Hierarchical microaggressions in higher education.

Abstract

Although there has been substantial research examining the effects of microaggressions in the public sphere, there has been little research that examines microaggressions in the workplace. This study explores the types of microaggressions that affect employees at universities. We coin the term "hierarchical microaggression" to represent the everyday slights found in higher education that communicate systemic valuing (or devaluing) of a person because of the institutional role held by that person in the institution. We explore hierarchical microaggressions through examining qualitative data from multiple cultural competence trainings devoted to learning about microaggressions on college campuses. Findings indicate 4 main types of hierarchical microaggressions: valuing/devaluing based on role/credential, changing accepted behavior based on role, actions (ignoring/excluding/surprise/interrupting) related to role, and terminology related to work position. The findings add a new dimension of interpretation to the current research on microaggressions, one that relates directly to hierarchical status of workplace identities. Hierarchical microaggressions exist in all workplaces, but are of a unique type in a university because of the rhetoric related to equality and upward mobility associated with college going. Our findings indicate that these forms of microaggressions are more than insensitive comments; they impact people because people take on an identity associated with their status at the university, an identity related to the amount of higher education they attain. This study adds to the literature on microaggressions and provides university stakeholders with the language and the tools to reduce microaggressions from their respective environments leading to the improvement of overall campus climate.

The moment of microaggression: The experience of acts of oppression, dehumanization, and exploitation

“…This article was based upon classroom exercises (Dover, 2008), and one article reviewed was rooted in a training exercise (Young et al, 2015). Although such exercises do not represent formal experiments, they can generate theory and professional understanding of the nature of microaggressions.…”

“…Fourth, the resulting examples were further coded according to a typology adopted. Notably, Young et al (2015) reported examples of microaggression regardless of status as producer, recipient, or observer of microaggression, something called for in the further research section of the present article.…”

“…Adopting the latter approach, they used the terminology of gendered racism, citing Essed (1991). One study on the initiation of microaggressions concluded that supervisors should take responsibility when they microaggress on others and that institutions should reduce the hierarchical microaggressions generated when people are systematically devalued by virtue of their institutional role (Young et al, 2015). This review suggests the need for theoretical and research attention to the roles of oppression, dehumanization, and exploitation in producing microaggression, as well attention to the full range of the experience of microaggression, including initiating, receiving, and observing such acts.…”

“…In another study, butcher paper was used to collect examples from among employees of an institution of higher education who were attending a workshop on cultural competency (Young, Anderson, & Stewart, 2015). Exposed during the training to a definition of microaggression and videotaped scenarios related to race, gender, and language-status microaggressions, small groups of four to six persons identified three examples of microaggression each.…”

Doctoral‐Level Counseling Students’ Experiences of Social Class Microaggressions

“…Investigators have examined constructs related to SCMs in higher education settings as well (Sarcedo, Matias, Montoya, & Nishi, 2015). Young, Anderson, and Stewart (2015) coined the term hierarchical microaggressions for situations in which participants experienced a systematic devaluing of their personhood based upon their institutional role. L. Smith, Mao, and Deshpande (2016) investigated classist microaggressions in poor and working‐class students.…”