Detecting and Experiencing Prejudice

Barreto, Manuela; Ellemers, Naomi

doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.02.001

Cited by 68 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 205 publications

(271 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, subtle prejudice can also be expressed in the form of absence of positive behaviors or attitudes (e.g., Dovidio & Gaertner, 2004) or denial that sexual orientation prejudice is still a problem nowadays (McConahay, 1986;Morrison & Morrison, 2003;Morrison, Morrison, & Franklin, 2009). These characteristics make subtle prejudice particularly hard to prove, and thus harder to combat (Barreto & Ellemers, 2015).…”

Section: Blatant Versus Subtle Prejudicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, the fact that SOGIP nowadays is more subtle than it was decades ago does not mean that its consequences are less harmful for the target (Barreto & Ellemers, 2015). One of the reasons for this is the greater uncertainty regarding negative outcomes in life: Is something due to individual characteristics or prejudice (Major, Kaiser, & McCoy, 2003)?…”

Section: Attitudes Toward Same-sex Marriagementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interventions to Reduce Blatant and Subtle Sexual Orientation‐ and Gender Identity Prejudice (SOGIP): Current Knowledge and Future Directions

Cramwinckel

Scheepers

Toorn

2018

Social Issues Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Blatant Versus Subtle Prejudicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Attitudes Toward Same-sex Marriagementioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions to Reduce Blatant and Subtle Sexual Orientation‐ and Gender Identity Prejudice (SOGIP): Current Knowledge and Future Directions

Cramwinckel

Scheepers

Toorn

2018

Social Issues Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, people's belief systems motivate denial of subtle sexism and thus prevent confrontation and assure its persistence (Barreto and Ellemers 2015). For instance, system justification theory proposes that people are motivated to defend the status quo in society, including social inequalities (Jost et al 2004;Napier et al 2010).…”

Section: Modern (Subtle) Sexismmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Did He Mean by that? Humor Decreases Attributions of Sexism and Confrontation of Sexist Jokes

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexist humor may be more difficult to confront than serious expressions of sexism because humor disguises the biased nature of the remark. The present research investigated whether delivering a sexist remark as a joke, compared to a serious statement, tempered perceptions that the speaker was sexist which, in turn, made women less likely to confront. Using a computer-mediated instant messaging paradigm, women were randomly assigned to receive the same sexist remark phrased either in a serious manner or as a joke. We recorded how women actually responded to the sexist remark and coded for confrontation. In Experiments 1 (195 women) and 2 (134 women) we found that humor decreased perceptions that the speaker was sexist. Furthermore, as perceptions that the perpetrator was sexist decreased, women's confronting also decreased. Experiment 2 demonstrated an additional consequence of reducing the perceived sexism of the perpetrator-it increased tolerance of sexist behavior perpetrated against an individual woman and sexual harassment more generally. Interestingly, the indirect effects only appeared when women at least moderately endorsed hostile sexism. For hostile sexists, failure to identify sexism reduced confrontation and increased tolerance for sexual harassment and sexist behavior. Contrary to popular belief, humor can actually make sexist messages more dangerous and difficult to confront than serious remarks.A woman bank teller accidentally short-circuited a computer system that monitored the bank's transactions. After this incident, many employees told jokes about women's alleged inferiority with technology. At a subsequent meeting, a woman secretary accidentally unplugged a slide projector with her foot as she walked by. A man supervisor joked to his colleagues about a Bwoman's touch,^which elicited laughter from other supervisors (Kahn 1989). Incidents like theseplayful, demeaning, group-based comments cloaked in humor-are among the most common ways that women experience sexism in the workplace and other settings (Pryor 1995).Sexist humor has been defined as humor that denigrates, demeans, stereotypes, oppresses, or objectifies women (Bemiller and Schneider 2010;Greenwood and Isbell 2002;LaFrance and Woodzicka 1998). How should women respond to such playful, often funny, but nonetheless belittling instances of sexist humor? In the present research we contend that sexist humor presents a unique challenge for people who may wish to engage in confrontation because the meaning of humorous sexist remarks, and the intentions of their owners, are often unclear. Accordingly, we investigated the degree to which delivering a sexist remark as a joke, compared to a serious statement, affected women's perception that the perpetrator was sexist, the likelihood that they would confront the sexist remark, and their tolerance of a subsequently encountered incident of sexist behavior, as well as their tolerance of sexual harassment, a more general, normative pattern of gender discrimination against women (Equal Employment

show abstract

“…Such a finding is probably an underestimation since minorities with meritocratic beliefs tended to under-report instances of racism (Major et al, 2002). Also, minorities might be unable to detect subtle covert racism, resulting in lower levels of perceived racism (Barreto & Ellemers, 2015). Taken together, it would be premature to conclude that racism might not be an issue in Singapore.…”

Section: Quantitative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Racism in Singapore: A Review and Recommendations for Future Research

Chew

2018

Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Racism refers to ‘the differential treatment enacted by an individual, group, or organization on individuals based on assumptions of a group's phenotypic, linguistic, or cultural differences’ (Gamst, Liang, & Der-Karabetian, 2011, p. 251). Currently, there is a lack of psychological research investigating racism in Singapore. The available research, narrative reviews, qualitative studies, and quantitative studies have yielded limited and inconclusive results. These researches are critically evaluated to provide four recommendations for a psychological research agenda: (a) develop a reliable and valid instrument to assess racism, (b) conduct experimental research to examine racism perpetuated by the majority or institutions, (c) examine the negative effects of racism, and (d) develop and evaluate interventions for racism.

show abstract

Detecting and Experiencing Prejudice

Cited by 68 publications

References 205 publications

Interventions to Reduce Blatant and Subtle Sexual Orientation‐ and Gender Identity Prejudice (SOGIP): Current Knowledge and Future Directions

Interventions to Reduce Blatant and Subtle Sexual Orientation‐ and Gender Identity Prejudice (SOGIP): Current Knowledge and Future Directions

What Did He Mean by that? Humor Decreases Attributions of Sexism and Confrontation of Sexist Jokes

Racism in Singapore: A Review and Recommendations for Future Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About