(Absent) Allyship in STEM: Can Psychological Standing Increase Prejudice Confrontation?

IF 3.7 2区 心理学 Q2 BUSINESS Journal of Business and Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-13 DOI:10.1007/s10869-023-09929-0
Eden B. King, Mikki Hebl, Jenessa R. Shapiro, Elisabeth Silver, Isabel Bilotta, Nicole Lennon, Kristen Jones, Alex Lindsey, Abby Corrington
{"title":"(Absent) Allyship in STEM: Can Psychological Standing Increase Prejudice Confrontation?","authors":"Eden B. King, Mikki Hebl, Jenessa R. Shapiro, Elisabeth Silver, Isabel Bilotta, Nicole Lennon, Kristen Jones, Alex Lindsey, Abby Corrington","doi":"10.1007/s10869-023-09929-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The current research focuses on the role that allies can play in improving the experiences of Black and Latinx students in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) contexts. Using an experience sampling design, study 1 shows that such students report negative experiences in STEM learning contexts and that bystanders rarely engage in allyship. Study 2 suggests that participants perceive the experiences described by Black and Latinx students in study 1 as negative and somewhat urgent, but do not feel personal responsibility to act. Studies 3 and 4 assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at enhancing personal responsibility for confronting prejudice and engaging in allyship. Study 3 reveals that enhancing a bystander’s sense of psychological standing can increase prejudice confrontation, and study 4 extends this phenomenon by showing that fellow bystanders’ (not just targets’) appeals to other bystanders’ psychological standing also evoke action. Overall, this work advances research on allyship in STEM contexts by integrating the Confronting Prejudiced Responses (CPR) model with theories of subtle discrimination.</p>","PeriodicalId":48254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business and Psychology","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business and Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-023-09929-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current research focuses on the role that allies can play in improving the experiences of Black and Latinx students in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) contexts. Using an experience sampling design, study 1 shows that such students report negative experiences in STEM learning contexts and that bystanders rarely engage in allyship. Study 2 suggests that participants perceive the experiences described by Black and Latinx students in study 1 as negative and somewhat urgent, but do not feel personal responsibility to act. Studies 3 and 4 assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at enhancing personal responsibility for confronting prejudice and engaging in allyship. Study 3 reveals that enhancing a bystander’s sense of psychological standing can increase prejudice confrontation, and study 4 extends this phenomenon by showing that fellow bystanders’ (not just targets’) appeals to other bystanders’ psychological standing also evoke action. Overall, this work advances research on allyship in STEM contexts by integrating the Confronting Prejudiced Responses (CPR) model with theories of subtle discrimination.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
(科技、工程和数学领域的(缺席)盟友关系:心理地位能否增强偏见对抗?
目前的研究侧重于盟友在改善黑人和拉美裔学生在科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)环境中的经历方面所能发挥的作用。利用经验取样设计,研究 1 显示,这些学生报告了在 STEM 学习环境中的负面经历,而旁观者很少参与盟友关系。研究 2 表明,参与者认为黑人和拉丁裔学生在研究 1 中描述的经历是负面的,而且有些紧迫,但并不觉得个人有责任采取行动。研究 3 和研究 4 评估了干预措施的有效性,这些干预措施旨在增强个人面对偏见和参与盟友关系的责任感。研究3揭示了增强旁观者的心理地位感可以提高对抗偏见的能力,研究4扩展了这一现象,表明旁观者(不仅仅是目标)对其他旁观者心理地位的呼吁也会唤起行动。总之,这项研究通过将 "对抗偏见反应"(CPR)模型与微妙歧视理论相结合,推动了科技、教育、体育和文化环境中的盟友关系研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: The Journal of Business and Psychology (JBP) is an international outlet publishing high quality research designed to advance organizational science and practice. Since its inception in 1986, the journal has published impactful scholarship in Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Organizational Behavior, Human Resources Management, Work Psychology, Occupational Psychology, and Vocational Psychology. Typical subject matters include Team processes and effectiveness Customer service and satisfaction Employee recruitment, selection, and promotion Employee engagement and withdrawal Organizational culture and climate Training, development and coaching Mentoring and socialization Performance management, appraisal and feedback Workplace diversity Leadership Workplace health, stress, and safety Employee attitudes and satisfaction Careers and retirement Organizational communication Technology and work Employee motivation and job design Organizational change and development Employee citizenship and deviance Organizational effectiveness Work-nonwork/work-family Rigorous quantitative, qualitative, field-based, and lab-based empirical studies are welcome. Interdisciplinary scholarship is valued and encouraged. Submitted manuscripts should be well-grounded conceptually and make meaningful contributions to scientific understandingsand/or the advancement of science-based practice. The Journal of Business and Psychology is - A high quality/impactful outlet for organizational science research - A journal dedicated to bridging the science/practice divide - A journal striving to create interdisciplinary connections For details on submitting manuscripts, please read the author guidelines found in the far right menu.
期刊最新文献
Servant Leadership and Cooperation: The Moderating Role of Leader Group Prototypicality Here’s Looking at You: Does Eye Contact in Video Interviews Affect How Applicants are Perceived and Evaluated? Parent–Adolescent Transmission of Emotional Exhaustion: Testing a Social-Cognitive Spillover and Crossover Model The More Contextualized, the More Valid: Effects of Contextualization Strategies on Forced-choice Measurement The Relationship Between Team Diversity and Team Performance: Reconciling Promise and Reality Through a Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Registered Report
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1