Premium
Ally confrontations as identity‐safety cues for marginalized individuals
Author(s) -
Hildebrand Laura K.,
Jusuf Celine C.,
Monteith Margo J.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
european journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.609
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1099-0992
pISSN - 0046-2772
DOI - 10.1002/ejsp.2692
Subject(s) - psychology , social psychology , identity (music) , white (mutation) , statement (logic) , aesthetics , biochemistry , philosophy , chemistry , political science , law , gene
Three studies and an integrative data analysis ( N = 1,017) demonstrated that confrontations (speaking up against a stereotypical or prejudiced statement), when affirmed by bystanders, serve as an effective safety cue for targets of bias. In Studies 1 and 2, Chinese‐American and White women witnessed anti‐Asian and sexist remarks, respectively. Results revealed that a lone confronter (i.e., a confronter not affirmed by others) was unable to boost identity‐safety (e.g., belonging, safety) compared to when the bias was not confronted, regardless of confronter identity (i.e., ally vs. ingroup confronter). Study 2 demonstrated that other people in the interaction group (i.e., bystanders) must affirm the confrontation for it to serve as an effective safety cue. Study 3 replicated and extended these results among White women for confrontation of sexism and Black women for confrontation of racism. Overall, these studies suggest that confrontations, when affirmed, can serve as a safety cue.