优势群体误解了盟友关系会得到怎样的回应

IF 3.4 2区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2024-02-03 DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104309
Hannah J. Birnbaum , Desman Wilson , Adam Waytz
{"title":"优势群体误解了盟友关系会得到怎样的回应","authors":"Hannah J. Birnbaum ,&nbsp;Desman Wilson ,&nbsp;Adam Waytz","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104309","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Allyship is a way for advantaged groups to advance equity, yet acts of allyship are infrequent or limited. Here we explore a potential reason for this: a miscalibration between advantaged and disadvantaged groups’ perceptions of allyship. Studies 1a−2b demonstrate that advantaged groups (men in Studies 1a−1b; White people in Studies 2a−2b) underestimate how much disadvantaged groups (women in Studies 1a−1b; Black people in Studies 2a−2b) would appreciate various acts of allyship. Across these studies, relatively disadvantaged members (non– White men in Studies 1a−1b; White women in Studies 2a−2b) were better calibrated in their assessments than relatively advantaged members. Study 3 examines real, behavioral contexts whereby advantaged groups (men) underestimate disadvantaged groups’ (women’s) appreciation of allyship. Study 4 demonstrates that expectations about appreciation predict allyship intentions. Finally, Study 5 finds that highlighting appreciation of potential allyship can increase allyship intentions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advantaged groups misperceive how allyship will be received\",\"authors\":\"Hannah J. Birnbaum ,&nbsp;Desman Wilson ,&nbsp;Adam Waytz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104309\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Allyship is a way for advantaged groups to advance equity, yet acts of allyship are infrequent or limited. Here we explore a potential reason for this: a miscalibration between advantaged and disadvantaged groups’ perceptions of allyship. Studies 1a−2b demonstrate that advantaged groups (men in Studies 1a−1b; White people in Studies 2a−2b) underestimate how much disadvantaged groups (women in Studies 1a−1b; Black people in Studies 2a−2b) would appreciate various acts of allyship. Across these studies, relatively disadvantaged members (non– White men in Studies 1a−1b; White women in Studies 2a−2b) were better calibrated in their assessments than relatively advantaged members. Study 3 examines real, behavioral contexts whereby advantaged groups (men) underestimate disadvantaged groups’ (women’s) appreciation of allyship. Study 4 demonstrates that expectations about appreciation predict allyship intentions. Finally, Study 5 finds that highlighting appreciation of potential allyship can increase allyship intentions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597824000013\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597824000013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

盟友关系是优势群体促进公平的一种方式,但盟友关系的行为并不频繁或有限。在此,我们探讨了造成这种情况的潜在原因:优势群体和弱势群体对盟友关系的认识存在误差。研究 1a-2b 表明,优势群体(研究 1a-1b 中的男性;研究 2a-2b 中的白人)低估了弱势群体(研究 1a-1b 中的女性;研究 2a-2b 中的黑人)对各种结盟行为的感激程度。在所有这些研究中,相对弱势的成员(研究 1a-1b 中的非白人男性;研究 2a-2b 中的白人女性)比相对优势的成员在评估时更准确。研究 3 探讨了优势群体(男性)低估弱势群体(女性)对盟友关系的欣赏的真实行为背景。研究 4 表明,对赞赏的预期会预测结盟意向。最后,研究 5 发现,强调对潜在盟友关系的欣赏可以增加盟友关系意向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Advantaged groups misperceive how allyship will be received

Allyship is a way for advantaged groups to advance equity, yet acts of allyship are infrequent or limited. Here we explore a potential reason for this: a miscalibration between advantaged and disadvantaged groups’ perceptions of allyship. Studies 1a−2b demonstrate that advantaged groups (men in Studies 1a−1b; White people in Studies 2a−2b) underestimate how much disadvantaged groups (women in Studies 1a−1b; Black people in Studies 2a−2b) would appreciate various acts of allyship. Across these studies, relatively disadvantaged members (non– White men in Studies 1a−1b; White women in Studies 2a−2b) were better calibrated in their assessments than relatively advantaged members. Study 3 examines real, behavioral contexts whereby advantaged groups (men) underestimate disadvantaged groups’ (women’s) appreciation of allyship. Study 4 demonstrates that expectations about appreciation predict allyship intentions. Finally, Study 5 finds that highlighting appreciation of potential allyship can increase allyship intentions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context
期刊最新文献
Joining disconnected others reduces social identity threat in women brokers Retraction notice to “Don’t stop believing: Rituals improve performance by decreasing anxiety” [Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 137C (2016) 71–85] The confrontation effect: When users engage more with ideology-inconsistent content online A Numeracy-Task interaction model of perceived differences On time or on thin ice: How deadline violations negatively affect perceived work quality and worker evaluations
×
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