The Collective Value of "Me" (and it's Limitations): Towards a More Nuanced Understanding of Individual and Collective Coping with Prejudice

Journal of Social Issues

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 497-516

  Becker, Julia C ^a   Barreto, Manuela ^b,c   Kahn, Kimberly B ^d   de Oliveira Laux, Stephanie H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSNABRÜCK   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^c INSTITUTO UNIVERSITÁRIO DE LISBOA ISCTE IUL   (Portugal)

^d PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLLECTIVE ACTION; COPING STRATEGY; GENDER ISSUE; SOCIAL CHANGE;

EID: 84941079879     PISSN: 00224537     EISSN: 15404560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/josi.12125     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2000). You can't always do what you want: Social identity and self-presentational determinants of the choice to work for a low status group. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 891-906. doi: 10.1177/01461672002610001.
2. Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2003). The effects of being categorised: The interplay between internal and external social identities. European Review of Social Psychology, 14, 139-170. doi: 10.1080/10463280340000045.
3. Barreto, M., Kahn, K. B., & du Toit R., (2014). Dos gender identification moderate women's responses to individual and collective confrontation of sexism? Unpublished raw data.
4. Becker, J. C. (2012). Virtual special issue on theory and research on collective action in EJSP. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 19-33. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1839.
5. Becker, J. C., & Barreto, M. (2014). Ways to go: Men's and women's support for aggressive and non-aggressive confrontation of sexism as a function of gender identification. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 668-686. doi: 10.1111/josi.12085.
6. Becker, J. C., & Tausch, N. (2014). When group memberships are negative: The concept, measurement, and behavioral implications of psychological disidentification. Self and Identity, 13, 294-321. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2013.819991.
7. Becker, J. C., Glick, P., Ilic, M., & Bohner, G. (2011). Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't? Social consequences of accepting versus rejecting benevolent sexist offers for the target and perpetrator. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 761-773. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.823.
8. Czopp, A. M., Monteith, M. J., & Mark, A. Y. (2006). Standing up for a change: Reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 784-803. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.784.
9. Derks, B., van Laar, C., Ellemers, N., & Raghoe, G. (2015). Extending the queen bee effect: How Hindustani workers cope with disadvantage by distancing the self from the group. Journal of Social Issues, 71(3), 476-496.
10. Dodd, E. H., Giuliano, T. A., Boutell, J. M., & Moran, B. E. (2001). Respected or rejected: Perceptions of women who confront sexist remarks. Sex Roles, 45, 567-577. doi: 10.1023/a:1014866915741.
11. Ellemers, N. (2001). Individual upward mobility and the perceived legitimacy of intergroup relations. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy (pp. 205-222). New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Garcia, D. M., Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Ellemers, N. (2010). Women's reactions to ingroup members who protest discriminatory treatment: The importance of beliefs about inequality and response appropriateness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 733-745. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.644.
13. Gervais, S. J., & Hillard, A. L. (2014). Confronting sexism as persuasion: Effects of a confrontation's recipient, source, message, and context. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 653-667. doi:10.1111/josi.12084.
14. Gervais, S. J., Hillard, A. L., & Vescio, T. K. (2010). Confronting sexism: The role of relationship orientation and gender. Sex Roles, 63, 463-474. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9838-7.
15. Gollwitzer, M., Christ, O., & Lemmer, G. (2014). Individual differences make a difference: On the use and the psychometric properties of difference scores in social psychology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 673-682 [Special Section on "Methods and statistics in social psychology: Refinements and new developments"]. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2042.
16. Hyers, L. (2007). Resisting prejudice every day: Exploring women's assertive responses to anti-Black racism, anti-semitism, heterosexism, and sexism. Sex Roles, 56, 1-12. doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-9142-8.
17. Jiménez-Moya, G., Spears, R., Rodríguez-Bailón, R., & de Lemus, S. (2015). By any means necessary? When and why low group identification paradoxically predicts radical collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 71(3), 517-535.
18. Kaiser, C. R., & Major, B. (2004). Judgments of deserving and the emotional consequences of stigmatization. In L. Z. Tiedens, C. Leach (Eds.), The social life of emotions (pp. 270-291). New York: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/cbo9780511819568.015.
19. Kaiser, C. R., & Miller, C. T. (2001). Stop complaining! The social costs of making attributions to discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 254-263. doi: 10.1177/0146167201272010.
20. Kaiser, C., & Miller, C. (2003). Derogating the victim: The interpersonal consequences of blaming events on discrimination. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6, 227-237. doi: 10.1177/13684302030063001.
21. Kaiser, C. R., Hagiwara, N., Malahy, L. W., & Wilkins, C. L. (2009). Group identification moderates attitudes toward ingroup members who confront discrimination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 770-777. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.027.
22. Kulich, C., Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., & Iacoviello, V. (2015). Moving across status lines: Low concern for the ingroup and group identification. Journal of Social Issues, 71(3), 453-475.
23. Leach, C. W., van Zomeren, M., Zebel, S., Vliek, M. L. W., Pennekamp, S. F., Doosje, B., Ouwerkerk, J. W., & Spears, R. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical (multi-component) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 144-165. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.144.
24. O'Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality and Quantity, 41, 673-690. doi: 10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6.
25. Rasinski, H. M., & Czopp, A. M. (2010). The effect of target status on witnesses' reactions to confrontations of bias. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32, 8-16. doi: 10.1080/01973530903539754.
26. Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2010). Who confronts prejudice? The role of implicit theories in the motivation to confront prejudice. Psychological Science, 21, 952-959. doi: 10.1177/0956797610374740.
27. Simon, B., & Klandermans, B. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56, 319-331. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.56.4.319.
28. Stürmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). The role of collective identification in social movement participation: A panel study in the context of the German gay movement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 263-277. doi: 10.1177/0146167203256690.
29. Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life. Race, gender, and sexual orientation. New Jersey: Wiley.
30. Swim, J. K., & Hyers, L. L. (1999). Excuse me-what did you just say?!: Women's public and private responses to sexist remarks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 68-88. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1998.1370.
31. Swim, J. K., & Thomas, M. A. (2005). Responding to everyday discrimination: A synthesis of research on goal-directed, self-regulatory coping behaviors. In S. Levin & C. Van Laar (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality (pp. 105-128). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
33. Tausch, N., Saguy, T., & Bryson, J. (2015). How does intergroup contact affect social change? It's impact on collective action and individual mobility intentions among members of a disadvantaged group. Journal of Social Issues, 71(3), 536-553.
34. Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504-535. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504.
35. Wright, S. C. (2001). Restricted intergroup boundaries: Tokenism, ambiguity and the tolerance of injustice. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy (pp. 223-256). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Wright, S. C. (2010). Collective action and social change. In J. F. Dovidio, M. Hewstone, P. Glick, & V. M. Esses (Eds.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 577-596). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781446200919.n35.