Perceived discrimination as worldview threat or worldview confirmation: Implications for self-esteem.

Abstract

In 3 studies, the authors tested the hypothesis that discrimination targets' worldview moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-esteem among devalued groups. In Study 1, perceiving discrimination against the ingroup was negatively associated with self-esteem among Latino Americans who endorsed a meritocracy worldview (e.g., believed that individuals of any group can get ahead in America and that success stems from hard work) but was positively associated with self-esteem among those who rejected this worldview. Study 2 showed that exposure to discrimination against their ingroup (vs. a non-self-relevant group) led to lower self-esteem, greater feelings of personal vulnerability, and ingroup blame among Latino Americans who endorsed a meritocracy worldview but to higher selfesteem and decreased ingroup blame among Latino Americans who rejected it. Study 3 showed that compared with women informed that prejudice against their ingroup is pervasive, women informed that prejudice against their ingroup is rare had higher self-esteem if they endorsed a meritocracy worldview but lower self-esteem if they rejected this worldview. Findings support the idea that perceiving discrimination against one's ingroup threatens the worldview of individuals who believe that status in society is earned but confirms the worldview of individuals who do not.

Distributing prejudice unequally: Do Whites direct their prejudice toward strongly identified minorities?

“…These include stratification beliefs (Bobo & Hutchings, 1996), social-mobility belief structures (Hogg & Abrams, 1988), hierarchy-enhancing myths (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), system-justifying beliefs (Jost & Hunyady, 2005), and ideologies (Jost, 2006). In this article, we refer to these beliefs as status-legitimizing worldviews (SLWs; see Major, Kaiser, O'Brien, & McCoy, 2007). Examples of SLWs include the belief in a just world (Lerner, 1980), Protestant work ethic (Katz & Hass, 1988), and the belief in individual mobility (Major, Gramzow, et al, 2002).…”

“…By so doing, these worldviews reduce uncertainty and promote successful engagement with one's surroundings (e.g., Fiske, 2004). Consequently, people are strongly motivated to confirm their worldviews and to defend them from threats that suggest that they may be inaccurate (Jost, 2006;Kaiser, Dyrenforth, & Hagiwara, 2006;Major et al, 2007;Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). In addition, because SLWs confer and justify social and material benefits for groups at the top of the status hierarchy, such as Whites, these groups are especially likely to endorse these worldviews and are particularly likely to react defensively when SLWs are challenged (Kaiser et al, 2006;Major, Gramzow, et al, 2002;Sidanius & Pratto, 1999).…”

Perceiving Discrimination in “Real Life”: Distinguishing Negative Events From Discrimination Attributions

“…By making attributions to discrimination, the children acknowledged that their ethnicity-a characteristic that is typically beyond their controlcan be a reason for peer victimization. This is stressful, as it implies that one is unfairly treated, that the world is unjust (see Major, Kaiser, O'Brien, & McCoy, 2007), and that one has limited mastery over one's life (Branscombe & Ellemers, 1998). In addition, ethnic discrimination entails the devaluation of a group membership that is often central to the identity of ethnic minorities, and thereby a direct attack on their selves (Schmitt & Branscombe, 2002).…”

Optimism and College Grades: Predicting GPA From Explanatory Style

“…Last but not least, future researchers could refine the existing academic explanatory style scale or develop a new one that serves solely the purposes of academic explanatory style. Ben-David & Schneider, 2005;Israel et al, 2009). One factor that affects perceptions and subsequent treatment is the victim's gender role, with gender role conforming women, or women fitting traditional gender expectations (e.g., feminine, nurturing), receiving better treatment than gender role nonconforming women, or women not fitting traditional gender expectations (e.g., masculine, assertive; Marin & Guadagno, 1999;Viki & Abrams, 2002).…”

“…Benevolent sexism as an ideology also serves to explain or justify gender inequality such as the unequal distribution of social or material goods in society (Major, Kaiser, O'Brien, & McCoy, 2007). Thus benevolent sexism serves to justify hostile sexism, which explains why an unequal distribution of power between men and women exists (Glick & Fiske, 1996).…”