Different power perceptions based on socially situated needs: Findings from a qualitative study among Asian Americans

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL British Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-06-22 DOI:10.1111/bjso.12777
Hu Young Jeong, Johanna Ray Vollhardt, Michelle S. Twali, John Tawa
{"title":"Different power perceptions based on socially situated needs: Findings from a qualitative study among Asian Americans","authors":"Hu Young Jeong,&nbsp;Johanna Ray Vollhardt,&nbsp;Michelle S. Twali,&nbsp;John Tawa","doi":"10.1111/bjso.12777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>While power is often defined and operationalized as control or influence over others, alternative conceptualizations define power as the ability to meet various fundamental needs. We argue that this conceptualization may better capture how marginalized minority group members understand their group's power or powerlessness. However, there is little research examining how people themselves construe group-based power. The present study, therefore, used qualitative inquiry to examine perceived ingroup power among Asian Americans, an underrepresented racial minority group with an ambivalent power status in society. Reflexive thematic analysis of 25 interviews illustrated the relevance of Prilleltensky's (<i>J. Community Psychol</i>., <i>36</i>, 2008, 116) psychopolitical conceptualization of power. Specifically, we identified eight themes that reflect various context-specific construals of power as oppression, wellness and liberation. Additionally, the findings suggest the need to consider intragroup heterogeneity in power and to situate how power is understood in the given sociopolitical, structural context.</p>","PeriodicalId":48304,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"63 4","pages":"2135-2157"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjso.12777","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12777","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While power is often defined and operationalized as control or influence over others, alternative conceptualizations define power as the ability to meet various fundamental needs. We argue that this conceptualization may better capture how marginalized minority group members understand their group's power or powerlessness. However, there is little research examining how people themselves construe group-based power. The present study, therefore, used qualitative inquiry to examine perceived ingroup power among Asian Americans, an underrepresented racial minority group with an ambivalent power status in society. Reflexive thematic analysis of 25 interviews illustrated the relevance of Prilleltensky's (J. Community Psychol., 36, 2008, 116) psychopolitical conceptualization of power. Specifically, we identified eight themes that reflect various context-specific construals of power as oppression, wellness and liberation. Additionally, the findings suggest the need to consider intragroup heterogeneity in power and to situate how power is understood in the given sociopolitical, structural context.

Abstract Image

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
基于社会需求的不同权力观念:对亚裔美国人的定性研究结果
权力通常被定义为对他人的控制力或影响力,并将其付诸实施,而另一种概念则将权力定义为满足各种基本需求的能力。我们认为,这种概念可以更好地反映边缘化少数群体成员如何理解其群体的权力或无权。然而,很少有研究探讨人们自己是如何理解群体权力的。因此,本研究采用定性调查的方法来研究亚裔美国人感知到的群体内权力,亚裔美国人是一个代表性不足的少数种族群体,在社会中的权力地位比较矛盾。对 25 个访谈进行的反思性主题分析表明,Prilleltensky(《社区心理学》,36,2008,116)的权力心理政治概念化具有现实意义。具体来说,我们确定了八个主题,这些主题反映了对权力的压迫、健康和解放的各种特定理解。此外,研究结果表明,有必要考虑群体内部权力的异质性,并确定如何在特定的社会政治和结构背景下理解权力。
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
9.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
85
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Social Psychology publishes work from scholars based in all parts of the world, and manuscripts that present data on a wide range of populations inside and outside the UK. It publishes original papers in all areas of social psychology including: • social cognition • attitudes • group processes • social influence • intergroup relations • self and identity • nonverbal communication • social psychological aspects of personality, affect and emotion • language and discourse Submissions addressing these topics from a variety of approaches and methods, both quantitative and qualitative are welcomed. We publish papers of the following kinds: • empirical papers that address theoretical issues; • theoretical papers, including analyses of existing social psychological theories and presentations of theoretical innovations, extensions, or integrations; • review papers that provide an evaluation of work within a given area of social psychology and that present proposals for further research in that area; • methodological papers concerning issues that are particularly relevant to a wide range of social psychologists; • an invited agenda article as the first article in the first part of every volume. The editorial team aims to handle papers as efficiently as possible. In 2016, papers were triaged within less than a week, and the average turnaround time from receipt of the manuscript to first decision sent back to the authors was 47 days.
期刊最新文献
Memorials and collective memory: A text analysis of online reviews. Registered report: Cognitive ability, but not cognitive reflection, predicts expressing greater political animosity and favouritism. From imagination to activism: Cognitive alternatives motivate commitment to activism through identification with social movements and collective efficacy Between east and west, between past and future: The effects of exclusive historical victimhood on geopolitical attitudes in Hungary and Serbia. The opposite roles of injustice and cruelty in the internalization of a devaluation: The humiliation paradox revisited
×
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