stigma, stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination (subtle, interpersonal, formal) Flashcards

1
Q

What is the definition of stigma?

A

Goffman, 1963
Defined stigma as individual attributes that are seen as personal flaws in social contexts.

They are devalued, and stigmas discredit individuals.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are Goffman’s (1963) three dimensions of stigma?

A

Aberrations of the body - disability
Character flaws - drug addiction
Tribal stigmas - race/ethnicity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What are Jones et al (1984) 6 dimensions of stigma?

A

1) concealability
2) course
3) disruptiveness
4) peril/threat
5) origin/cause
6) aesthetics

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Define and discuss relationships among stereotypes, prejudice and discrimination

A

Stereotypes are personal beliefs about categories of people, based on associated traits or characteristics.

Prejudice is an attitude about a group based on stereotypes we hold/adopt.

Discrimination is behavior: when differential treatment occurs between or among people.

Stereotypes->Prej->Discrimin

Stereotypes are mainly cognitive, prejudices are predominantly affective, and discrimination is behavioral.

Allport, 1954

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are shifting standards?

A

Shifting standard model: Having a different set of standards based on stereotypes for groups. (“Pretty good manager for a woman” is based on leaders being stereotyped as male.)

Biernat et al.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is stereotype threat?

A

The fear of being judged according to a negative stereotype.

But also refers to a process by which the salience of an unfavorable stereotype can depress performance of someone from a stigmatized group.

When someone from a stigmatized group is aware others expect them to perform poorly, it can create anxiety and distraction from the task at hand and actually result in decreased performance as a result.

The awareness is an additional burden, a sense of being “in the spotlight”

Roberson & Kulik 2007

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are the three conditions for stereotype threat?

A

Conditions when stereotype threat is most likely:

1) The employee is personally invested in doing well, on:
2) A difficult, stereotype relevant task, where:
3) The context reinforces the stereotype

Personal investment: important to one’s identity to do that task well (i.e., I’m a writer).

Difficulty: Ask themselves, why is this so hard? Will they think it’s because I’m [a woman? black? etc].

Context: Is this a place where stereotypes operate? i.e., when one is a token employee

Roberson and Kulik, 2007

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What are outcomes of stereotype threat?

A

Neg outcomes:

1) Decline in performance
2) More time monitoring their performance (for example, by comparing themselves to peers)
3) More likely to discount performance feed back that they received from the organization. But that’s functional - bc maybe they should be

Pos outcomes:
1) can enhance motivation (persistence and determination) - it can either work for you or against you. It works for you if you know how to do the task already

Roberson and Kulik, 2007

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

How to reduce stereotype threat?

A

Change the conditions:

1) Reduce stereotype relevance - say that everyone who has been hired has the skills to do the job equally well
2) Acknowledge stereotypes exist and tell employees that might be affected by it that if they’re anxious it might just be due to that (it can help lower and change the mindset).
3) Make role models salient - encourage participation mentoring programs, ERGs.

Roberson and Kulik, 2007

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is selective incivility?

A

A modern (covert) form of interpersonal discrimination targeting women and POC. Like general incivility, it has ambiguous intent.

Modern = more subtle, allows people to retain egalitarian image.

Cortina et al., 2013

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is attributional ambiguity theory?

A

It holds that neg feedback will be attributed to prejudiced evaluators in clear but not ambiguous situations. i.e. when it’s clear, one can say “it’s not my fault, they’re sexist!” but when it’s ambig, makes them think it’s them/their fault.

The confusion leads to stress.

Jones et al., 2016

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is interpersonal discrimination?

A

Interpersonal discrimination is a more subtle (non- or paraverbal (tone, number of words)) that occur in social interactions that are not illegal.

Formal: discrim in hiring, promotions, etc that is mostly illegal; laws and policies or social norms against.

It can occur even when formal discrimin isn’t there

Hebl et al., 2002

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is subtle discrimination, why is it harmful, and what are associated outcomes/

A

Subtle discrimination: negative or ambivalent treatment on basis of minority status, not necessarily conscious, likely convey ambiguous intent. (i.e., incivility, “modern” racism etc, jokes)

Harmful because its ambiguous intent causes target to spend more cognitive resources trying to figure out the person’a intention (attributional ambiguity), and that effort serves as a STRESSOR.

Outcomes:
Subtle discrimination is just as harmful as overt discrimination in terms of work outcomes (performance, turnover) & physical and psych health outcomes (i.e., stress, strain, cardiov health).

Jones et al., 2016

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Connections between Hebl et al., 2002, Jones et al., 2016, Cortina et al., 2013,

A

Interpersonal occurs even if/when formal isn’t happening (Hebl et al., 2002), and those subtle forms of discrim are just as harmful (if not moreso) as overt forms for work/health outcomes (Jones et al., 2016). A specific form of subtle discrim, selective incivility, is when ambiguous intentional incivility behaviors target women and people of color (Cortina et al., 2013). WOC report highest rates of incivility, double jeopardy, associated with higher turnover.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is intergroup contact theory/hypothesis and does it work?

A

Intergroup contact hypothesis/theory (Allport, 1954) holds that when there is more contact between majority and minority groups. A meta-analysis found that it does work to reduce prejudice. (Pettigrew et al., 2011)

Reduced anxiety and empathy are the mediators.

Works across nations, genders, and age groups.

Allport argued it would reduce prejudice under four conditions:

  1. Equal status of groups
  2. Common goals
  3. Cooperation/no competition between groups
  4. Laws or authority sanctions equality

Pettigrew et al 2011 found that the conditions not necessary but they enhance the effects.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the dimensions of SCM

A

SCM holds that people respond to others on 2 basic dimensions: warmth and competence.

First assessment is warmth: are they friendly or do they want to harm us? This is based on perception of competition.

Second assessment is competence: Can they carry out their intentions? High in competence are higher status than low competence.

Competence more key in workplace, but warmth is day to day.

The theory helps explain why certain minority groups are viewed more positively than others (Asians as model minorities), and why some members of groups (women) may be viewed more pos than others (competent when working, not when a stay at home mom)

Cuddy et al., 2008

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Describe the 4 SCM combinations, what reaction each elicits, and example groups that are stereotyped that way.

A

Low in both: homeless, the poor – incites contempt

High comp/low warmth: Asians, men – incites envy

Low competence/High warmth: disabled, elderly – incites pity

High warmth, high competence: middle class, Whites – incites admiration

Cuddy et al., 2008

18
Q

What are some responses to prejudice, per Allport?

A

Develop ego defenses to protect well being.

Anxiety/alertness: supported

Obsessive concern: less supported

Self-hate – not supported explicit measures; some on implicit

Distancing from group / deny membership- supported – and most costly!

Describe self as less stereotypical – supported

Striving to overcome negative implication of stigma – “most highly approved of in our culture” per Allport. (expend more effort) – supported – and neg impacts health

Leaving situation/withdraw effort – psych disengagement – discount validity of feedback or devalue importance it is to one’s self concept

Prejudice toward outgroups vs Sympathy: either more or less prejudiced against weaker others. Somewhat supported

Major and Vick, 2005

19
Q

What is a negative implication of affirmative action plans?

A

Minorities may perceive them as handouts, and think then have self-doubt. And, others may have negative impressions:

Leslie et al., 2014 meta found that AAP plan recipients had lower performance evaluations by others, based on others’ perceptions of their low warmth and competence. AND lower self-ratings based on stereotype threat.

20
Q

What are four strategies stigmatized individuals can engage in to reduce interpersonal discrimination?

A

Positivity (increase) less likely when liked
Acknowledge visible stigmas: reduces awkwardness
Individuating info (beyond stereotype): reduces reliance
Disclose invisible stigmas: fosters trust, reduce awkwardness

Ruggs et al., 2011

21
Q

What are three strategies orgs can engage in to reduce interpersonal discrimination?

A

Orgs can:
Standardize interview process (reduces opp for ambig); Create formal org policies (makes it unacceptable);
Get mgmt buy-in (so policies don’t backfire and undermine)

Ruggs et al., 2011

22
Q

What are behaviors (types and examples) allies can engage in to reduce discrimination in the workplace?

A

Allies engage in supportive and advocacy behaviors.

Support: provide comfort and tangible resources (i.e., displaying stickers, attending trainings, listening to concerns)
Advocacy: outward demonstrations of public support for indiv, org, or societal level issues pertaining to stigmatized groups (i.e., confronting prejudice directly, eudcating others, fighting for rights)

Sabat et al., 2013

23
Q

What are 5 situational influences that are hypothesized to be related to increased likelihood of intervening?

A
  1. Directness of harassment
  2. Relationship to target.
  3. Knowledge of target identity (S.O.)
  4. Recurrence beliefs (has this really happened much or isolated event)
  5. Costs/benefits analysis

Ryan and Wessel, 2012

24
Q

What are 5 hypothesized stages of allyship?

A
  1. Apathy
  2. Dissonance
  3. Learning
  4. Stumbling
  5. Integrated

Martinez et al., submitted

25
Q

Describe Pachankis, 2007 model of identity management

A

Process model highlighting psych impact of identity CONCEALMENT

It had been long thought that people w/ invisible stigmas would suffer less than those with visible stigmas (stigma theory holds this)

But this model highlighted that people with invisible stigmas have unique issues, i.e, not being able to identify others like themselves or supportive people, that might exacerbate outcomes

Outcomes: cog, affective, behavioral outcomes (i.e., preoccupation and vigilance; anxiety and shame; impression mgmt.)

26
Q

Describe three identity management models

A

Pachankis, 2007: highlights psychological impact of concealing a stigmatized identity. Holds that people with concealable IDs have unique stressors (i.e., not being able to connect with others like themselves) that exacerbate outcomes. (Aligns with minority stress theory). Outcomes: cognitive (being pre-occupied), affective (anxiety), behavioral (impression mgmt).

Chaudoir and Fisher, 2010: 2. People can choose whether or not to disclose to pursue positive outcomes (e.g., intimacy acceptance, understanding), or to avoid negative outcomes (e.g., social distancing, anxiety around concealing). There’s a feedback loop; a decision to disclose in one situation and how it’s received likely affects a decision to disclose in a later situation.

Jones and King, 2014: They conceptualize ID mgmt as a within and between person phenomenon. They argue that ID mgmt varies as a function of situational characteristics (within person) but people will also manage their stigmas in a certain way on average (between person).

27
Q

Why is ID mgmt sometimes detrimental in workplace contexts? (neg outcomes)

A

Experimental evidence has shown that preoccupation with impression management can deplete cognitive resources among stigmatized individuals and ultimately negatively impact task performance

Concealing may lead one to isolate ourselves, leading to negative reactions from coworkers and thus, more discriminatory treatment.

28
Q

What is identity management?

A

The decision making process about when, how, where, and to whom to disclose their concealable identities (Jones and King, 2014).

29
Q

Given the possibly negative outcomes, why would people want to disclose?

A

Increased authenticity, interpersonal relationships, psychological well-being (Jones and King, 2014)

30
Q

What is signaling and why is it useful? When is it most likely to occur?

A

Behaviors that involve information seeking through “testing the waters” or signaling a potential stigma.

Signaling strategies are unique from revealing and concealing strategies in that these indirect, strategic behaviors allow individuals to gauge the confidant’s reaction before actually disclosing and to “backtrack” if it becomes apparent that negative reactions to disclosure are probable.

Signaling is most likely to occur in ambiguous situations (when anticipated acceptance is unclear). Thus, in high-clarity situations, employees may bypass signaling in favor of immediate revealing and concealing. However, when signaling does indeed occur, it will be exhibited immediately prior to revealing and concealing

Clair et al., 2005

31
Q

What are passing strategies, and 2 types?

A

Passing is “a cultural performance whereby one member of a defined social group masquerades as another in order to enjoy the privileges afforded to the dominant group”

2 types:
Concealment: actively preventing others from getting personal info about them

Discretion: not hiding information, but “dodging” the issue.

Clair et al., 2005

32
Q

What are revealing strategies, and 3 types?

A

Those who reveal disclose an identity that would otherwise be invisible or unrecognizable to others. (“coming out”)

Signaling: drop hints; test waters in ambig situations, before deciding to reveal.

Normalizing: revealing, then attempting to make it seem commonplace or ordinary.

Differentiating: highlighting the identity and how it differentiates them from others. Transforming the stigmatized difference into assets. Preserving the marginality. Reclaims and reframes how their ID is understood at work.

Clair et al., 2005

33
Q

What are disclosure disconnects?

A

A state where a person has different degrees of disclosure in work and nonwork domains.
Ragins, 2008

34
Q

What are outcomes of disclosure disconnects?

A

Psych stress and conflict as person attempts to manage an ID concealed to various degrees across settings

Ragins, 2008

35
Q

What are 4 unique issues faced by those with invisible stigmas?

A

1) assumed normality
2) relationships based on assumed normality makes it complicated to reveal another identity later
3) could be outed at any time
4) can enact an extra toll (stress) based on having to think about it and decide

Ragins 2008

36
Q

What is the role of identity centrality in disclosure?

A

More likely to disclose if higher

Clair et al., 2005

37
Q

What is the optimal outcome in terms of disclosure across work and life domains?

A

Ragins 2008 holds that “integration” (full disclosure across both).

From a self-verification perspective (Schwann, 1983; 1987), individuals who have fully disclosed at work and home should achieve psychological coherence as a result of having a consistent identity across settings

However, full disclosure across settings may also reflect environments that are less likely to discriminate.

Identity-integrated individuals may therefore experience the most positive psychological outcomes, but this may be due to both psychological coherence of identity and environmental support.

Ragins, 2008

38
Q

Which legislation outlawed formal employment discrimination?

A

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

39
Q

What are mediators in the perceived discrimination-well being relationship?

A

Health behaviors and job stress (Pascoe et al., 2009)

Justice perceptions and job stress (Dhanani et al., 2018)

40
Q

What is minority stress?

A

Psychosocial stress related to one’s minority status (Meyer, 1995).

It is based on the premise that members of minority groups are subjected to chronic stress related to their stigmatization.

In general, minority stress can be described as being related to the juxtaposition of minority and dominant values and the resultant conflict with the social environment experienced by minority group members.

41
Q

What are 5 stages of allyship and what progresses the ally from one stage to the next?

A

Stages of ally ID development and catalysts for progression:

  1. Apathy (then event occurs, progresses)
  2. Dissonance - realize privilege, neg emotional reactions, seek to reduce
  3. Learning - until they feel comfortable to enact behaviors
  4. Stumbling - early behaviors, but don’t have all skills necessary; could be long term
  5. Integrated - theoretically the “perfect ally”

Martinez et al., under review

42
Q

What are some moderators to someone intervening on behalf of LGB employees?

A

(Ryan & Wessel, 2012)

  1. Directness of behaviors (more direct the more likey)
  2. Perceived frequency of behaviors (more frequent more likely)
  3. Relationship to target (closer the more likely)
  4. Costs benefits relationship
  5. Knowledge of the person’s sexual orientation (if ambig less likely)