On melting pots and salad bowls: A meta-analysis of the effects of identity-blind and identity-conscious diversity ideologies.

Leslie, Lisa M.; Bono, Joyce E.; Kim, Yeonka Sophia; Beaver, Gregory Robert

doi:10.1037/apl0000446

Cited by 86 publications

(144 citation statements)

References 177 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

126

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Beliefs in rape myths were particularly pronounced among participants who lived in communities with an overall strong rape myths acceptance. The assimilation of publicly expressed prejudices towards the dominant group opinion has been supported in a meta-analysis of Leslie et al (2020) and may provide an explanation for this finding. If it corresponds to the internalized beliefs remains, however, unclear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

To add insult to injury: Stigmatization reinforces the trauma of rape survivors – Findings from the DR Congo

Schmitt

Robjant

Elbert

et al. 2021

SSM - Population Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Survivors of sexual violence are frequently condemned and socially excluded. Myths about rape may translate into stigmatization, diminish disclosure, prevent help-seeking from support structures and worsen mental health. Areas of conflict or organized violence remain the evident hotspots of sexual victimization. However, little is known about prevalence and predictors of rape myths in these settings or their association with survivors’ disclosure, stigmatization and psychopathology. Method: Between September 2018 and May 2019, we assessed in a representative sample of 1066 individuals from six communities in Eastern DRC traumatic exposure, sexual perpetration, threats to social integrity, perceived stigmatization (perceived lack of social acknowledgement, shame), stigmatizing attitudes towards survivors (negative attitudes and willingness to provide support, rape myths acceptance), and mental illness (PTSD, depression). Results: Survivors of sexual violence (33%, n = 184 of women, 16%, n = 84 of men) reported more traumatic exposure, threats to social integrity, shame, perceived lack of social acknowledgement, PTSD symptoms and depression. Their social environment affirmed various stigmatizing attitudes (5-89% affirmations). Beliefs in rape myths were predicted by its average acceptance in the community, education, and witness of others’ sexual victimization. The rates of cases whose history of sexual victimization was socially disclosed were higher in communities and among survivors with low rape myths acceptance and disclosure showed associations with perceived stigmatization. Rape myths acceptance among individuals without a history of sexual victimization was associated with survivors’ recently experienced threats to social integrity which predicted their stigma perceptions and mental illness. Conclusion: Rape myths acceptance in the community is associated with stigma and trauma-related mental illness of sexual violence survivors. This adds up to the psychic burden of trauma.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

To add insult to injury: Stigmatization reinforces the trauma of rape survivors – Findings from the DR Congo

Schmitt

Robjant

Elbert

et al. 2021

SSM - Population Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More specifically, Multiculturalism (e.g., the cultural norm in Canada) is mostly negatively associated with prejudice toward minorities. Conversely, assimilationism (e.g., the cultural norm in Germany) is positively linked to prejudice (Wolsko et al, 2000;Levin et al, 2012;Guimond et al, 2013;Whitley and Webster, 2019;Leslie et al, 2020). Concerning colorblindness (e.g., the cultural norm in the United States), although its initial professed goal is equality, the available findings suggest a complex pattern.…”

Section: From the French Republican Model To The Laïcité Normsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In order to gauge how Laïcité influences prejudice regulation, one can start by situating the French ideological landscape with regard to past work on diversity ideologies. In the literature, diversity ideologies are generally classified according to two broad orientations (Plaut et al, 2018;Leslie et al, 2020): On the one hand, one finds (1) "identity-blind ideologies" like the assimilationist ideology requiring minorities to abandon their cultural identity for the benefit of a unique national identity. This category also includes the colorblind ideology, which prescribes the ignorance of group identity in favor of thinking of individuals as unique entities.…”

Section: From the French Republican Model To The Laïcité Normsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, research demonstrates that the ideological frame of "identity-conscious ideologies" such as multiculturalism can be an efficient route to reduce prejudice itself (Wolsko et al, 2000;Levin et al, 2012;Guimond et al, 2013;Whitley and Webster, 2019;Leslie et al, 2020). In fact, when the similarities and differences with outgroups are highlighted, this can drive the regulation of prejudice via yet another process: perspectivetaking (i.e., an active attempt to embrace and identify with the experience of another individual; Todd et al, 2011).…”

Section: Scope Of the Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From Diversity Ideologies to the Expression of Stereotypes: Insights Into the Cognitive Regulation of Prejudice Within the Cultural-Ecological Context of French Laïcité

Lankester

2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This theoretical paper examines the context-sensitivity of the impact of cultural norms on prejudice regulation. Granting the importance of understanding intergroup dynamics in cultural-ecological contexts, we focus on the peculiarities of the French diversity approach. Indeed, the major cultural norm, the Laïcité (i.e., French secularism) is declined today in two main variants: The Historic Laïcité, a longstanding egalitarian norm coexisting with its amended form: The New Laïcité, an assimilationist norm. In fact, these co-encapsulated Laïcité variants constitute a fruitful ground to cast light on the processes underlying prejudice regulation. Indeed, it is documented that the assimilationist New Laïcité is linked to higher levels of prejudice as compared to the egalitarian Historic Laïcité. To this day, research mainly explored interindividual determinants of Laïcité endorsements and specified how these endorsements shape prejudice. Crucially, this “indirect-endorsement path” does not account for the more straightforward causal relationship between Laïcité and prejudice. Moreover, recent experimental evidence suggests that the normative salience of both Laïcité norms shape intergroup attitudes beyond personal endorsement. Therefore, in this contribution, we complement previous work by investigating the possible socio-cognitive processes driving this “direct-contextual path.” In doing so, we seek to bridge the gap of causality by investigating how the Laïcité norms can set the stage for specific regulatory strategies. Our reasoning derives from an application of the Justification-Suppression Model bolstered by classical work on mental control, modern racism and diversity ideology. From this, we sketch out the operative functioning of two distinct regulation processes: (a) one that prevents prejudicial attitudes but which can have unexpected consequences on stereotyping within the Historic Laïcité context (i.e., suppression) and (b) one that helps realize prejudice within the New Laïcité context (i.e., justification). From this analysis, we discuss the consequences for intergroup relations within and beyond the French context. In particular, we outline the importance of an adequate framing of egalitarian ideologies so that they achieve their goal to foster harmonious intergroup relations.

show abstract

“…M uch research has examined an important source of debate regarding political, organizational, and educational efforts to foster and support racial diversity-whether or not to pay attention to demographic group memberships, such as race [i.e., diversity ideologies; [1][2][3][4][5]]. However, this discourse ignores another key distinction that characterizes such efforts, particularly in the context of higher education-why an entity chooses to pay attention to group memberships (i.e., diversity rationales).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How university diversity rationales inform student preferences and outcomes

Starck

Sinclair

Shelton

2021

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is currently commonplace for institutions of higher education to proclaim to embrace diversity and inclusion. Though there are numerous rationales available for doing so, US Supreme Court decisions have consistently favored rationales which assert that diversity provides compelling educational benefits and is thus instrumentally useful. Our research is a quantitative/experimental effort to examine how such instrumental rationales comport with the preferences of White and Black Americans, specifically contrasting them with previously dominant moral rationales that embrace diversity as a matter of intrinsic values (e.g., justice). Furthermore, we investigate the prevalence of instrumental diversity rationales in the American higher education landscape and the degree to which they correspond with educational outcomes. Across six experiments, we showed that instrumental rationales correspond to the preferences of White (but not Black) Americans, and both parents and admissions staff expect Black students to fare worse at universities that endorse them. We coded university websites and surveyed admissions staff to determine that, nevertheless, instrumental diversity rationales are more prevalent than moral ones are and that they are indeed associated with increasing White–Black graduation disparities, particularly among universities with low levels of moral rationale use. These findings indicate that the most common rationale for supporting diversity in American higher education accords with the preferences of, and better relative outcomes for, White Americans over low-status racial minorities. The rationales behind universities’ embrace of diversity have nonlegal consequences that should be considered in institutional decision making.

show abstract

On melting pots and salad bowls: A meta-analysis of the effects of identity-blind and identity-conscious diversity ideologies.

Cited by 86 publications

References 177 publications

To add insult to injury: Stigmatization reinforces the trauma of rape survivors – Findings from the DR Congo

To add insult to injury: Stigmatization reinforces the trauma of rape survivors – Findings from the DR Congo

From Diversity Ideologies to the Expression of Stereotypes: Insights Into the Cognitive Regulation of Prejudice Within the Cultural-Ecological Context of French Laïcité

How university diversity rationales inform student preferences and outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About