When do women respond against discrimination? Exploring factors of subtlety, form, and focus

Abstract

We examined the personal-group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD), the tendency for women to recognize that others encounter sexism while simultaneously minimizing their own personal experiences with sexism, and the degree to which it (a) applies to all manifestations of discrimination, and (b) extends beyond perceptions of discrimination to taking action against it. Our findings replicated the PGDD when it comes to perceptions of discrimination, but this effect was reversed for behavioral action such that women were more likely to take action against discrimination when it was directed at them personally. We also disentangled the factors of subtlety (subtle vs. overt) and form (formal vs. interpersonal) by showing that women can reliably distinguish between these factors when determining their reactions to discrimination.

Subtle Discrimination in the Workplace: A Vicious Cycle

“…Although we realize this assertion may be met with some controversy and skepticism, there is recent empirical work that supports our view. Indeed, Lindsey and colleagues (2015) showed that women could reliably distinguish between factors of subtlety and formality when deciding how they would respond to scenarios depicting various instances of discrimination. Specifically, the findings revealed that although there were no differences in women's abilities to detect interpersonal versus formal discrimination, women were more likely to detect overt as compared with subtle manifestations of discrimination.…”

“…To the extent that subtlety and formality reflect the same construct, one would expect to observe similar effects across dependent variables of interest, as opposed to the differing effects that the authors observed here. In an effort to examine whether women's actual experiences also varied across these dimensions of discrimination, Lindsey and colleagues (2015) conducted a follow-up study in which they asked women to recall discriminatory incidents that they had experienced or witnessed in the workplace. These incidents were then rated by two independent coders with regard to subtlety and formality.…”

“…As discussed in the opening of this article, recent work by Lindsey and colleagues (2015) examining women's tendency to recognize discrimination directed at others while minimizing their own experiences of discrimination provides a starting point for disentangling some of these issues. In this study, women were asked to imagine either themselves or another woman being discriminated against at work in a manner that was either subtle or overt and to subsequently indicate (a) whether they recognized the behavior as discrimination and (b) whether they would take action against the behavior.…”

Is More Always Merrier? Intersectionality as an Antecedent of Job Insecurity

“…Evidence suggests that disenfranchised populations such as women [ 30 ], racial minorities [ 31 ], religious minorities [ 32 ], sexual orientation minorities, [ 33 ] and older employees [ 34 ] endure different forms of mistreatment at work. For example, past work details that marginalized employees are perceived as incompetent [ 35 ] and perceive greater instances of both formal and interpersonal discrimination from others as compared to majority status employees [ 36 ]. This perceived or recognized interpersonal mistreatment at work relates to a variety of negative job-related outcomes such as lower commitment, lower job satisfaction, greater work tension, less engagement, higher withdrawal, greater depressive symptoms, and greater job insecurity [ 35 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ].…”

Perceived Centrality in Social Networks Increases Women’s Expectations of Confronting Sexism

“…We focus our investigation of whether perceived centrality shapes intergroup dynamics on the workplace context because the expression of sexism in everyday interactions between coworkers continues to be prevalent ( Ely et al, 2006 ; Swim et al, 2001 ). We focus on women’s desire to confront a sexist comment because women must want to engage in this action before actually confronting ( Ashburn-Nardo et al., 2008 ; Lindsey et al, 2015 ). Past research has focused on how individual characteristics (e.g., optimism, Kaiser & Miller, 2001 , 2004 ; hardiness, Foster & Dion, 2004 ; trait activism, Hyers, 2007 ; Swim & Hyers, 1999 ) and situational factors (e.g., formal power, Ashburn-Nardo et al, 2014 ; Woodzicka & LaFrance, 2005 ; salient costs, Shelton & Stewart, 2004 ; public contexts, Stangor et al., 2002 ; risk to standing, Kaiser & Miller, 2001 , 2004 ) can restrict confronting.…”