It's fair for us: Diversity structures cause women to legitimize discrimination

被引:51
作者
Brady, Laura M. [1 ]
Kaiser, Cheryl R. [1 ]
Major, Brenda [2 ]
Kirby, Teri A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Dept Psychol, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[2] Univ Calif Santa Barbara, Dept Psychol & Brain Sci, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Sexism; Diversity; Discrimination; Legitimacy; Procedural justice; Benevolent sexism; SYSTEM-JUSTIFYING BELIEFS; BENEVOLENT SEXISM; AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION; GENDER SYSTEM; PREJUDICE; HOSTILE; EXPECTATIONS; PERCEPTIONS; STEREOTYPES; CUES;
D O I
10.1016/j.jesp.2014.11.010
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Three experiments tested the hypothesis that the mere presence (vs. absence) of diversity structures makes it more difficult for women to detect sexism. In Experiment 1, even when a company's hiring decisions disadvantaged women, women perceived the company as more procedurally just for women and were less supportive of sexism litigation when the company offered diversity training, compared to when it did not. In Experiment 2, women perceived a company as more procedurally just for women and as less likely to have engaged in sexism when the company offered diversity training, compared to when it did not. This effect was not moderated by women's endorsement of status legitimizing beliefs. In Experiment 3, women perceived a company as more procedurally just and less discriminatory when the company had been recognized for positive gender diversity practices compared to when it had not. Additionally, these effects were most pronounced among women who endorsed benevolent sexist beliefs and mitigated among those who rejected benevolent sexist beliefs. Together, these experiments demonstrate that diversity structures can make it difficult for women to detect and remedy discrimination, especially women who hold benevolent sexist beliefs. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:100 / 110
页数:11
相关论文
共 49 条
[21]   Presumed Fair: Ironic Effects of Organizational Diversity Structures [J].
Kaiser, Cheryl R. ;
Major, Brenda ;
Jurcevic, Ines ;
Dover, Tessa L. ;
Brady, Laura M. ;
Shapiro, Jenessa R. .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2013, 104 (03) :504-519
[22]   Prejudice expectations moderate preconscious attention to cues that are threatening to social identity [J].
Kaiser, CR ;
Vick, SB ;
Major, B .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2006, 17 (04) :332-338
[23]  
Kaiser CR., 2014, POLICY INSIGHTS BEHA, V1, P95, DOI 10.1177/2372732214548429
[24]   Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies [J].
Kalev, Alexandra ;
Dobbin, Frank ;
Kelly, Erin .
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2006, 71 (04) :589-617
[25]   How affirmative action became diversity management - Employer response to antidiscrimination law, 1961 to 1996 [J].
Kelly, E ;
Dobbin, F .
AMERICAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST, 1998, 41 (07) :960-984
[26]  
Leventhal G.S., 1980, Social Exchange, P27
[27]  
Lind A., 1988, SOCIAL PSYCHOL PROCE
[28]   FROM SOCIAL-INEQUALITY TO PERSONAL ENTITLEMENT - THE ROLE OF SOCIAL COMPARISONS, LEGITIMACY APPRAISALS, AND GROUP MEMBERSHIP [J].
MAJOR, B .
ADVANCES IN EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, VOL 26, 1994, 26 :293-355
[29]  
Major B, 2001, PSYCHOLOGY OF LEGITIMACY, P176
[30]   Minority Perceptions of Whites' Motives for Responding Without Prejudice: The Perceived Internal and External Motivation to Avoid Prejudice Scales [J].
Major, Brenda ;
Sawyer, Pamela J. ;
Kunstman, Jonathan W. .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN, 2013, 39 (03) :401-414