of personal and group discrimination.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2006;90:94-105.
4. Cohen C. F.,Cohen M. E.Defending your life: When women complain about sexual harassment.Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. 1993;7:235-242.
5. Crandall C. S.,Eshleman A.,O'Brien L.Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: The struggle for internalization.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002;82:359-378.
6. Czopp A. M.The passive activist: Negative consequences of failing to confront anti-environmental statements.Ecopsychology. 2013;5:17-23.
7. Czopp A. M.,Monteith M. J.,Mark A. Y.Standing up for a change: Reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2006;90:784-803.
8. Eagly A. H.Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1987:.
9. Eagly A. H.,Karau S. J.Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.Psychological Review. 2002;109:573-598.
10. Ellison v. Brady, 55 FEP Cases 111 (9th Cir. 1991)
11. EstrichS. (1991). Sex at work. Stanford Law Review, 43, 813-861. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1228921.
12. Fiske S. T.Social beings: A core motives approach to social psychology. New York, NY: Wiley; 2004:.
13. Fitzgerald L. F.,Swan S.,Fischer K.Why didn't she just report him? The psychological and legal implications of women's responses to sexual harassment.Journal of Social Issues. 1995;51:117-138.
14. Godfrey D. K.,Jones E. E.,Lord C. C.Self-promotion is not ingratiating.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986;50:106-115.
15. Good J. J.,Moss-Racusin C. A.,Sanchez D. T.When do we confront? Perceptions of costs and benefits predict confronting discrimination on behalf of the self and others.Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2012;36:210-226.
16. Guilford J. P.Psychometric methods. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1954:.
17. HayesA. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling (White paper). Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf.
18. Heilman M. E.,Wallen A. S.,Fuchs D.,Tamkins M. M.Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male tasks.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004;89:416-427.
19. Hyers L.Resisting prejudice every day: Exploring women's assertive responses to anti-Black racism, anti-semitism, heterosexism, and sexism.Sex Roles. 2007;56:1-12.
20. Jones E. E.Conformity as a tactic of ingratiation.Science. 1965;149:144-150.
21. Jones E. E.Interpersonal perception. New York, NY: Freeman; 1990:.
22. Jones E. E.,Pittman T. S.Psychological perspectives on the self. Suls J., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1982:231-262.
23. Keltner D.,Van Kleef G. A.,Chen S.,Kraus M.A reciprocal influence model of social power: Emerging principles and lines of inquiry.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 2008;40:151-192.
24. Knowles M. L.,Gardner W. L.Benefits of membership: The activation and amplification of group identities in response to social rejection.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2008;34:1200-1213.
25. MacKinnon D. P.,Lockwood C. M.,Hoffman J. M.,West S. G.,Sheets V.A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects.Psychological Methods. 2002;7:83-104.
26. Mallett R. K.,Wagner D. E.The unexpectedly positive consequences of confrontation.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2011;47:215-220.
27. Milgram S.Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York, NY: Harper & Row; 1974:.
28. Phelan J. E,Moss-Racusin C. A.,Rudman L. A.Competent yet out in the cold: Shifting criteria for hiring reflect backlash towards agentic women.Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2008;32:406-413.
29. PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717-731. Available from http://brm.psychonomic-journals.org/.
30. Preacher K. J.,Hayes A. F.Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models.Behavior Research Methods. 2008;40:879-891.
31. Preacher K. J.,Rucker D. D.,Hayes A. F.Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2007;42:185-227.
32. Rattan A.,Dweck C. S.Who confronts prejudice? The role of implicit theories in the motivation to confront prejudice.Psychological Science. 2010;21:952-959.
33. Rosenthal R.,Rosnow R. L.Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2008:.
34. Rudman L. A.,Glick P.Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle-managers.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999;77:1004-1010.
35. Rudman L. A.,Glick P.Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women.Journal of Social Issues. 2001;57:732-762.
36. Rudman L. A.,Moss-Racusin C. A.,Glick P.,Phelan J. E.Reactions to vanguards: Advances in backlash theory.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 2012;45:167-227.
37. Shelton J. N.,Stewart R. E.Confronting perpetrators of prejudice: The inhibitory effects of social costs.Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2004;28:215-223.
38. Short J.,Williams E.,Christie B.The social psychology of telecommunications. London, England: Wiley; 1976:.
39. Sisk R.Who wears the pantsuit? I am the secretary of state, exasperated Hill tells crowd.Daily News. 2009;:7.
40. Swim J. K.,Hyers L. L.Excuse me-What did you just say?!: Women's public and private responses to sexist remarks.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1999;35:68-88.
41. Williams J.,MacKinnon D. P.Resampling and distribution of the product methods for testing indirect effects in complex models.Structural Equation Modeling. 2008;15:23-51.
42. Williams K. D.,Carter-Sowell A. R.Coping with minority status: Responses to exclusion and inclusion. Butera F.Levine J. M., ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2009:104-122.
43. Woodzicka J. A.,LaFrance M.Real versus imagined gender harassment.Journal of Social Issues. 2001;57:15-30.