The Intersections of Race, Gender, Age, and Socioeconomic Status: Implications for Reporting Discrimination and Attributions to Discrimination.

This study employed an intersectional approach (operationalized as the combination of more than one social identity) to examine the relationship between aspects of social identity (i.e., race, gender, age, SES), self-reported level of mistreatment, and attributions for discrimination. Self-reported discrimination has been researched extensively and there is substantial evidence of its association with adverse physical and psychological health outcomes. Few studies, however, have examined the relationship of multiple demographic variables (including social identities) to overall levels self-reported mistreatment as well the selection of attributions for discrimination. A diverse community sample (N = 292; 42.12% Black; 47.26% male) reported on experiences of discrimination using the Everyday Discrimination Scale. General linear models were used to test the effect of sociodemographic characteristics (i.e., race, gender, age, SES) on total discrimination score and on attributions for discrimination. To test for intersectional relationships, we tested the effect of two-way interactions of sociodemographic characteristics on total discrimination score and attributions for discrimination. We found preliminary support for intersectional effects, as indicated by a significant race by age interaction on the selection of the race attribution for discrimination; gender by SES on the age attribution; age by gender on the education attribution; and race by SES on the economic situation attribution. Our study extends prior work by highlighting the importance of testing more than one factor as contributing to discrimination, particularly when examining to what sources individuals attribute discrimination.

Ignoring biased feedback: Membership in a stigmatized group as a moderator of mnemic neglect.

A personal history of being the target of biased negative evaluation may lead individuals to habitually divert attention from negative feedback when it is possible to do so. Two studies tested for the first time the hypothesis that people belonging to a stigmatized group (Black students on a predominantly White campus) will, relative to non-stigmatized people, be more likely to engage in mnemic neglect-that is, they will reveal a greater tendency to insulate themselves from the effects of negative self-relevant feedback by means of motivated forgetting. The results of Study 1 supported that hypothesis. In Study 2, priming the concept of egalitarianism reduced the tendency of Black participants to engage in higher levels of mnemic neglect, consistent with the idea that the higher observed levels of mnemic neglect among stigmatized individuals derives from expecting biased, discriminatory responses from other people.

Nonverbal expressions of status and system legitimacy: an interactive influence on race bias.

A voluminous literature has examined how primates respond to nonverbal expressions of status, such as taking the high ground, expanding one's posture, and tilting one's head. We extend this research to human intergroup processes in general and interracial processes in particular. Perceivers may be sensitive to whether racial group status is reflected in group members' nonverbal expressions of status. We hypothesized that people who support the current status hierarchy would prefer racial groups whose members exhibit status-appropriate nonverbal behavior over racial groups whose members do not exhibit such behavior. People who reject the status quo should exhibit the opposite pattern. These hypotheses were supported in three studies using self-report (Study 1) and reaction time (Studies 2 and 3) measures of racial bias and two different status cues (vertical position and head tilt). For perceivers who supported the status quo, high-status cues (in comparison with low-status cues) increased preferences for White people over Black people. For perceivers who rejected the status quo, the opposite pattern was observed.

Impact of genetic causal information on medical students' clinical encounters with an obese virtual patient: health promotion and social stigma.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers will increasingly encounter information about the genetics of obesity as genetics research progresses. PURPOSE: This study explores whether information about the genetics of obesity reduces medical student stigmatization of obese patients, and how it affects rates of health behavior-related referral. METHODS: One hundred and ten third and fourth year medical students were randomly assigned to read about genetic or behavioral mechanisms of obesity, or a control topic. Students interacted with an obese virtual patient in a virtual clinic and completed a battery of measures. RESULTS: Rates of most health behavior screening recommendations (weight loss, exercise, and diet consultations) were lower among participants exposed to genetic causal information than control. The genetic causal information group exhibited less negative stereotyping of the patient than control, F(1,105) = 5.00, p = 0.028, but did not differ in anticipated patient adherence, F(1,105) = 3.18, p = 0.077. CONCLUSIONS: Information highlighting genetic contributions to obesity may lead to both positive and negative outcomes. Communication about the genetics of obesity should discuss the multi-factorial and non-deterministic nature of genetic risk.

Self-Esteem Depends on the Beholder: Effects of a Subtle Social Value Cue.

The idea that self-esteem functions as a gauge or "sociometer" of social value (Leary & Baumeister, 2000) is supported by research on direct social feedback. To examine if the sociometer model is relevant to more subtle social value cues, the implicit self-esteem of women was assessed a week after an interaction with an experimenter. Consistent with the sociometer model, Week 2 self-esteem depended on a subtle social value cue encountered during Week 1. When the Week 1 experimenter wore a t-shirt celebrating larger bodies (i.e., "everyBODY is beautiful"), heavier women had higher self-esteem than lighter women in Week 2. As hypothesized, this effect was relationship-specific, occurring only when the same experimenter administered Week 1 and 2 sessions.