Responding to sexual discrimination: the effects of societal versus self-blame

Minimizing the Pervasiveness of Women's Personal Experiences of Gender Discrimination

Given the Rejection-Identification Model ( Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999 ), which shows that perceiving discrimination to be pervasive is a negative experience, it was suggested that there would be conditions under which women would instead minimize the pervasiveness of discrimination. Study 1 ( N = 91) showed that when women envisioned themselves in a situation of academic discrimination, they defined it as pervasive, but when they experienced a similar laboratory simulation of academic discrimination, its pervasiveness was minimized. Study 2 ( N = 159) showed that women who envisioned themselves experiencing discrimination minimized its pervasiveness more so than women reading about discrimination happening to someone else. Further, mediation analysis showed that minimizing the pervasiveness enhanced positive affect about personal discrimination. Implications for minimizing on both an individual and social level are discussed.

Responses to Discrimination: The Role of Emotion and Expectations for Emotional Regulation

The present study examined the role of emotion in women’s perceptions of discrimination and their endorsement of behavioral responses to change the status quo. In an experimental simulation involving a situation of sex discrimination, women (N = 108) were primed to experience a particular emotion (sad, angry, control condition) and were subsequently instructed to either suppress or express (or neither) their emotional responses. Women primed to feel sad and told to suppress their emotions reported the least discrimination, whereas angered women who were permitted to express themselves reported the greatest discrimination. Furthermore, when encouraged to express their emotions, women primed to feel sad were more likely to endorse normative actions to rectify the situation, whereas women induced to feel angry were more likely to endorse collective actions to change the status quo. These findings have implications for the role of emotions and expectations regarding their expression on collective action taking.

Dispositional Hardiness and Women's Well-Being Relating to Gender Discrimination: the Role of Minimization

Three studies examined whether personality-based hardiness would be associated with mental health benefits in contexts of gender discrimination. Hardy women encountering both a laboratory simulation and a hypothetical scenario of discrimination showed greater self-esteem and less negative affect than low hardy women. However, these benefits were mediated by the use of specific attributions, suggesting that well-being in hardy women may have been achieved through minimizing the pervasiveness of discrimination. The third study showed this mediation pattern occurred only for participants exposed to higher threat scenarios versus lower threat scenarios of discrimination. Thus, minimizing the pervasiveness of discrimination may have been a threat-reducing tool for high hardy women. Bandura's (1997) self-efficacy theory was used as a possible explanation for this finding.

The Motivational Quality of Global Attributions in Hypothetical and Experienced Situations of Gender Discrimination

Traditionally, global attributions have been thought to reduce instrumental behavior aimed at resolving negative events. However, the present research shows global attributions for gender discrimination are related to taking action against unfair treatment. In Study 1, women ( N = 157) completed a questionnaire assessing attributions for hypothetical scenarios of discrimination and collective responses to discrimination. In Study 2, women ( N = 79) were placed into a laboratory situation of discrimination and asked to indicate their attributions for and responses to their unfair treatment. In both studies, hierarchical regression analyses showed that global attributions were related to both individual and collective responses to their discrimination. Implications for examining attributions in an intergroup context were discussed.

The effects of meritocracy beliefs on women's well-being after first-time gender discrimination

This study examined how meritocracy beliefs may buffer women from the negative psychological effects of an acute situation of gender discrimination. Although some research indirectly suggests that believing that meritocracy exists may increase wellbeing, group consciousness theories suggest that disbelieving that meritocracy exists will enhance psychological adjustment to gender discrimination. Women who reported little past experience with discrimination, and either believed or disbelieved that meritocracy exists, were exposed to either a laboratory situation of discrimination or a nondiscrimination failure (control) condition. Consistent with group consciousness theories, women experiencing discrimination reported greater well-being if they disbelieved that meritocracy exists than if they were believers. In contrast, women in the control condition reported greater wellbeing if they believed that meritocracy exists than if they were disbelievers. Implications for coping with discrimination are discussed.

Embodying inequality: a review of concepts, measures, and methods for studying health consequences of discrimination

Investigating effects of discrimination upon health requires clear concepts, methods, and measures. At issue are both economic consequences of discrimination and accumulated insults arising from everyday and at times violent experiences of being treated as a second-class citizen, at each and every economic level. Guidelines for epidemiologic investigations and other public health research on ways people embody racism, sexism, and other forms of social inequality, however, are not well defined, as research in this area is in its infancy. Employing an ecosocial framework, this article accordingly reviews definitions and patterns of discrimination within the United States; evaluates analytic strategies and instruments researchers have developed to study health effects of different kinds of discrimination; and delineates diverse pathways by which discrimination can harm health, both outright and by distorting production of epidemiologic knowledge about determinants of population health. Three methods of studying health consequences of discrimination are examined (indirect; direct, at the individual level, in relation to personal experiences of discrimination; at the population level, such as via segregation), and recommendations are provided for developing research instruments to measure acute and cumulative exposure to different aspects of discrimination.