Consumers with stigmatized identities may be especially attentive to organizational cues that signal to them whether or not they are welcomed and valued consumers. These stigmatized‐identity cues can become a part of a company's brand, influencing the attractiveness of the company and consumer loyalty, and allowing consumers to draw inferences about an organization's ideologies and attitudes toward multiple stigmatized groups. Consumers with stigmatized identities attend to stigmatized‐identity cues that signal inclusion (or exclusion) toward other stigmatized groups, resulting in stigmatized‐identity cue transfers, especially when similarity mindsets are activated, and among consumers who are high in stigma solidarity. Because identity is central in consumer behavior, stigmatized‐identity threat cues can at times result in anti‐consumption, including boycotts, allowing consumers and companies to engage in collective action. This article reviews this growing body of research, demonstrating the important influence of stigmatized‐identity cues on consumer behavior and discussing ways in which companies can better signal their inclusive attitudes and ideologies to attract consumers.

In the current research, we posited the stigma-by-prejudice-transfer effect, which proposes that stigmatized group members (e.g., White women) are threatened by prejudice that is directed at other stigmatized group members (e.g., African Americans) because they believe that prejudice has monolithic qualities. While most stigma researchers assume that there is a direct correspondence between the attitude of prejudiced individuals and the targets (i.e., sexism affects women, racism affects racial minorities), the five studies reported here demonstrate that White women can be threatened by racism (Study 1, 3, 4, and 5) and men of color by sexism (Study 2). Robust to perceptions of liking and the order in which measures were administered, results showed that prejudice transfers between racism and sexism were driven by the presumed social dominance orientation of the prejudiced individual. In addition, important downstream consequences, such as the increased likelihood of anticipated stigma, expectations of unfair treatment, and the attribution of negative feedback to sexism, appeared for stigmatized individuals.

Traditionally, researchers have focused on identity-congruent safety cues such as the effect of gender diversity awards on women's sense of inclusion in organizations. The present studies investigate, for the first time, whether identity safety cues (e.g., organizational diversity structures) aimed at one stigmatized group transfer via perceptions of the organization's ideology (social dominance orientation), resulting in identity safety for individuals with stigmatized identities incongruent with the cue. Across four studies, we demonstrate that White women experience identity safety from organizational diversity structures aimed at racial minorities (Studies 1 and 2), and men of color experience identity safety from organizational diversity structures aimed at women (Study 3). Furthermore, while White men similarly perceive the organization's ideology, this does not promote identity safety (Study 4). Thus, we argue that individuals view organizations commended for diversity as promoting more egalitarian attitudes broadly, resulting in the transference of identity safety cues for stigmatized individuals.

Previous work has found that individuals who have been confronted for discrimination demonstrate a reduction in explicit prejudice and use fewer stereotypes immediately after the confrontation. Although confronting prejudice has been touted as a tool for prejudice reduction, it is not known how these effects translate over time and what processes might account for their endurance. Across two studies, the present research finds that individuals used significantly fewer negative stereotypes 7 days after confrontation (Study 1) and engaged in behavioral inhibition to stereotypical cues on a probe task 1 week after confrontation. Moreover, guilt and prolonged rumination mediated these effects for confronted participants (Studies 1 and 2). Across two studies, the present studies reveal the lasting effects of interpersonal confrontations in prejudice reduction and the process by which these effects endure.

No abstract