Meta-stereotype activation: evidence from indirect measures for specific evaluative concerns experienced by members of dominant groups in intergroup interaction

Mobilizing or Sedative Effects? A Narrative Review of the Association Between Intergroup Contact and Collective Action Among Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups

ACADEMIC ABSTRACT

In this narrative review, we examined 134 studies of the relationship between intergroup contact and collective action benefiting disadvantaged groups. We aimed to identify whether, when, and why contact has mobilizing effects (promoting collective action) or sedative effects (inhibiting collective action). For both moderators and mediators, factors associated with the intergroup situation (compared with those associated with the out-group or the in-group) emerged as the most important. Group status had important effects. For members of socially advantaged groups (examined in 98 studies, 100 samples), contact had a general mobilizing effect, which was stronger when contact increased awareness of experiences of injustice among members of disadvantaged groups. For members of disadvantaged groups (examined in 49 studies, 58 samples), contact had mixed effects. Contact that increased awareness of injustice mobilized collection action; contact that made the legitimacy of group hierarchy or threat of retaliation more salient produced sedative effects.

PUBLIC ABSTRACT

We present a review of existing studies that have investigated the relationship between intergroup contact and collective action aimed at promoting equity for disadvantaged groups. We further consider the influence of contact that is positive or negative and face-to-face or indirect (e.g., through mass or social media), and we distinguish between collective action that involves socially acceptable behaviors or is destructive and violent. We identified 134 studies, considering both advantaged (100 samples) and disadvantaged groups (58 samples). We found that intergroup contact impacts collective action differently depending on group status. Contact generally leads advantaged groups to mobilize in favor of disadvantaged groups. However, contact has variable effects on members of disadvantaged groups: It sometimes promotes their collective action in support of their own group; in other cases, it leads them to be less likely to engage in such action. We examine when and why contact can have these different effects.

The Way They See Us: Examining the Content, Accuracy, and Bias of Metaperceptions Held by Syrian Refugees About the Communities That Host Them

Discourse about people seeking refuge from conflict varies considerably. To understand what components of this discourse reach refugees the most, we examined refugees' perceptions of how their host communities perceive them (i.e., intergroup metaperceptions). We sampled refugees who fled Syria to Jordan, Lebanon, Germany, and the Netherlands. Focus groups with 102 Syrian refugees revealed that the most prevalent metaperception discussed by refugees was that they thought their host communities saw them as threatening (Study 1). Surveys with 1,360 Syrian refugees and 1,441 members of the host communities (Study 2) found that refugees' metaperceptions tracked the perceptions held by their host communities (i.e., they were accurate), but there was also a significant mean difference, indicating that they were positively biased. Analyses further tested the roles of evaluative concern and group salience on metaperception accuracy, as well as differences in accuracy and bias across country and perception domain.

Uniting Through Difference: Rich Cultural-Identity Expression as a Conduit to Inclusion

Although previous research suggests that bringing attention to minority cultural identities in the workplace can lead to professional penalties, this research provides promising evidence that the opposite can occur. I examine how cultural minority employees engaging in rich and meaningful conversations about their racial, ethnic, and national backgrounds (referred to as rich cultural-identity expression) influences majority-group coworkers’ inclusive behaviors, such as majority-group employees’ willingness to socially integrate with and professionally support minority coworkers. Three experiments found evidence of majority-group employees behaving more—not less—inclusively toward minority coworkers who engaged in rich cultural-identity expression, as opposed to small talk that did not bring attention to a minority cultural background. Even when minority employees richly expressed negatively valenced cultural information that could provoke anxiety (such as issues with discrimination), this form of sharing had positive effects on most measures of inclusive behavior in Studies 2 and 3 (although one exception was found in Study 3). No benefits were observed when minority employees engaged in surface-level cultural-identity expression (Studies 2 and 3) and intimate, noncultural self-disclosure (Study 2). The power of rich cultural-identity expression is its ability to increase majority-group individuals’ status perceptions of, feelings of closeness to, and sense of learning potential from minority coworkers. This research provides promising evidence that minority employees may be able to express valued aspects of their cultural identities while gaining—as opposed to jeopardizing—inclusion.

Funding: This work was supported by the Wharton Behavioral Laboratory and the Wharton Dean’s Research Fund.

Supplemental Material: The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1648 .

Black and Latinx conservatives upshift competence relative to liberals in mostly white settings

Racial minorities vary in their sociopolitical views, as figures such as Barack Obama and Ted Cruz often demonstrate. Here, I examine the implications for interracial behaviour, proposing that Black and Latinx conservatives-specifically, those who are more supportive of hierarchy-upshift competence relative to liberals in mostly white settings, distancing themselves from stereotypes. Analysing 250,000 Congressional remarks and 1 million tweets revealed that Black and Latinx conservatives (determined by voting behaviour) referenced high power and ability more than liberals. No such pattern emerged for white politicians. A meta-analysis of four experiments further revealed that Black conservatives (determined by social dominance orientation) referenced high status more than liberals when responding to a white (but not Black) partner. This was robust to controls and unique to hierarchy-based conservatism. Finally, analysing 18,000 editorials suggested the following implications: the more minority conservatives referenced power in Congress, the more journalists referenced power in editorials about them. The findings highlight the diverse ideology of racial minorities, as well as the behavioural implications.

Understanding and combating misperceived polarization

By many accounts politics is becoming more polarized, yielding dire consequences for democracy and trust in government. Yet a growing body of research on so-called false polarization finds that perceptions of 'what the other side believes' are inaccurate-specifically, overly pessimistic-and that these inaccuracies exacerbate intergroup conflict. Through a review of existing work and a reanalysis of published data, we (i) develop a typology of the disparate phenomena that are labelled 'polarization', (ii) use that typology to distinguish actual from (mis)perceived polarization, and (iii) identify when misperceived polarization gives rise to actual polarization (e.g. extreme issue attitudes and prejudice). We further suggest that a specific psychological domain is ideal for developing corrective interventions: meta-perception, one's judgement of how they are perceived by others. We review evidence indicating that correcting meta-perception inaccuracies is effective at reducing intergroup conflict and discuss methods for precisely measuring meta-perception accuracy. We argue that the reputational nature of meta-perception provides a motivational mechanism by which individuals are sensitive to the truth, even when those truths pertain to the 'other side'. We conclude by discussing how these insights can be integrated into existing research seeking to understand polarization and its negative consequences. This article is part of the theme issue 'The political brain: neurocognitive and computational mechanisms'.

Metastereotypes impairing doctor-patient relations: The roles of intergroup anxiety and patient trust

This study examined whether patients' negative metastereotypes undermine their perception of doctor-patient relations through raising their intergroup anxiety and decreasing their trust level. One hundred twenty-four outpatients from a Chinese hospital participated in this study; they were randomly assigned to either the negative metastereotype activation (NMSA) or the non-NMSA condition according to different instructions. Then, they were asked to complete the Intergroup Anxiety, Patient Trust, and Doctor-Patient Relations Scale. Patients' negative metastereotypes undermined doctor-patient relations through the mediation of intergroup anxiety and patient trust (i.e., the independent mediation effect of intergroup anxiety and patient trust) and the serial mediation effect of intergroup anxiety and patient trust. These findings suggest that future research consider intergroup anxiety and patient trust in developing interventions to improve doctor-patient relations.

When Might Heterosexual Men Be Passive or Compassionate Toward Gay Victims of Hate Crime? Integrating the Bystander and Social Loafing Explanations

Compassionate feelings for people who are victimized because of their perceived sexual deviance (e.g., gay men) may be incompatible with support for heterosexual norms among heterosexual men. But, indifference (or passivity) toward such victims could raise concern over heterosexual men's gay-tolerance attitude. Two classic social psychological theories offer competing explanations on when heterosexual men might be passive or compassionate toward gay victims of hate crime. The bystander model proposes passivity toward victims in an emergency situation if other bystanders are similarly passive, but compassionate reactions if bystanders are responsive to the victims. Conversely, the social loafing model proposes compassionate reactions toward victims when bystanders are passive, but passivity when other bystanders are already responsive toward the victims' predicament. We tested and found supportive evidence for both models across two experiments (N_total = 501) in which passivity and compassionate reactions to gay victims of a purported hate crime were recorded after heterosexual men's concern for social evaluation was either accentuated or relaxed. We found that the bystander explanation was visible only when the potential for social evaluation was strong, while the social loafing account occurred only when the potential for social evaluation was relaxed. Hence, we unite both models by showing that the bystander explanation prevails in situations where cues to social evaluation are strong, whereas the social loafing effect operates when concern over social judgement is somewhat muted.

Exaggerated meta-perceptions predict intergroup hostility between American political partisans

People's actions toward a competitive outgroup can be motivated not only by their perceptions of the outgroup, but also by how they think the outgroup perceives the ingroup (i.e., meta-perceptions). Here, we examine the prevalence, accuracy, and consequences of meta-perceptions among American political partisans. Using a representative sample (n = 1,056) and a longitudinal convenience sample (n = 2,707), we find that Democrats and Republicans equally dislike and dehumanize each other but think that the levels of prejudice and dehumanization held by the outgroup party are approximately twice as strong as actually reported by a representative sample of Democrats and Republicans. Overestimations of negative meta-perceptions were consistent across samples over time and between demographic subgroups but were modulated by political ideology: More strongly liberal Democrats and more strongly conservative Republicans were particularly prone to exaggerate meta-perceptions. Finally, we show that meta-prejudice and meta-dehumanization are independently associated with the desire for social distance from members of the outgroup party and support for policies that harm the country and flout democratic norms to favor the ingroup political party. This research demonstrates that partisan meta-perceptions are subject to a strong negativity bias with Democrats and Republicans agreeing that the shadow of partisanship is much larger than it actually is, which fosters mutual intergroup hostility.

Inaccurate group meta-perceptions drive negative out-group attributions in competitive contexts

Across seven experiments and one survey (n = 4,282), people consistently overestimated out-group negativity towards the collective behaviour of their in-group. This negativity bias in group meta-perception was present across multiple competitive (but not cooperative) intergroup contexts and appears to be yoked to group psychology more generally; we observed negativity bias for estimation of out-group, anonymized-group and even fellow in-group members' perceptions. Importantly, in the context of US politics, greater inaccuracy was associated with increased belief that the out-group is motivated by purposeful obstructionism. However, an intervention that informed participants of the inaccuracy of their beliefs reduced negative out-group attributions, and was more effective for those whose group meta-perceptions were more inaccurate. In sum, we highlight a pernicious bias in social judgements of how we believe 'they' see 'our' behaviour, demonstrate how such inaccurate beliefs can exacerbate intergroup conflict and provide an avenue for reducing the negative effects of inaccuracy.

Group Status Modulates the Associative Strength Between Status Quo Supporting Beliefs and Anti-Black Attitudes

What belief systems are associated with negative attitudes toward lower status groups? Does the relationship differ across higher and lower status groups? We examined the extent to which status quo supporting beliefs (social dominance orientation and conservatism) were associated with negative attitudes toward African Americans and whether the strength of the relationship varied between members of higher and lower status racial groups. On explicit and implicit measures, status quo supporting beliefs were associated with negative attitudes toward African Americans among members of higher (White) and lower status (Black, Hispanic, and Asian) racial groups. The association was stronger among Whites than racial minorities and was stronger among Asians and Latinos than Blacks. Status quo supporting beliefs are associated with negative attitudes toward lower status groups regardless of one’s group status, but the strength of the association is greatest among the societally advantaged.

Being Seen As Individuals Versus As Group Members: Extending Research on Metaperception to Intergroup Contexts

Recent research has begun to examine people's expectations for how they are viewed in intergroup contexts, yet little work has considered how these metaperceptions relate to those that emerge in interpersonal contexts. As we extend research on metaperceptions into the intergroup realm, we must address several important conceptual issues. In this article, we provide a general overview of research on interpersonal metaperceptions, along with many factors that are likely to affect whether people think they are viewed as individuals or as group members. We also consider how metaperceptions are likely to be formed differently in interpersonal and intergroup contexts, and depending on the group membership of the perceiver We then explore the consequences of different kinds of metaperceptions for intergroup relations, and how they relate to strategies we might use to improve intergroup relations, to suggest future directions for research on metaperceptions in intergroup contexts.

Promoting the “Social” in the Examination of Social Stigmas

This review highlights the value of empirical investigations examining actual interactions that occur between stigmatizers and targets, and is intended to stimulate and help guide research of this type. We identify trends in the literature demonstrating that research studying ongoing interactions between stigmatizers and targets is relatively less common than in the past. Interactive studies are challenging, complex, and have variables that are sometimes more difficult to control; yet, they offer unique insights and significant contributions to understanding stigma-related phenomena that may not be offered in other (e.g., self-report) paradigms. This article presents a conceptual and empirical overview of stigma research, delineates the unique contributions that have been made by conducting interactive studies, and proposes what can be further learned by conducting more of such research.

Empathy by dominant versus minority group members in intergroup interaction: Do dominant group members always come out on top?

What power dynamics are instantiated when a minority group member empathizes with a dominant group member during social interaction? How do these dynamics compare to those instantiated when the dominant group member instead does the empathizing? According to a general power script account, because empathy is generally directed “down” toward disadvantaged targets needing support, the empathizer should come out “on top” with respect to power-relevant outcomes no matter who it is. According to a meta-stereotype account, because adopting an empathic stance in intergroup contexts leads individuals to think about how their own group is viewed (including with respect to power-relevant characteristics), the dominant group member might come out on top no matter which person empathizes. Two studies involving face-to-face intergroup exchanges yielded results that overall were consistent with the meta-stereotype account: Regardless of who does it, empathy in intergroup contexts seems more apt to exacerbate than mitigate group-based status differences.

Spanning Two Worlds: Social Identity and Emergent African-American Leaders

The literature that explores African-American leadership has largely examined the institutional and societal factors that threaten the likelihood that African-Americans will emerge or be successful as leaders. However, in recent years, the emergence of African-Americans in key executive positions within the Fortune 500 suggests that select individuals are managing to overcome external threats to success. I argue that the social identity literature provides fresh theoretical perspectives for understanding the determinants of behavior that enable minorities to navigate institutional barriers to advancement. This literature enables the examination of leadership as a function of ingrouplout-group membership. This paper focuses on choice in identification as an antecedent of leadership attributions, and possibly, success. This is an important perspective because it enables the analysis of African Americans as members of multiple constituents groups, specifically, various work groups and political coalitions (which all nascent leaders must negotiate) and the African-American ethnicity (into which they are born and may feel some degree of duty). The role of social context is also explored.

Perceptions and Metaperceptions of Negative Evaluation: Group Composition and Meta-Accuracy in a Social Relations Model

This study examined whether socially stigmatized individuals (cigarette smokers) use unique person perception strategies during interaction with out-group individuals (nonsmokers), as well as implications for meta-accuracy. Undergraduate students ( N = 104) were divided into groups of four, representing one of three compositions: all smokers, all nonsmokers, or two smokers with two nonsmokers. Participants interacted with each group member, evaluated each other, and guessed partners' evaluations of themselves (metaperceptions). Contrary to past findings, smokers' metaperceptions of out-group members were not consistent across targets. Instead, smokers' metaperceptions were influenced by the smoking status of interaction partners. Moreover, smokers interacting with nonsmokers were least accurate in their metaperceptions, compared to other dyad combinations. Connections between metaperception and meta-accuracy are discussed.

Interpersonal Concerns in Social Encounters between Majority and Minority Group Members

Dyadic interactions between Whites and Blacks were examined. Whites' concern about appearing prejudiced was manipulated by informing Whites that it was extremely important not to be prejudiced during the interaction. Blacks' concern about being the target of prejudice was manipulated by informing them that their dyadic partner was prejudiced against Blacks. The findings show that these two concerns differentially impacted individuals' own and their partner's experiences in the interaction. Specifically, Whites who tried not to be prejudiced experienced more anxiety and enjoyed the interaction less, but were liked more by their Black partner. Additionally, Blacks who believed their partner was prejudiced enjoyed the interaction more, and their White partner experienced less anxiety and enjoyed the interaction more. The implications of these findings for interpersonal intergroup encounters are discussed.

Taking Seriously Ingroup Self-Evaluation, Meta-Prejudice, and Prejudice in Analyzing Interreligious Relations

The present study aims to understand the conditions where prejudice can be predicted by ingroup and outgroup meta-prejudice. The data collecting was disseminated toward Muslim and Christian participants (N = 362) living in Maumere, Flores Island, Indonesia. In Flores, Christianity is the largest religion and Islam is the second. Across two samples, the effects of ingroup and outgroup meta-prejudice on prejudice were found to be moderated by ingroup self-evaluation. It shows that at high level (but not low) of positive ingroup self-evaluation, ingroup and outgroup meta-prejudice were found to predict prejudice. The results suggest that it is important to consider how group members evaluate their own group and how group members think what others are thinking, in the study pertaining to intergroup relations.

Valence matters: Positive meta-stereotypes and interethnic interactions

Two experimental studies were conducted that aimed at testing whether the activation of positive meta-stereotypes among high-status group members involved in conflictual relationships with the low-status group is beneficial for intergroup relations. Results revealed that the activation of positive meta-stereotypes led Italian high-school students (high-status group) to anticipate greater enjoyment of an upcoming interaction with an African immigrant (low-status group) by increasing positive feelings about contact and concerns about being accepted. Initial prejudice emerged as the moderator, with the effects of positive meta-stereotypes present among those with average- to high-levels of prejudice. This study represents the first experimental demonstration that positive meta-stereotypes have beneficial effects for intergroup relations among high-status members. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Is this about You or Me? Self-Versus Other-Directed Judgments and Feelings in Response to Intergroup Interaction

This research demonstrated that both dominant and lower status group members’ responses to interacting with an out-group member can center largely on thoughts and feelings about themselves. Pairs of students (either two White Canadians or one White Canadian and one Aboriginal Canadian) had casual get-acquainted discussions. Consistent with our hypothesis that individuals would tend to frame the interaction in terms of the other person’s evaluation of them, high-prejudice White Canadians felt stereotyped by an Aboriginal partner even though they actually were not stereotyped and even though they themselves did not stereotype an Aboriginal partner. Moreover, Aboriginal Canadians appeared to personalize negative behaviors exhibited by their White partner. These individuals experienced discomfort and self-directed negative affect—but not other-directed negative affect—when their White partner was high in prejudice.

A Threat in the Computer: The Race Implicit Association Test as a Stereotype Threat Experience

Three experiments test whether the threat of appearing racist leads White participants to perform worse on the race Implicit Association Test (IAT) and whether self-affirmation can protect from this threat. Experiments 1 and 2 suggest that White participants show a stereotype threat effect when completing the race IAT, leading to stronger pro-White scores when the test is believed to be diagnostic of racism. This effect increases for domain-identified (highly motivated to control prejudice) participants (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, self-affirmation inoculates participants against stereotype threat while taking the race IAT. These findings have methodological implications for use of the race IAT and theoretical implications concerning the malleability of automatic prejudice and the potential interpersonal effects of the fear of appearing racist.

Anxiety and categorisation effects in student nurses' attitudes towards young and older patients: A dual pathway model

BACKGROUND

Student nurses often have a negative attitude towards older patients due to negative stereotypes, which may explain their reluctance to work in geriatric care.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate a dual effect (direct and indirect via anxiety) of patients' age on student nurses' attitudes towards their patients.

DESIGN

Quantitative survey study with 2 between-subjects conditions (patient age: young patients vs. older patients; both n's=52).

SETTING

Two schools for higher vocational education in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

104 student nurses between the ages of 16-30 in the third or fourth year of their nursing education (Mage=21.58, SD=2.22; 93 women).

RESULTS

Attitudes towards older patients were more negative than those towards young patients. Older patients also elicited less anxiety compared to young patients, and anxiety had a weaker relationship with attitudes towards older patients than attitudes towards younger patients. Attitudes towards younger patients, but not towards older patients, were depressed by anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Older patients generate more negative attitudes among student nurses, but can also improve attitudes indirectly by lowering intergroup anxiety. Older people may be therefore be especially suitable as a patient group to receive care from young nurses in training, who can mature in their profession without being anxious over making a wrong impression.

Don’t bring me down: Divergent effects of being the target of empathy versus perspective-taking on minority group members’ perceptions of their group’s social standing

This experiment examined how being the target of one of two commonly recommended strategies for improving intergroup relations—empathy or perspective-taking—affects minority group members’ sense of their group’s power and status in society. The main hypothesis was that the distinct status hierarchies implied by each of these mindsets would be communicated across face-to-face intergroup exchanges. Specifically, because empathy targets are typically in lower power positions whereas perspective-taking targets are typically in higher power positions, minority group members who were targets of a dominant group member’s empathy were expected to come away with a reduced sense of their group’s social standing relative to those who were targets of a dominant group member’s perspective-taking. Results were consistent with this prediction and further suggested that the mindset effect was partially mediated by a tendency for dominant group members’ efforts to empathize with minority targets to foster heightened imbalance in the levels of various power-relevant behaviors exhibited by each person.

How can intergroup interaction be bad if intergroup contact is good? Exploring and reconciling an apparent paradox in the science of intergroup relations

The outcomes of social interactions among members of different groups (e.g., racial groups, political groups, sexual orientation groups) have long been of interest to psychologists. Two related literatures on the topic have emerged-the intergroup interaction literature and the intergroup contact literature-in which divergent conclusions have been reported. Intergroup interaction is typically found to have negative effects tied to intergroup bias, producing heightened stress, intergroup anxiety, or outgroup avoidance, whereas intergroup contact is typically found to have positive effects tied to intergroup bias, predicting lower intergroup anxiety and lower prejudice. We examine these paradoxical findings, proposing that researchers contributing to the two literatures are examining different levels of the same phenomenon and that methodological differences can account for the divide between the literatures. Further, we introduce a mathematical model by which the findings of the two literatures can be reconciled. We believe that adopting this model will streamline thinking in the field and will generate integrative new research in which investigators examine how a person's experiences with diversity unfold.

An Investigation of Positive and Negative Contact As Predictors of Intergroup Attitudes in the United States, Hong Kong, and Thailand

Contact researchers have overlooked (a) the mechanisms that explain the association between negative contact and prejudice, (b) the effects of positive and negative contact on outcomes beyond prejudice, and (c) the importance of testing contact effects cross-culturally. In the present article, we addressed these gaps in the literature by drawing on data from White Americans ( N = 207; Study 1), Hong Kong Chinese ( N = 145; Study 2), and Buddhist Thais ( N = 161; Study 3). Specifically, we examined positive and negative contact as predictors of old-fashioned and modern prejudice toward, and negative metaperceptions about, Black Americans, Mainland Chinese, and Muslim Thais, respectively. We also tested intergroup anxiety as a mediator of the associations between positive and negative contact, and all intergroup outcomes. Across three studies, positive contact predicted reduced intergroup anxiety, prejudice, and negative metaperceptions, while negative contact predicted increased intergroup anxiety, prejudice, and negative metaperceptions. Negative contact, however, was the more consistent predictor of intergroup attitudes. Intergroup anxiety emerged as a robust mediator of the relationships between both types of contact and all intergroup outcomes. We thus present the first test of a model of positive and negative contact that holds across both Western and non-Western contexts.

Younger workers’ metastereotypes, workplace mood, attitudes, and behaviors

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of age-related stereotyping processes on younger workers’ mood, attitudes, and impression management behaviors at work.

Design/methodology/approach

– Using survey data from 281 younger workers, the hypothesized model was tested using structural equation modeling.

Findings

– As younger workers are more self-conscious about being age stereotyped, they are less likely to be satisfied with older co-workers, which is partly explained by negative mood associated with that metastereotype consciousness. Also, chronological age, age-group identification, and age prejudice, were critical influences on the emergence of metastereotype consciousness.

Research limitations/implications

– Unexpected findings point to: experiences of younger workers which may not follow the same patterns found with older groups and unique operation of age as a dynamic social category that may not parallel findings regarding other social categories.

Practical implications

– There is clearly potential for younger workers to be concerned they are viewed “stereotypically” and this metastereotype consciousness influences how they feel, think, and behave at work. Organizations should be aware of the potential antecedents and consequences, as well as the nature of metastereotypic perceptions, to better facilitate positive and productive interactions across age groups at work.

Originality/value

– This research contributes to an understanding of younger workers’ experiences at work, highlights the role of mood in the operation of metastereotypes on attitudes and behaviors in age-diverse contexts, and improves our understanding of social biases and inequality associated with age-based groups.

Deny, Distance, or Dismantle? How White Americans Manage a Privileged Identity

Social scientists have traditionally argued that whiteness—the attribute of being recognized and treated as a White person in society—is powerful because it is invisible. On this view, members of the racially dominant group have the unique luxury of rarely noticing their race or the privileges it confers. This article challenges this “invisibility thesis,” arguing that Whites frequently regard themselves as racial actors. We further argue that whiteness defines a problematic social identity that confronts Whites with 2 psychological threats: the possibility that their accomplishments in life were not fully earned ( meritocratic threat) and the association with a group that benefits from unfair social advantages ( group-image threat). We theorize that Whites manage their racial identity to dispel these threats. According to our deny, distance, or dismantle (3D) model of White identity management, dominant-group members have three strategies at their disposal: deny the existence of privilege, distance their own self-concepts from the White category, or strive to dismantle systems of privilege. Whereas denial and distancing promote insensitivity and inaction with respect to racial inequality, dismantling reduces threat by relinquishing privileges. We suggest that interventions aimed at reducing inequality should attempt to leverage dismantling as a strategy of White identity management.

On the psychological barriers to the workplace: when and why metastereotyping undermines employability beliefs of women and ethnic minorities

We investigated the effect of how one might expect one's group to be viewed by a dominant outgroup (i.e., metastereotypes) on employability beliefs of members of disadvantaged groups. Based on the extensive literature on stereotype threat, we hypothesized that activating negative metastereotypes would undermine employability beliefs of members of disadvantaged groups, because such beliefs are likely to threaten their state self-esteem. In particular, we expected that an effect of negative metastereotyping on employability beliefs would be explained by momentary self-doubts and be particularly evident among members whose dispositional self-esteem is high rather than low to begin with. Taken jointly, results from a correlational study (n = 80) and an experimental study (n = 56) supported these hypotheses, and discussion focuses on their implications for mobility into the workplace.