Success under tokenism: Co‐option of the newcomer and the prevention of collective protest

A laboratory analogue of North American intergroup context was used to investigate the responses of individuals who succeed in individual upward social mobility under conditions of highly restricted boundary permeability (i.e. tokenism). These successful tokens were compared with participants who either (a) succeeded in an open/meritocratic intergroup context, or (b) were forced to remain in the disadvantaged group because of the tokenism restriction. Although successful tokens recognized the collective injustice of tokenism, their behaviour did not differ from participants who succeeded in the open/meritocratic condition. Those forced to remain in their disadvantaged position preferred non‐normative action (relatively drastic actions known to be inconsistent with the rules of the broader social system), while successful tokens supported only disadvantaged group members who accepted their disadvantaged position or took individual normative action. Experiment 2 suggests that successful tokens lack of support for collective or non‐normative actions does not result from (a) a failure to identify with the disadvantaged in‐group; (b) compliance with perceived advantaged group norms; or (c) individualistic concerns for personal benefits. The present results provide some evidence that tokens shift their identification from the disadvantaged to the advantaged group. Thus, the consistent lack of support for socially disruptive action by members of the disadvantaged group may represent an attempt to support their new in‐group ‐ the high‐status advantaged group.