Perceptions of White Women’s Stigma-Based Solidarity Claims and Disingenuous Allyship

IF 4.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Social Psychological and Personality Science Pub Date : 2023-08-03 DOI:10.1177/19485506231188757
K. Chaney, Rebecca Cipollina, D. Sanchez
{"title":"Perceptions of White Women’s Stigma-Based Solidarity Claims and Disingenuous Allyship","authors":"K. Chaney, Rebecca Cipollina, D. Sanchez","doi":"10.1177/19485506231188757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Efforts to promote allyship often focus on creating a common ingroup identity between marginalized and privileged groups, including making salient stigma-based solidarity. In addition, research on allyship perceptions highlights that allies are viewed as more genuine when they are not perceived as motivated by self-interests. Integrating research on allyship perceptions and stigma-based solidarity, the present research examined Black Americans’ perceptions of White women’s allyship messages that focus on stigma-based solidarity. In three experiments ( Ntotal = 851), White women claiming stigma-based solidarity highlighting shared perpetrators (Studies 1–3) or shared discrimination (Study 3) were perceived as less genuine allies (i.e., less trustworthy and self-sacrificing) who were motivated to reduce racism for their own self-interests compared to allyship claims that only highlighted racism (Studies 1–3) or no allyship claims (Study 2). These findings add to a growing literature documenting marginalized groups’ suspicion of privileged groups’ motives when claiming allyship.","PeriodicalId":21853,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506231188757","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

Efforts to promote allyship often focus on creating a common ingroup identity between marginalized and privileged groups, including making salient stigma-based solidarity. In addition, research on allyship perceptions highlights that allies are viewed as more genuine when they are not perceived as motivated by self-interests. Integrating research on allyship perceptions and stigma-based solidarity, the present research examined Black Americans’ perceptions of White women’s allyship messages that focus on stigma-based solidarity. In three experiments ( Ntotal = 851), White women claiming stigma-based solidarity highlighting shared perpetrators (Studies 1–3) or shared discrimination (Study 3) were perceived as less genuine allies (i.e., less trustworthy and self-sacrificing) who were motivated to reduce racism for their own self-interests compared to allyship claims that only highlighted racism (Studies 1–3) or no allyship claims (Study 2). These findings add to a growing literature documenting marginalized groups’ suspicion of privileged groups’ motives when claiming allyship.
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
白人妇女以耻辱为基础的团结主张和虚伪的盟友关系的看法
促进盟友关系的努力往往侧重于在边缘化和特权群体之间建立共同的群体内认同,包括建立明显的基于耻辱的团结。此外,对盟友观念的研究强调,当盟友不被自身利益所驱使时,他们会被视为更真诚。本研究整合了对盟友感知和基于耻辱的团结的研究,考察了美国黑人对白人女性基于耻辱的团结的盟友信息的感知。在三个实验中(Ntotal = 851),白人女性声称基于耻辱的团结强调共同的肇事者(研究1-3)或共同的歧视(研究3)被认为是不太真正的盟友(即,与只强调种族主义的盟友关系声明(研究1-3)或没有盟友关系声明(研究2)相比,这些人为了自身利益而减少种族主义。这些发现增加了越来越多的文献,记录了边缘化群体在声称盟友关系时对特权群体动机的怀疑。
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
12.50
自引率
1.80%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Social Psychological and Personality Science (SPPS) is a distinctive journal in the fields of social and personality psychology that focuses on publishing brief empirical study reports, typically limited to 5000 words. The journal's mission is to disseminate research that significantly contributes to the advancement of social psychological and personality science. It welcomes submissions that introduce new theories, present empirical data, propose innovative methods, or offer a combination of these elements. SPPS also places a high value on replication studies, giving them serious consideration regardless of whether they confirm or challenge the original findings, with a particular emphasis on replications of studies initially published in SPPS. The journal is committed to a rapid review and publication process, ensuring that research can swiftly enter the scientific discourse and become an integral part of ongoing academic conversations.
期刊最新文献
The Strengths of People in Low-SES Positions: An Identity-Reframing Intervention Improves Low-SES Students' Achievement Over One Semester. Perceived Naturalness Biases Objective Behavior in Both Trivial and Meaningful Contexts Corrigendum to a Potential Pitfall of Passion: Passion is Associated with Performance Overconfidence The Game Within the Game: The Potential Influence of Demand Characteristics and Participant Beliefs in Violent Video Game Studies An Improved Scoring Algorithm for Indirect Evaluation Measurement With the Evaluative Priming Task
×
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