The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2019
DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12450
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seeking authenticity in diverse contexts: How identities and environments constrain “free” choice

Abstract: Diversity and inclusion are a key goal in 21st century society, but people continue to self‐segregate in occupations, communities, and everyday interactions. Are people's choices to separate by groups into these different spaces truly “free?” In this paper, we review and extend a new framework for understanding how social identities contextually and automatically constrain the choices people make. We consider how situations subtly cue a sense of fit to one's identity, automatically eliciting state authenticity… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 84 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…E-3;Byrd, 2017). This view is consistent with the observation that advantaged majority group members inhabit environments that are more likely to be created and maintained by members of the advantaged social group (Aday & Schmader, 2019). Taken together, Whites may structure their environments to reduce incidental intergroup contact both through geographical self-segregation and through institutional segregation which is made possible by Whites' disproportionate access to and control over important institutions within society.…”
Section: Structuring Environments To Reduce Incidental Intergroup Consupporting
confidence: 83%
“…E-3;Byrd, 2017). This view is consistent with the observation that advantaged majority group members inhabit environments that are more likely to be created and maintained by members of the advantaged social group (Aday & Schmader, 2019). Taken together, Whites may structure their environments to reduce incidental intergroup contact both through geographical self-segregation and through institutional segregation which is made possible by Whites' disproportionate access to and control over important institutions within society.…”
Section: Structuring Environments To Reduce Incidental Intergroup Consupporting
confidence: 83%
“…Sander's application of systems theory to moments of meeting is consonant with Aday and Schmader's ( 69 ) assertion “that authenticity is a subjective signal of fit to one's environment” and is “more often experienced as a state of mind rather than a trait of the person” (p. 2). They add, “the presence of fit and fluency” between the individual and her/his environment “will lead to a sense of authenticity” (p. 3).…”
Section: Implicit Relational Knowing and Authenticitymentioning
confidence: 70%
“…First, this research indicates that the less favorable evaluations of men's childcare competence likely disadvantage men interested in childcare work. As nurseries are often set‐up with the understanding that the workers are women, they create a work environment for women to thrive in—to the exclusion of men (Aday & Schmader, 2019; Peeters, 2007; Schmader & Sedikides, 2017). The strong association of “maternal instincts” with good childcare circumvents men's inclusion, neglecting the fact that professional childcare not only requires female‐typed communal qualities (e.g., concern for others, integrity) but also male‐typed agentic qualities (e.g., independence, showing initiative; National Center for O*NET Development, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%