DOCSLIB.ORG

The Effect of Perceived Men's Standards of Injustice On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Effect of Perceived Men's Standards of Injustice On THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED MEN’S STANDARDS OF INJUSTICE ON WOMEN’S RESPONSES TO INEQUALITY By Elle A. Moore The present study investigated the effects of perceived men’s standards of injustice on women’s responses to the inequality of the gender wage gap. Men’s standards of injustice (i.e., outgroup standards of injustice) are defined as the amount of evidence men require to conclude that the existing gender economic inequality is unfair to women (Miron, Branscombe, Kulibert, Moore, & Agnello, in preparation-a; Miron, Branscombe, Moore, & Kulibert, in preparation-b). Work by Miron and colleagues (Miron et al., in preparation-a; b) indicated that women overestimate men’s standards of injustice (e.g., women believe men require more evidence of the gender wage gap to conclude it is unfair in comparison to the amount of evidence that men themselves report requiring). The current study tested 109 female participants and manipulated women’s perception of men’s standards of injustice in order to test the applicability of the Rejection-Identification Model (Branscombe et al., 1999) to women’s experiences with the gender wage gap. Specifically, the current experiment examined the complex relationship between perceived men’s standards of injustice and women’s gender identification, self-esteem, and willingness to reduce inequality. Results were consistent with elements of the Rejection-Identification Model. Women who were informed that men require a low amount of evidence reported stronger identification with their gender group. Furthermore, women’s standards mirrored the manipulated men’s standards. Post- hoc regression analyses indicated that increased gender identity predicted greater willingness only in the high standards and no information conditions. Moreover, high within-group correlations between women’s own standards and manipulated men’s standards in the low standards condition indicated that women feel free to determine for themselves the amount of evidence they need in order to recognize the gender wage gap as unfair when they perceive men as being in solidarity with women. These results also support the notion that solidarity between genders can be an important factor when the goal is reducing gender inequality. Nevertheless, these findings require further replication. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... v LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................... vi CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1 Social Identity Theory .................................................................................... 2 Prejudice and Inequality ................................................................................ 3 Perceiving Inequality ......................................................................... 3 Injustice Standards and the Gender Wage Gap ...................... 4 Psychological Consequences of Perceiving Prejudice ........... 6 Responses to Prejudice and Inequality .................................. 7 Coping Mechanisms ................................................... 7 Rejection-Identification Model .................................. 8 The Proposed Process Model ................................................. 9 The Current Study .......................................................................................... 10 CHAPTER II: METHOD .......................................................................................... 14 Participants ..................................................................................................... 14 Measures ........................................................................................................ 14 Experimental Manipulation ............................................................... 14 Gender Identity Scale ......................................................................... 16 Self-esteem Scale ............................................................................... 16 Willingness to Reduce Inequality ...................................................... 16 Emotion Checklist .............................................................................. 17 Condition Identification ..................................................................... 17 Standards of Injustice ......................................................................... 17 Demographic Questionnaire .............................................................. 18 Exploratory Questionnaires ............................................................... 18 Procedure ....................................................................................................... 19 CHAPTER III: RESULTS ......................................................................................... 20 Data Cleaning ................................................................................................. 20 Manipulation Check ....................................................................................... 20 Gender Identity .............................................................................................. 21 Self-esteem ..................................................................................................... 22 Willingness to Reduce Inequality .................................................................. 23 Additional Analyses ....................................................................................... 23 iii Standards of Injustice ......................................................................... 23 What Predicts Willingness? ............................................................... 24 CHAPTER IV: DISCUSSION .................................................................................. 26 Gender Identification ..................................................................................... 26 Women’s Resilience in the Face of Prejudice ............................................... 27 Women’s Standards of Injustice .................................................................... 28 When Are Women More Willing to Reduce Inequality? .............................. 29 Limitations, Considerations and Future Directions ....................................... 31 Conclusions .................................................................................................... 33 TABLES .................................................................................................................... 35 FIGURES ................................................................................................................... 37 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... 39 APPENDIX A: Informed Consent Form ...................................................... 39 APPENDIX B: Gender Wage Gap Information ........................................... 41 APPENDIX C: Gender Identity Scale .......................................................... 45 APPENDIX D: Flourishing Scale ................................................................. 47 APPENDIX E: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale .............................................. 49 APPENDIX F: Willingness to Reduce Inequality ........................................ 51 APPENDIX G: Emotions Checklist ............................................................. 53 APPENDIX H: Condition Identification ...................................................... 56 APPENDIX I: Estimated Outgroup Standards of Injustice .......................... 58 APPENDIX J: Standards of Injustice ........................................................... 62 APPENDIX K: Demographic Questionnaire ................................................ 66 APPENDIX L: Debriefing Form .................................................................. 70 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 73 iv LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Predictions for each experimental condition with simple planned contrast coding ................................................................................... 35 Table 2. Means and standard deviations for index scores by experimental condition ............................................................................................ 36 v LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. The Rejection-Identification Model ................................................... 37 Figure 2. The Proposed Process Model ............................................................. 38 vi 1 Chapter I Introduction The gender wage gap, in which women’s earnings are approximately equal to 80% of men’s earnings (National Partnership for Women & Families, 2017), holds true across a variety of occupations. For example, women earn 91% of men’s earnings for construction and extraction jobs, though only 56.7% of men’s earnings in legal positions (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). However, men and women perceive the social inequality of the gender wage gap differently, likely due to the differing amounts of evidence that men and women require to conclude that the existing economic inequality is unfair to women (i.e., injustice standards), with men requiring significantly higher amounts of evidence to recognize this injustice in comparison to women (Miron, Warner, & Branscombe, 2011). Interestingly however,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Overcoming Stigma to Thrive
    L. Sookram PhD. Victoria Osler CPWS Mary Ahern CPWS Jen Hazuka CPWS Introductions –Presenters and Panel (8- 10min) Slides and comments (1-9) to Panel (15- 20min) Panel (T-M-J) (10-10-10 min) Summarizing and Strategies (15-20min) Wrap-up questions (10 Min) Participants will : ◦ Learn how to Identify the experiences that led to personal biases about themselves and others with Mental Health Challenges (MHC) ◦ Hear the real life experiences of self stigma and recovery from a peer panel and ◦ Learn about strategies to manage self stigma (archaic ): a scar left by a hot iron : brand : a mark of shame or discredit An identifying mark or characteristic; specifically : a specific diagnostic sign of a disease Examples of stigma in a sentence There's a social stigma attached to receiving welfare. the stigma of slavery remained long after it had been abolished What is mental health stigma?: Mental health stigma can be divided into two distinct types: social stigma is characterized by prejudicial attitudes and discriminating behaviour directed towards individuals with mental health problems as a result of the psychiatric label they have been given. In contrast, perceived stigma or self-stigma is the internalizing by the mental health sufferer of their perceptions of discrimination (Link, Cullen, Struening & Shrout, 1989), and perceived stigma can significantly affect feelings of shame and lead to poorer treatment outcomes (Perlick, Rosenheck, Clarkin, Sirey et al., CLD Graham Ph.D. (2013 post). Mental Health and Stigma. Bias (ˈbaɪəs) n1. mental tendency or inclination, especially an irrational preference or prejudice 2. (Knitting & Sewing) a diagonal line or cut across the weave of a fabric A conviction that a point of view or belief is right for one’s life’s circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward Gender Equality: Progress and Bottlenecks
    Chapter 8 Toward Gender Equality: Progress and Bottlenecks Paula England s the significance of gender declining in America? Are men's and women's lives and rewards becoming more similar? To answer this question, I examine trends in market work and unpaid household work, including child care. I consider whether men's and women's employment and hours in paid work are converging, and examine trends in occupational sex segregation and the sex gap in pay. I also consider trends in men's and women's hours of paid work and household work. The emergent picture is one Iof convergence within each of the two areas of paid and unpaid work. Yet progress is not continuous and has stalled recently. Sometimes it continues on one front and stops on another. Gender change is also asymmetric in two ways: things have changed in paid work more than in the household, and women have dramatically increased their participation in formerly "male" activities, but men's inroads into traditionally female occupations or household tasks is very limited by comparison. I consider what these trends portend for the future of gender inequality. Robert Max Jackson argues (see chapter 7, this volume) that continued progress toward gender inequality is inevitable. I agree with him that many forces push in the direction of treating similarly situated men and women equally in bureaucratic organizations. Nonetheless, I conclude that the two related asymmetries in gender change—the sluggish change in the household and in men taking on traditionally female activities in any sphere- create bottlenecks that can dampen if not reverse egalitarian trends.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Acknowledging the Impact of Discrimination, Stigma, and Implicit Bias on Provision of Services
    aota.org AOTA’s Guide to Acknowledging the Impact of Discrimination, Stigma, and Implicit Bias on Provision of Services Introduction Protests against racial violence, systemic racism, and the COVID-19 pandemic highlight the longstanding impact of racial discrimination, inequality, and social determinants of health within the American population. Occupational therapy practitioners can address such issues to enhance access to care, improve treatment outcomes, and advocate for equity in service provision for the clients they serve. In addition, recognizing the intersectionality of age, gender identity, sexual orientation, nationality, socioeconomic status, religion, disability, and other forms of social identity is imperative. The following provides an overview of the implications of discrimination, stigma, and implicit bias on provision of occupational therapy services. What is Discrimination? As described by Healthy People 2020, discrimination presents in many forms: Unjust or unfair action Social behaviors that leverage protection of a group in power over those from less privileged groups Promotion of privilege of one group that negatively affects others Discrimination is an important aspect of the social and community context of social determinants of health (Healthy People 2020). With occupation being embedded within context, the various forms of discrimination negatively affect health and well-being. One may experience discrimination based on age, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, disability, and other forms of social identity. Occupational therapy practitioners must support, promote, and advocate for the health and well-being of everyone. See AOTA’s Official Document on Occupational Therapy in the Promotion of Health and Well-Being. Moreover, discrimination affects the occupational therapy process, including evaluation, intervention, and outcomes of occupational therapy service provision.
    [Show full text]
  • Preventing and Addressing Social Stigma Associated with COVID-19
    Social Stigma associated with COVID-19 A guide to preventing and addressing 1 social stigma Target audience: Government, media and local organisations working on the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19). WHAT IS SOCIAL STIGMA? Social stigma in the context of health is the negative association between a person or group of people who share certain characteristics and a specific disease. In an outbreak, this may mean people are labelled, stereotyped, discriminated against, treated separately, and/or experience loss of status because of a perceived link with a disease. Such treatment can negatively affect those with the disease, as well as their caregivers, family, friends and communities. People who don’t have the disease but share other characteristics with this group may also suffer from stigma. The current COVID-19 outbreak has provoked social stigma and discriminatory behaviours against people of certain ethnic backgrounds as well as anyone perceived to have been in contact with the virus. WHY IS COVID-19 CAUSING SO MUCH STIGMA? The level of stigma associated with COVID-19 is based on three main factors: 1) it is a disease that’s new and for which there are still many unknowns; 2) we are often afraid of the unknown; and 3) it is easy to associate that fear with ‘others’. It is understandable that there is confusion, anxiety, and fear among the public. Unfortunately, these factors are also fueling harmful stereotypes. WHAT IS THE IMPACT? Stigma can undermine social cohesion and prompt possible social isolation of groups, which might contribute to a situation where the virus is more, not less, likely to spread.
    [Show full text]
  • AIDS, Mental Illness, and Physical Disability Fatimah Jackson-Best1* and Nancy Edwards2
    Jackson-Best and Edwards BMC Public Health (2018) 18:919 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5861-3 RESEARCHARTICLE Open Access Stigma and intersectionality: a systematic review of systematic reviews across HIV/ AIDS, mental illness, and physical disability Fatimah Jackson-Best1* and Nancy Edwards2 Abstract Background: Stigma across HIV/AIDS, mental illness, and physical disability can be co-occurring and may interact with other forms of stigma related to social identities like race, gender, and sexuality. Stigma is especially problematic for people living with these conditions because it can create barriers to accessing necessary social and structural supports, which can intensify their experiences with stigma. This review aims to contribute to the knowledge on stigma by advancing a cross-analysis of HIV/AIDS, mental illness, and physical disability stigma, and exploring whether and how intersectionality frameworks have been used in the systematic reviews of stigma. Methods: A search of the literature was conducted to identify systematic reviews which investigated stigma for HIV/ AIDS, mental illness and/or physical disability. The electronic databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, COCHRANE, and PsycINFO were searched for reviews published between 2005 and 2017. Data were extracted from eligible reviews on: type of systematic review and number of primary studies included in the review, study design study population(s), type(s) of stigma addressed, and destigmatizing interventions used. A keyword search was also done using the terms “intersectionality”, “intersectional”,and“intersection”; related definitions and descriptions were extracted. Matrices were used to compare the characteristics of reviews and their application of intersectional approaches across the three health conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • African Americans Respond to Stigmatization: the Meanings and Salience of Confronting, Deflecting Conflict, Educating the Ignorant and ‘Managing the Self’
    African Americans respond to stigmatization: the meanings and salience of confronting, deflecting conflict, educating the ignorant and ‘managing the self’ The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Fleming, Crystal, Michèle Lamont, and Jessica Welburn. 2012. African Americans respond to stigmatization: the meanings and salience of confronting, deflecting conflict, educating the ignorant and ‘managing the self.’ Ethnic and Racial Studies 35, no. 3: 400-417. Published Version doi:10.1080/01419870.2011.589527 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:10482582 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP Responding to Stigmatization and Gaining Recognition: Evidence from Middle Class and Working Class African-Americans Crystal Fleming Michèle Lamont And Jessica Welburn Abstract Drawing on interviews with 150 randomly sampled African-Americans, we analyze how members of a stigmatized group understand their experience of stigmatization and assess appropriate responses when asked about best approach to deal with stigmatization and about responses to specific incidents. Combining in-depth interviews with a systematic coding of the data, we make original contributions to the previous literature by identifying the relative salience of modalities and tools for responding. We also examine closely through qualitative data the two most salient modalities of response, “confronting” and “deflating” conflict, the most salient tools, teaching out- group members about African-Americans, and “the management of the self,” a rationale for deflating conflict that is largely overlooked in previous studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Changing Cultural and Social Norms That Support Violence
    Changing cultural and social norms that support violence Series of briefings on violence prevention This briefing for advocates, programme designers and implementers and others is one of a seven-part series on the evidence for interventions to prevent interpersonal and self-directed violence. The other six briefings look at reducing access to lethal means; increasing safe, stable and nurturing relationships between children and their parents and caregivers; develop ing life skills in children and adolescents; reducing availabil- ity and misuse of alcohol; promoting gender equality; and victim identification, care and support. For a searchable evidence base on interventions to prevent violence, please go to: www.preventviolence.info For a library of violence prevention publications, including the other briefings in this series, please go to: http://www.who.int/violenceprevention/publications/en/index.html WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data Changing cultural and social norms supportive of violent behaviour. (Series of briefings on violence prevention: the evidence) 1.Violence – prevention and control. 2.Domestic violence – prevention and control. 3.Social behavior. 4.Health policy. I.World Health Organization. ISBN 978 92 4 159833 0 (NLM classification: HV 6625) © World Health Organization 2009 All rights reserved. Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from WHO Press, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel.: +41 22 791 3264; fax: +41 22 791 4857; e-mail: [email protected]). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications – whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution – should be addressed to WHO Press, at the above address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; e-mail: [email protected]).
    [Show full text]
  • Social Stigma During COVID-19 and Its Impact on Hcws Outcomes
    sustainability Communication Social Stigma during COVID-19 and its Impact on HCWs Outcomes Tiziana Ramaci 1 , Massimiliano Barattucci 2,* , Caterina Ledda 3 and Venerando Rapisarda 3 1 Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, Kore University of Enna, 94100 Enna, Italy; [email protected] 2 Faculty of Psychology, e-Campus University, 22060 Novedrate (CO), Italy 3 Occupational Medicine, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Catania, 95121 Catania, Italy; [email protected] (C.L.); [email protected] (V.R.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 21 April 2020; Accepted: 5 May 2020; Published: 8 May 2020 Abstract: The COVID-19 emergency has significantly transformed the working environment and job demands. Providing care was emotionally difficult for healthcare workers. Uncertainty, stigmatisation, and potentially exposing their families to infection were prominent themes for healthcare workers (HCWs) during the crisis, which first broke out in China at the end of 2019, and then in Italy in early 2020. This study examined the effects of stigma, job demands, and self-esteem, and the consequences of working as a “frontline care provider” with patients infected with the coronavirus (COVID-19). A correlational design study involved 260 healthcare workers (HCWs) working in a large hospital in southern Italy. The following questionnaires were administered: (1) the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ), for assessing psychological and physical demands; (2) the Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL) to measure the quality individuals feel in relation to their work as “frontline care providers”, through three dimensions: compassion fatigue (CF), burnout (BO), and compassion satisfaction (CS); (3) the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, for evaluating individual self-esteem; (4) a self-administered multiple-choice questionnaire developed by See et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Matter of A-B-, 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018)
    Cite as 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018) Interim Decision #3929 Matter of A-B-, Respondent Decided by Attorney General June 11, 2018 U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General (1) Matter of A-R-C-G-, 26 I&N Dec. 338 (BIA 2014) is overruled. That decision was wrongly decided and should not have been issued as a precedential decision. (2) An applicant seeking to establish persecution on account of membership in a “particular social group” must demonstrate: (1) membership in a group, which is composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, is defined with particularity, and is socially distinct within the society in question; and (2) that membership in the group is a central reason for her persecution. When the alleged persecutor is someone unaffiliated with the government, the applicant must also show that her home government is unwilling or unable to protect her. (3) An asylum applicant has the burden of showing her eligibility for asylum. The applicant must present facts that establish each element of the standard, and the asylum officer, immigration judge, or the Board has the duty to determine whether those facts satisfy all of those elements. (4) If an asylum application is fatally flawed in one respect, an immigration judge or the Board need not examine the remaining elements of the asylum claim. (5) The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim. (6) To be cognizable, a particular social group must exist independently of the harm asserted in an application for asylum.
    [Show full text]
  • Stigma for Common Mental Disorders in Racial Minorities and Majorities A
    Eylem et al. BMC Public Health (2020) 20:879 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08964-3 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Stigma for common mental disorders in racial minorities and majorities a systematic review and meta-analysis Ozlem Eylem1,2* , Leonore de Wit1, Annemieke van Straten1, Lena Steubl3, Zaneta Melissourgaki4, Gözde Topgüloğlu Danışman5, Ralph de Vries6, Ad J. F. M. Kerkhof1, Kamaldeep Bhui2 and Pim Cuijpers1 Abstract Background: There is a strong stigma attached to mental disorders preventing those affected from getting psychological help. The consequences of stigma are worse for racial and/or ethnic minorities compared to racial and/or ethnic majorities since the former often experience other social adversities such as poverty and discrimination within policies and institutions. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis summarizing the evidence on the impact of differences in mental illness stigma between racial minorities and majorities. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis included cross-sectional studies comparing mental illness stigma between racial minorities and majorities. Systematic searches were conducted in the bibliographic databases of PubMed, PsycINFO and EMBASE until 20th December 2018. Outcomes were extracted from published reports, and meta-analyses, and meta-regression analyses were conducted in CMA software. Results: After screening 2787 abstracts, 29 studies with 193,418 participants (N = 35,836 in racial minorities) were eligible for analyses. Racial minorities showed more stigma than racial majorities (g = 0.20 (95% CI: 0.12 ~ 0.27) for common mental disorders. Sensitivity analyses showed robustness of these results. Multivariate meta-regression analyses pointed to the possible moderating role of the number of studies with high risk of bias on the effect size.
    [Show full text]
  • Experience of Discrimination and the ADA
    Experience of Discrimination and the ADA An ADA Knowledge Translation Center Research Brief Sarah Parker Harris Rob Gould Department of Disability and Human Development University of Illinois at Chicago 2019 What is the ADA? The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a civil rights law that creates a legal framework for people with disabilities to address discrimination. Passed in 1990, the ADA represents bipartisan support for disability inclusion in all aspects of public life. Through the ADA, disability is a recognized source of discrimination, similar to “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” within the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The ADA allows individuals with disabilities to challenge discrimination in the realms of employment, public services, and places of public use. The overarching goal of the ADA is to promote equal opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for all people with disabilities. ADA and Experiences of Discrimination Developing a law that prohibits discrimination and creates regulations around access was, and continues to be, an important step in addressing barriers to inclusion. Disability- based discrimination is often related to both prejudices as well as broader social barriers that deny people with disabilities equal opportunities. Some researchers describe the goal of the ADA “…to integrate persons with disabilities into the social mainstream,” (p. 13).1 The ADA has regulations to address structural barriers (i.e. physical and programmatic issues) and discriminatory practices, in order to impact attitudes towards disability. www.adata.org 2 2019 Much of the research on discrimination is about causes and frequency of negative attitudes held by people without disabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Indian Caste System and Its Impact on India Today
    HISTORY OF THE INDIAN CASTE SYSTEM AND ITS IMPACT ON INDIA TODAY By Manali S. Deshpande Advised by Dr. Harold Kerbo SOCS 461, 462 Senior Project Social Sciences Department College of Liberal Arts CALIFORNIA POLYTHECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY, San Luis Obispo Fall, 2010 Table of Contents I. Research Proposal II. Annotated Bibliography III. Outline IV. Final Paper i. Introduction ii. Caste Structure and Characteristics iii. Origins and History iv. Religion, Culture, and Caste v. Movements and Political Policies against Caste vi. Modern India vii. Conclusion V. Bibliography Research Proposal The Indian Caste System is historically one of the main dimensions where people in India are socially differentiated through class, religion, region, tribe, gender, and language. Although this or other forms of differentiation exist in all human societies, it becomes a problem when one or more of these dimensions overlap each other and become the sole basis of systematic ranking and unequal access to valued resources like wealth, income, power and prestige. The Indian Caste System is considered a closed system of stratification, which means that a person’s social status is obligated to which caste they were born into. There are limits on interaction and behavior with people from another social status. This paper will be exploring the various aspects of the Indian caste system and its effects on India today. The caste system is a classification of people into four hierarchically ranked castes called varnas. They are classified according to occupation and determine access to wealth, power, and privilege. The Brahmans, usually priests and scholars, are at the top. Next are the Kshatriyas, or political rulers and soldiers.
    [Show full text]