Bystanders' thresholds for intervention in Black vs. White women's sexual harassment.

Black women's sexual harassment is often overlooked and dismissed relative to White women's harassment. In three pre-registered experiments, we test whether this neglect extends to bystander intervention in sexual harassment. Participants observed an ostensibly live job interview between a man manager and a Black or White woman job candidate. The manager's questions were pre-programmed to grow increasingly harassing, and participants were asked to intervene if/when they found the interview inappropriate. A meta-analysis of the three studies (N = 1487), revealed that bystanders did not differ in their threshold for intervention when sexual harassment targeted the Black vs. White woman. Despite evidence for the relative neglect of Black women in responses to sexual harassment, these data suggest that bystanders may respond similarly for Black and White women.

Gender Prototypes Hinder Bystander Intervention in Women's Sexual Harassment.

Bystander intervention is a powerful response to sexual harassment that reduces victims' burden to respond. However, gender prototypes depicting sexual harassment victims as prototypical women (i.e., stereotypically feminine) may hinder intervention when harassment targets women who deviate from this prototype. Across four preregistered experiments (N = 1,270 Americans), we test whether bystanders intervene less readily in nonprototypical (vs. prototypical) women's sexual harassment. Participants observed a man manager ask a series of increasingly sexually harassing job interview questions toward either a gender prototypical or nonprototypical woman by traits (Studies 1-3) or gender identity (Study 4). Participants were instructed to intervene to stop the interview if/when they judged the questions as inappropriate. A meta-analysis revealed participants had a greater threshold for intervention when harassment targeted a nonprototypical (vs. prototypical) woman-a small but meaningful effect. Efforts to foster bystander intervention in sexual harassment would benefit by recognizing this neglect of nonprototypical women.

Diversity Initiatives and White Americans' Perceptions of Racial Victimhood.

Seven experiments explore whether organizational diversity initiatives heighten White Americans' concerns about the respect and value afforded toward their racial group and increase their perceptions of anti-White bias. The presence (vs. absence) of organizational diversity initiatives (i.e., diversity awards, diversity training, diversity mission statements) caused White Americans to perceive Whites as less respected and valued than Blacks and to blame a White man's rejection for a promotion on anti-White bias. Several moderators were tested, including evidence that Whites were clearly advantaged within the organization, that the rejected White candidate was less meritorious than the Black candidate, that promotion opportunities were abundant (vs. scarce), and individual differences related to support for the status hierarchy and identification with Whites. There was little evidence that these moderators reduced Whites' perceptions of diversity initiatives as harmful to their racial group.

Narrow prototypes and neglected victims: Understanding perceptions of sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment is pervasive and has adverse effects on its victims, yet perceiving sexual harassment is wrought with ambiguity, making harassment difficult to identify and understand. Eleven preregistered, multimethod experiments (total N = 4,065 participants) investigated the nature of perceiving sexual harassment by testing whether perceptions of sexual harassment and its impact are facilitated when harassing behaviors target those who fit with the prototype of women (e.g., those who have feminine features, interests, and characteristics) relative to those who fit less well with this prototype. Studies A1-A5 demonstrate that participants' mental representation of sexual harassment targets overlapped with the prototypes of women as assessed through participant-generated drawings, face selection tasks, reverse correlation, and self-report measures. In Studies B1-B4, participants were less likely to label incidents as sexual harassment when they targeted nonprototypical women compared with prototypical women. In Studies C1 and C2, participants perceived sexual harassment claims to be less credible and the harassment itself to be less psychologically harmful when the victims were nonprototypical women rather than prototypical women. This research offers theoretical and methodological advances to the study of sexual harassment through social cognition and prototypicality perspectives, and it has implications for harassment reporting and litigation as well as the realization of fundamental civil rights. For materials, data, and preregistrations of all studies, see https://osf.io/xehu9/. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

When is women's benevolent sexism associated with support for other women's agentic responses to gender-based threat?

Three studies examine how women's benevolent sexism (BS) shapes support for other women's agentic responses to gender-based threat. In Study 1, women read vignettes about a woman who agentically responded (vs. no response) to gender-based threat (e.g., sexism). As hypothesized, BS predicted more positive attitudes towards the woman who chose not to challenge sexism and more negative attitudes towards the woman who did. Studies 2 and 3 focused on whether these effects are driven by the behaviour displayed by the target (response or not) or by the ideology it seeks to uphold (traditional or non-traditional). There may be circumstances under which BS is associated with positive attitudes towards women's agentic (i.e., non-gender role conforming) behaviour, for instance, when it is used to support traditional gender roles. Studies 2 and 3 showed that when women's agentic behaviour is used to uphold traditional gender roles (vs. challenge them), BS is positively associated with support for such behaviour. These findings underscore the importance of ideology underlying women's agentic behaviour: BS can support women's agentic responses that violate prescribed gender roles, so long as they reinforce the status quo.

Person-Message Fit: Racial Identification Moderates the Benefits of Multicultural and Colorblind Diversity Approaches.

Although diversity approaches attempt to foster inclusion, one size may not fit all. In five studies, African Americans (N = 1,316), who varied in strength of racial identification, contemplated interviewing at a company with a multicultural or colorblind approach. Participants in the multicultural condition anticipated pressure to be prototypical group members relative to colorblind and control conditions. Only weakly identified participants reacted to this pressure, experiencing more anxiety and inauthenticity in the multicultural relative to colorblind (not control) company. Strongly identified participants experienced less anxiety and inauthenticity in the multicultural relative to colorblind and control companies. Inauthenticity among weakly identified participants was apparent in self-descriptions and linked with worse hiring outcomes in multicultural relative to colorblind and control contexts. Despite predictions, there were no self-stereotyping effects. Diversity approaches that make some group members more comfortable may prove simultaneously constraining for others, highlighting the complexity in how diversity approaches affect individuals.

Show Don't Tell: Diversity Dishonesty Harms Racial/Ethnic Minorities at Work.

Organizations aim to convey that they are diverse and inclusive, in part, to recruit racial minorities. We investigate a previously unexamined downside of this recruitment strategy: diversity dishonesty, that is, belief that an organization is falsely or incorrectly inflating its actual diversity. In four studies (total N = 871), we found that diversity dishonesty heightened minorities' concerns about fitting in, being authentic, and performing well at the organization. We also found that evidence-based cues (which "show" observers whether the organization has a positive or negative diversity climate), but not expressed cues (which "tell" observers about the organization's diversity), affect these expectations. Using correlational methodologies, Study 1 found these effects were pertinent to African American and Latinx participants' beliefs about their current workplaces, holding other diversity-related measures constant. Studies 2 to 4 used experimental methods to replicate these findings with African American participants, using a hypothetical workplace setting.

Bargaining while Black: The role of race in salary negotiations.

The influence of race in negotiations has remained relatively underexplored. Across three studies, we theorize and find that Black job seekers are expected to negotiate less than their White counterparts and are penalized in negotiations with lower salary outcomes when this expectation is violated; especially when they negotiate with an evaluator who is more racially biased (i.e., higher in social dominance orientation). Specifically, on the basis of the prescriptive stereotype held by those higher in racial bias-that Black (as compared to White) negotiators deserve lower salaries-we predicted that Black negotiators who behave in counterstereotypical ways encounter greater resistance and more unfavorable outcomes from more biased evaluators. We tested this argument in a stepwise fashion: In Study 1, we found that more biased evaluators expect Black job seekers to negotiate less as compared to White job seekers. When Black negotiators violate those expectations, evaluators award them lower starting salaries (Study 2), which appears to occur because evaluators become more resistant to making concessions to Black than to White job seekers (Study 3). Collectively, our findings demonstrate that racially biased perceptual distortions can be used to justify the provision of smaller monetary awards for Black job seekers in negotiations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

When do high and low status group members support confrontation? The role of perceived pervasiveness of prejudice.

This paper examines how perceived pervasiveness of prejudice differentially affects high and low status group members' support for a low status group member who confronts. In Experiment 1 (N = 228), men and women read a text describing sexism as rare or as pervasive and subsequently indicated their support for a woman who confronted or did not confront a sexist remark. Experiment 2 (N = 324) specified the underlying process using a self-affirmation manipulation. Results show that men were more supportive of confrontation when sexism was perceived to be rare than when it was pervasive. By contrast, women tended to prefer confrontation when sexism was pervasive relative to when it was rare. Personal self-affirmation decreased men's and increased women's support for confrontation when prejudice was rare, suggesting that men's and women's support for confrontation when prejudice is rare is driven by personal impression management considerations. Implications for understanding how members of low and high status groups respond to prejudice are discussed.

Parents' empathic perspective taking and altruistic behavior predicts infants' arousal to others' emotions.

Empathy emerges in children's overt behavior around the middle of the second year of life. Younger infants, however, exhibit arousal in response to others' emotional displays, which is considered to be a precursor to fully developed empathy. The goal of the present study was to investigate individual variability in infants' arousal toward others' emotional displays, as indexed by 12- and 15-month-old infants' (n = 49) pupillary changes in response to another infant's emotions, and to determine whether such variability is linked to parental empathy and prosociality, as indexed via self-report questionnaires. We found that increases in infants' pupil dilation in response to others' emotional displays were associated with aspects of parental empathy and prosociality. Specifically, infants who exhibited the greatest arousal in response to others' emotions had parents who scored highly on empathic perspective taking and self-reported altruism. These relations may have been found because arousal toward others' emotions shares certain characteristics with empathic and prosocial dispositions. Together, these results demonstrate the presence of early variability in a precursor to mature empathic responding in infancy, which is meaningfully linked to parents' empathic dispositions and prosocial behaviors.

Racial progress as threat to the status hierarchy: implications for perceptions of anti-White bias.

In three studies, we examined how racial progress affects Whites' perceptions of anti-White bias. When racial progress was chronically (Study 1) and experimentally (Study 2) salient, Whites who believed the current U.S. status hierarchy was legitimate were more likely to report that Whites were victims of racial discrimination. In contrast, Whites who perceived the current status system as illegitimate were unaffected by the salience of racial progress. The results of Study 3 point to the role of threat in explaining these divergent reactions to racial progress. When self-affirmed, Whites who perceived the status hierarchy as legitimate no longer showed increased perceptions of anti-White bias when confronted with evidence of racial progress. Implications for policies designed to remedy social inequality are discussed.

Presumed fair: ironic effects of organizational diversity structures.

This research tests the hypothesis that the presence (vs. absence) of organizational diversity structures causes high-status group members (Whites, men) to perceive organizations with diversity structures as procedurally fairer environments for underrepresented groups (racial minorities, women), even when it is clear that underrepresented groups have been unfairly disadvantaged within these organizations. Furthermore, this illusory sense of fairness derived from the mere presence of diversity structures causes high-status group members to legitimize the status quo by becoming less sensitive to discrimination targeted at underrepresented groups and reacting more harshly toward underrepresented group members who claim discrimination. Six experiments support these hypotheses in designs using 4 types of diversity structures (diversity policies, diversity training, diversity awards, idiosyncratically generated diversity structures from participants' own organizations) among 2 high-status groups in tests involving several types of discrimination (discriminatory promotion practices, adverse impact in hiring, wage discrimination). Implications of these experiments for organizational diversity and employment discrimination law are discussed.

Racial stereotypes and interracial attraction: phenotypic prototypicality and perceived attractiveness of Asians.

What does it take to find a member of a different race attractive? In this research, we suggest that for Whites, attraction to Asians may be based, in part, on stereotypes and variations in Asians' racial appearance. Study 1 reveals that Asians are stereotyped as being more feminine and less masculine than other racial groups-characteristics considered appealing for women but not for men to possess. Study 2 examines how variation in racial appearance, phenotypic prototypicality (PP), shapes the degree to which Asians are gender stereotyped and how PP relates to perceptions of attractiveness. Higher PP Asian men are perceived as being less masculine and less physically attractive than lower PP Asian men. These findings inform theory on how within-group variation in racial appearance affects stereotyping and other social outcomes.

Distributing prejudice unequally: do Whites direct their prejudice toward strongly identified minorities?

Across 6 studies, Whites expressed more negative attitudes toward strongly identified racial minorities than toward weakly identified minorities. Whites who personally endorsed worldviews that legitimize the status hierarchy were particularly likely to express negative attitudes toward strongly identified minorities relative to weakly identified minorities, whereas Whites who personally rejected status-legitimizing worldviews displayed the opposite pattern. In addition, Whites' biases against strongly identified minorities dissipated when strongly identified minorities expressed strong endorsement of status-legitimizing worldviews. These studies suggest that Whites do not distribute their prejudicial attitudes equally among all members of minority groups and that some subsets of minorities (the strongly identified) might bear the brunt of racial prejudice.

Perceived discrimination as worldview threat or worldview confirmation: implications for self-esteem.

In 3 studies, the authors tested the hypothesis that discrimination targets' worldview moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-esteem among devalued groups. In Study 1, perceiving discrimination against the ingroup was negatively associated with self-esteem among Latino Americans who endorsed a meritocracy worldview (e.g., believed that individuals of any group can get ahead in America and that success stems from hard work) but was positively associated with self-esteem among those who rejected this worldview. Study 2 showed that exposure to discrimination against their ingroup (vs. a non-self-relevant group) led to lower self-esteem, greater feelings of personal vulnerability, and ingroup blame among Latino Americans who endorsed a meritocracy worldview but to higher self-esteem and decreased ingroup blame among Latino Americans who rejected it. Study 3 showed that compared with women informed that prejudice against their ingroup is pervasive, women informed that prejudice against their ingroup is rare had higher self-esteem if they endorsed a meritocracy worldview but lower self-esteem if they rejected this worldview. Findings support the idea that perceiving discrimination against one's ingroup threatens the worldview of individuals who believe that status in society is earned but confirms the worldview of individuals who do not.

Why are attributions to discrimination interpersonally costly? A test of system- and group-justifying motivations.

In two studies, Whites' endorsement of system-justifying beliefs predicted increased negativity toward Blacks who blamed negative events on discrimination. Whites' system-justifying beliefs were not associated with negativity toward Blacks who blamed negative events on other internal causes, external causes, or nondiscriminatory unfairness. These negative reactions toward discrimination claimants were mediated by perceptions that the claimant held dissimilar values and failed to take personal responsibility for outcomes. In both studies, participants' White Identification did not moderate the relationship between the Black target's attribution for failure and subsequent negative perceptions of that individual, thus providing evidence against a group-justification explanation of these findings.

Prejudice expectations moderate preconscious attention to cues that are threatening to social identity.

Two studies examined whether chronic and situational expectations about being stigmatized predict attention toward cues that are threatening to social identity. In Study 1, women's chronic expectations about experiencing sexism were positively associated with their attention toward subliminal cues threatening to their social identity. In Study 2, women were vigilant toward subliminal cues threatening to their social identity when the experimental situation conveyed that their gender was devalued, but not when the experimental situation promoted value and respect for their gender. Women were vigilant toward consciously presented cues threatening to their social identity regardless of the attitudes the experimental context conveyed toward their group. These studies have important theoretical and practical implications for understanding the psychological experience of possessing a devalued social identity.

A prospective investigation of the relationship between just-world beliefs and the desire for revenge after September 11, 2001.

We prospectively examined the relationship between individuals' belief in a just world and their desire for revenge against the perpetrators of the September 11 terrorist attacks against the United States. Eighty-three undergraduate students who had completed a measure of just-world beliefs prior to the terrorist attacks were assessed approximately 2 months following the attacks. The more strongly they had endorsed just-world beliefs prior to the attacks, the more distressed they felt about the attacks and the more they desired revenge. Furthermore, the relationship between belief in a just world and the desire for revenge was mediated by feelings of distress in response to the terrorist attacks. The results point to the importance of justice beliefs in understanding responses to the terrorist attacks.

Expectations about the future and the emotional consequences of perceiving prejudice.

Three studies tested the hypothesis that possessing a pessimistic outlook on life moderates the effects of perceiving sexism on emotions and self-esteem. Across all studies, a pessimistic outlook on life (either dispositionally held or experimentally induced) served as a source of emotional vulnerability among women (Studies 1-3) and men (Study 1) faced with evidence of sexism directed against their gender group. Study 3 demonstrated that one's outlook on life influences emotional adjustment to prejudice through the cognitive appraisal process. Relative to optimists, pessimists appraised sexism as more stressful and believed they possessed fewer resources for coping with it. This research emphasizes the importance of examining sources of vulnerability and resilience in understanding emotional responses to prejudice.

It's not my fault: when and why attributions to prejudice protect self-esteem.

This study tested the hypothesis that awareness of the possibility of being a target of discrimination can provide individuals with a means of self-esteem protection when they are faced with negative outcomes. Men and women contemplated being rejected from a course due to sexism, personal deservingness, or an exclusively external cause. Regardless of gender, participants in the sexism condition blamed themselves less, attributed the rejection less to internal causes, and anticipated feeling less depressed than those in the personal deservingness condition. Furthermore, the more participants discounted the rejection--blamed it more on discrimination than themselves--the less depressed emotions they anticipated feeling. Discounting did not buffer participants from feeling hostility or anxiety. These findings advance our understanding of when and why attributions to prejudice protect emotional well-being.