Beyond Allyship: Motivations for Advantaged Group Members to Engage in Action for Disadvantaged Groups.

White Americans who participate in the Black Lives Matter movement, men who attended the Women's March, and people from the Global North who work to reduce poverty in the Global South-advantaged group members (sometimes referred to as allies) often engage in action for disadvantaged groups. Tensions can arise, however, over the inclusion of advantaged group members in these movements, which we argue can partly be explained by their motivations to participate. We propose that advantaged group members can be motivated to participate in these movements (a) to improve the status of the disadvantaged group, (b) on the condition that the status of their own group is maintained, (c) to meet their own personal needs, and (d) because this behavior aligns with their moral beliefs. We identify potential antecedents and behavioral outcomes associated with these motivations before describing the theoretical contribution our article makes to the psychological literature.

Risk and protective factors for mental health at a youth mass gathering.

BACKGROUND: Mass gatherings are well-documented for their public health risks; however, little research has examined their impact on mental health or focused on young people specifically. This study explores risk and protective factors for mental health at mass gatherings, with a particular focus on characterising attendees with high levels of psychological distress and risk taking. METHOD: Data collection was conducted in situ at "Schoolies", an annual informal week-long mass gathering of approximately 30,000 Australian school leavers. Participants were 812 attendees of Schoolies on the Gold Coast in 2015 or 2016 (74% aged 17 years old). RESULTS: In both years, attendee mental health was found to be significantly better than population norms for their age peers. Identification with the mass gathering predicted better mental health, and this relationship became stronger across the course of the mass gathering. Attendees with high levels of psychological distress were more likely to be male, socially isolated, impulsive, and in a friendship group where risk taking was normative. CONCLUSIONS: Mass gatherings may have a net benefit for attendee mental health, especially for those attendees who are subjectively committed to the event. However, a vulnerable subgroup of attendees requires targeted mental health support.

Applying the Dynamic Dual Pathway Model of Approach Coping to Collective Action Among Advantaged Group Allies and Disadvantaged Group Members.

We apply the dynamic dual pathway model of approach coping to understanding the predictors of future collective action among a sample of advantaged group allies and disadvantaged group members who were attending a protest. We propose that problem-focused approach coping (i.e., group efficacy beliefs) would be a stronger predictor of future collective action among disadvantaged compared to advantaged group members, and emotion-focused approach coping (i.e., group-based anger) would be a stronger predictor of future collective action among advantaged compared to disadvantaged group members. Data was collected from LGBTIQ+ and heterosexual people (N = 189) protesting as part of the 2019 Christopher Street Day Parade in Cologne, Germany. We found that increased group efficacy predicted intentions to engage in future collective action for the rights of sexual minorities among LGBTIQ+ but not heterosexual participants. Increased group-based anger was a predictor of future collective action intentions regardless of which group the participants belonged to. Our findings extend the dynamic dual pathway model by applying it to a sample of advantaged group allies and disadvantaged group members attending a protest using a multiple perspectives approach.

Is the racial composition of your surroundings associated with your levels of social dominance orientation?

We investigate the extent to which minority group members are surrounded by outgroup members in their immediate environment as a predictor of social dominance orientation. Using a large representative sample of New Zealanders, we found that minority group members in outgroup dense environments reported lower levels of social dominance orientation (Study 1). In studies 2 and 3, Asian Australian and Black American participants who were surrounded by outgroup members reported lower social dominance orientation. For majority group (White) participants there was no association between social dominance orientation and outgroup density. Study 4 explained the overall pattern: Black Americans surrounded by outgroup members perceived their group to be of lower status in their immediate environment, and through this, reported lower social dominance orientation. This article adds to growing literature on contextual factors that predict social dominance orientation, especially among minority group members.

Barriers to women engaging in collective action to overcome sexism.

Over centuries women have fought hard to obtain increasing gender equality, but despite these successes absolute equality remains an elusive goal. Theoretically, women's numerical strength makes them well-placed to take effective collective action, and millions of women engage in feminist collective action every day. In this article, however, we argue that women also face barriers to engaging in feminist collective action; barriers that are associated with the social construction and experience of what it means to be a woman. Our review synthesizes sexism research under a contemporary collective action framework to clarify our current understanding of the literature and to offer novel theoretical explanations for why women might be discouraged from engaging in feminist collective action. Using the antecedents of collective action identified by van Zomeren, Postmes, and Spears' (2008) meta-analysis, we critically review the sexism literature to argue that women face challenges when it comes to (a) identifying with other women and feminists, (b) perceiving sexism and expressing group-based anger, and (c) recognizing the efficacy of collective action. We then outline a research agenda with a view to investigating ways of overcoming these barriers. (PsycINFO Database Record

Losing our humanity: the self-dehumanizing consequences of social ostracism.

People not only dehumanize others, they also dehumanize the self in response to their own harmful behavior. We examine this self-dehumanization effect across four studies. Studies 1 and 2 show that when participants are perpetrators of social ostracism, they view themselves as less human compared with when they engage in nonaversive interpersonal interactions. Perceived immorality of their behavior mediated this effect. Studies 3 and 4 highlight the behavioral consequences of self-dehumanization. The extent to which participants saw themselves as less human after perpetrating social ostracism predicted subsequent prosocial behavior. Studies 2 to 4 also demonstrate that consequences of self-dehumanization occur independently of any effects of self-esteem or mood. The findings are discussed in relation to previous work on dehumanization and self-perception. We conclude that in the context of immoral actions (self) dehumanization may be functional.

Don't mind meat? The denial of mind to animals used for human consumption.

Many people like eating meat, but most are reluctant to harm things that have minds. The current three studies show that this dissonance motivates people to deny minds to animals. Study 1 demonstrates that animals considered appropriate for human consumption are ascribed diminished mental capacities. Study 2 shows that meat eaters are motivated to deny minds to food animals when they are reminded of the link between meat and animal suffering. Finally, Study 3 provides direct support for our dissonance hypothesis, showing that expectations regarding the immediate consumption of meat increase mind denial. Moreover, this mind denial in turn reduces negative affect associated with dissonance. The findings highlight the role of dissonance reduction in facilitating the practice of meat eating and protecting cultural commitments.

The contact caveat: negative contact predicts increased prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced prejudice.

Contact researchers have largely overlooked the potential for negative intergroup contact to increase prejudice. In Study 1, we tested the interaction between contact quantity and valence on prejudice toward Black Australians (n = 1,476), Muslim Australians (n = 173), and asylum seekers (n = 293). In all cases, the association between contact quantity and prejudice was moderated by its valence, with negative contact emerging as a stronger and more consistent predictor than positive contact. In Study 2, White Americans (n = 441) indicated how much positive and negative contact they had with Black Americans on separate measures. Although both quantity of positive and negative contact predicted racism and avoidance, negative contact was the stronger predictor. Furthermore, negative (but not positive) contact independently predicted suspicion about Barack Obama's birthplace. These results extend the contact hypothesis by issuing an important caveat: Negative contact may be more strongly associated with increased racism and discrimination than positive contact is with its reduction.