多样性意识形态对种族和性别关系的不同影响

IF 3.4 2区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104226
Ashley E. Martin
{"title":"多样性意识形态对种族和性别关系的不同影响","authors":"Ashley E. Martin","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The present research compares the influence of diversity ideologies on race and gender relations. In contrast to research suggesting that an identity-aware ideology (i.e., multiculturalism or race-awareness) predicts more support for racial equality than does an identity-blind one (i.e., colorblindness or race-blindness), this paper suggests that the opposite is true for gender. Six studies demonstrate that an identity-aware ideology (compared to an identity-blind one) highlights unique types of race and gender differences, leading to divergent outcomes for race and gender inequality. While race-awareness highlights external, opportunity-based differences, promoting support for policies that combat systemic inequality (e.g., affirmative action), gender-awareness highlights internal, biology-based differences, reifying gender-essentialism, broadly, and gender stereotypes, in particular. Together, this work suggests that the beneficial effects of identity-aware ideologies previously found for race may not be effective for gender. Ultimately, it warns against one-size-fits-all approaches to diversity and offers practical implications for diversity science.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"175 ","pages":"Article 104226"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The divergent effects of diversity ideologies for race and gender relations\",\"authors\":\"Ashley E. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104226\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The present research compares the influence of diversity ideologies on race and gender relations. In contrast to research suggesting that an identity-aware ideology (i.e., multiculturalism or race-awareness) predicts more support for racial equality than does an identity-blind one (i.e., colorblindness or race-blindness), this paper suggests that the opposite is true for gender. Six studies demonstrate that an identity-aware ideology (compared to an identity-blind one) highlights unique types of race and gender differences, leading to divergent outcomes for race and gender inequality. While race-awareness highlights external, opportunity-based differences, promoting support for policies that combat systemic inequality (e.g., affirmative action), gender-awareness highlights internal, biology-based differences, reifying gender-essentialism, broadly, and gender stereotypes, in particular. Together, this work suggests that the beneficial effects of identity-aware ideologies previously found for race may not be effective for gender. Ultimately, it warns against one-size-fits-all approaches to diversity and offers practical implications for diversity science.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"volume\":\"175 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104226\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"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/S0749597823000018\",\"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/S0749597823000018","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

本研究比较了多元化意识形态对种族和性别关系的影响。研究表明,身份意识意识形态(即多元文化或种族意识)比身份盲意识形态(即色盲或种族盲)更能预测对种族平等的支持,与此相反,本文认为性别恰恰相反。六项研究表明,身份意识意识形态(与身份盲意识形态相比)突出了独特类型的种族和性别差异,导致种族和性别不平等的不同结果。虽然种族意识强调外部的、基于机会的差异,促进对消除系统性不平等的政策(如平权行动)的支持,但性别意识强调内部的、基于生物学的差异,广泛地具体化性别本质主义,尤其是性别陈规定型观念。总之,这项工作表明,以前为种族发现的身份意识意识形态的有益影响可能对性别无效。最终,它警告不要对多样性采取一刀切的方法,并为多样性科学提供了实际意义。
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
The divergent effects of diversity ideologies for race and gender relations

The present research compares the influence of diversity ideologies on race and gender relations. In contrast to research suggesting that an identity-aware ideology (i.e., multiculturalism or race-awareness) predicts more support for racial equality than does an identity-blind one (i.e., colorblindness or race-blindness), this paper suggests that the opposite is true for gender. Six studies demonstrate that an identity-aware ideology (compared to an identity-blind one) highlights unique types of race and gender differences, leading to divergent outcomes for race and gender inequality. While race-awareness highlights external, opportunity-based differences, promoting support for policies that combat systemic inequality (e.g., affirmative action), gender-awareness highlights internal, biology-based differences, reifying gender-essentialism, broadly, and gender stereotypes, in particular. Together, this work suggests that the beneficial effects of identity-aware ideologies previously found for race may not be effective for gender. Ultimately, it warns against one-size-fits-all approaches to diversity and offers practical implications for diversity science.

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
The inclusion of anchors when seeking advice: Causes and consequences 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
×
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