Advances in Group Processes

Shane R. Thye, Edward J. Lawler

• Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781787690158
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Social Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Advances in Group Processes publishes theoreticalanalyses, reviews, and theory-based empirical chapters on group phenomena. The series adopts a broad conception of "group processes." This includes work ongroups ranging from the very small to the very large, and on classic and contemporarytopics such as status, power, trust, justice, social influence, identity, decision-making, intergroup relations, and social networks.

Volume35 brings together papers related to a variety of topics in small groups andorganizational research. The volumeincludes papers that address theoretical and empirical issues relating toconsumer behavior, vocal accommodation, measuring aggression, social identitytheory, and criminal sentencing. Othercontributions examine reverse discrimination, perceptions of responsibility for the behaviors of others, and expectations and coordination in small groups. Overall, the volume includespapers that reflect a wide range of theoretical approaches from leadingscholars who work in group processes.

UNDERSTANDING WHITE AMERICANS’ PERCEPTIONS OF “REVERSE” DISCRIMINATION: AN APPLICATION OF A NEW THEORY OF STATUS DISSONANCE

Deena A. Isom Scott

ABSTRACT

Purpose – This chapter has two central goals: (1) to present a foundational argument for status dissonance theory and (2) to apply its central propositions to understanding why some White Americans perceive anti-White bias. Building upon status construction theory, status dissonance theory generally posits that one’s overall status value determined by their combined status characteristics influences the degree they internalize normative referential structures. The salience of normative referential structures frames one’s justice perceptions, which creates status dissonance that manifests as a positional lens through which individuals perceive and interact with the social world. In an application of this framework, it is hypothesized that among Whites, one’s gender and class will impact one’s perceptions of resource reallocation (i.e., racial equality), which in turn impacts the likelihood one perceives anti-White bias generally and personally.

Design – Using the Pew Research Center’s Racial Attitudes in America III Survey, this study employs logistic and ordered probit regressions on a nationally representative sample of White Americans to assess the above propositions.

Findings – Among Whites, males, those whom self-identified as lower class, and the least educated have the highest odds of perceiving resource re-allocation, and in turn all of these factors increased the odds of perceiving anti-White bias generally in society as well as perceiving personal encounters of “reverse” discrimination.

Implications – The findings and theoretical propositions provide a foundation for additional investigations into understanding the causes and consequences of within and between group variation in perceptions and responses to social inequality as well as mechanisms to counter status hierarchies.

Keywords: Discrimination; White Americans; status characteristics; status construction; status dissonance; race; ethnicity; gender; social class

A surprising trend has emerged in the last few decades. Many in the racial majority now believe that White Americans face as much or more racial discrimination than people of Color, particularly Black Americans (Jones, 2008; Jones, Cox, Galston, & Dionne, 2011; Norton & Sommers, 2011). These perceptions are surfacing in a time when America has never been more equal (Anderson, 2016; Thernstrom & Thernstrom, 1998), with the gender wage gap being the smallest in history (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016) and Black college enrollment on the rise (National Center for Education Statistics, 2016). Though, White males still earn more than their similarly situated female and Black and Latinx counterparts (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016), and are still the majority seat holders in the corporate sector (McGirt, 2016; U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2016). Yet, the advances of marginalized populations toward equality leave some White Americans, about 30% (e.g., Isom Scott & Andersen, 2018; Jones, Cox, Cooper, & Lienesch, 2017; Pew Research Center, 2016),¹ feeling as if they are “the victims of government-sponsored racial discrimination” (Kimmel, 2013, p. 40).

Scholars argue that for some Whites, progress toward racial equality is perceived as a threat to their dominant status as the racial majority (Outten, Schmitt, Miller, & Garcia, 2012; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), and often times Whites believe that equality for marginalized populations may only be achieved at their expense (Eibach & Keegan, 2006; Kimmel, 2013; Norton & Sommers, 2011). In other words, racial equality is a zero-sum game (Wilkins, Wellman, Babbitt, Toosi, & Schad, 2015).² “If one believes this story of Whites losing the presidency, losing cultural icons, losing college admission opportunities, and losing jobs […] (then they) feel like they have lost more than they actually have lost, because of the immense power and resources (Whites) had to begin with” (Hammon, 2013, p. 119). Therefore, “efforts to level the playing field may feel like water is rushing uphill, like it’s reverse discrimination against (Whites). Meritocracy sucks when you are suddenly one of the losers and not the winners” (Kimmel, 2013, p. xiii). Many Whites, particularly men, perceive that the steps taken to remedy social inequality are taking away resources they are entitled to and are in turn unfair to them, leading to anger towards women and people of Color and feelings of loss and victimhood (Kimmel, 2013). Thus, some White Americans appear to believe that their social status is not only threatened, but already lost, and they are now the victims of a racially biased society.

The perceptions of others of those claiming anti-White bias is well-established in the literature (Blodorn & O’Brien, 2013; Unzueta, Everly, & Gutiérrez, 2014; Wilkins, Wellman, & Kaiser, 2013), and the various negative outcomes of Whites’ perceived status threat, including political movements and negative racial attitudes (Abascal, 2015; Craig & Richeson, 2014a, 2014b; Enos, 2016; Willer, Feinber, & Watts, 2016), have been studied. What have not been assessed, however, are the potential underlying social psychological processes that lead to some Whites perceiving a shift, and even loss, in status, which in turn potentially result in perceptions of anti-White bias. This paper builds upon the mechanisms provided by status construction theory to present a new theory – status dissonance theory – to illuminate potential mechanisms that result in perceptions of anti-White bias.

Status construction theory (Ridgeway, 1991; Ridgeway & Balkwell, 1997; Ridgeway, Boyle, Kuipers, & Robinson, 1998; Ridgeway & Correll, 2006; Ridgeway & Erickson, 2000; Ridgeway & Glasgow, 1996; with elaborations by Hysom, 2009; Webster & Hysom, 1998) generally posits that the arbitrary associations between nominal characteristics, such as race/ethnicity and gender, and the distribution of resources, goal objects, power, and prestige, are reinforced and perpetuated through confirming social interactions until the value of some characteristics, such as being White and male, over others, such as being Black and female, becomes a cultural norm. Status construction theory and its extensions provide sufficient mechanisms for the creation, dissemination, and even de-generalization of status beliefs. Yet, how do we explain when some of those holding high-status states, such as White men, feel oppressed and targeted? Building upon the mechanisms proposed by status construction theory, I present a theory of status dissonance that posits a sufficient process for understanding the disconnect between one’s believed deserved status value in social structure and how one perceives others to actually value people similar to themselves. In other words, how one believes things ought to be compared to how one thinks things are. This status dissonance then provides a lens through which the individual perceives and interacts with and behaves within the social world. This paper concludes with an application of status dissonance theory’s central propositions to assess how some Whites compared to others come to perceive anti-White bias using a nationally representative sample of White Americans (Pew Research Center, 2017).

STATUS CONSTRUCTION THEORY

Drawing upon an expectation states tradition (Berger & Conner, 1974; Berger, Rosenholtz, & Zelditch, 1980; Ridgeway & Berger, 1986), status construction theory (Ridgeway, 1991) posits sufficient mechanisms by which structural conditions influence social interactions and in turn affect cultural norms and beliefs. A nominal characteristic is an attribute that is commonly distinguishable and professed to categorize people, such as gender, race, or ethnicity. A characteristic has status value when cultural norms and beliefs suggest that one category (i.e., white skin or males) is more worthy than another (i.e., black skin or females).

Ridgeway (1991) makes four assumptions about the structural conditions of society, based on structuralist theory (Blau, 1977), which are sufficient, but not necessary, for a culture of status value to emerge. First, exchangeable resources must be unequally distributed across the population; thus, at the least, there is a dichotomous distinction in the population between those with abundant resources and those without. Second, this distinction between the resource rich and poor must be socially meaningful, so that individuals associate most with similar others. Third, the population is distinguishable on a characteristic which is socially salient (i.e., easily noticeable in society, such as race/ethnicity or gender), but does not have status value.³ And lastly, there must be a correlation between the resource distribution and the nominal characteristic. Consequently, there is a structure of inequality in society such that resources are disproportionately associated with different categories of the nominal characteristic (Ridgeway, 1991). Thus, according to status construction theory, because the resource distribution of a society and the nominal characteristics of white skin and skin of color are associated, the links between status, resources, and race/ethnicity are made in a specific interaction. Race and ethnicity, therefore, along with resources, become categorical cues for performance expectations,⁴ and thus, status (Berger & Conner, 1974; Ridgeway, 1991; Ridgeway et al., 1985).

Status value beliefs are reinforced through repeated interaction with dissimilar others, particularly with those that differ in both resources and the nominal characteristic. Beliefs gained in such interactions will be transferred to similar others and will be reinforced by similar outcomes; therefore, the status value of race/ethnicity, for example, becomes increasing salient and categorically meaningful. Race/ethnicity acquires independent status value, and categorical referential structures emerge (Ridgeway, 1991; Ridgeway & Berger, 1986). Referential structures are widely held, socially endorsed beliefs about what is assumed to be the relationship between remunerative distribution of resources and a nominal characteristic. As racialized referential structures are more commonly applied over time, they become legitimized rationales for racial inequality (Ridgeway & Berger, 1986).

Status construction theory has been extensively examined with experimental methods, supporting the posited mechanisms for the creation of status value (Ridgeway & Erickson, 2000; Ridgeway et al., 1998; Ridgeway & Glasgow, 1996) and their diffusion into social norms (Ridgeway & Correll, 2006; Ridgeway & Erickson, 2000; Ridgeway, Backor, Li, Tinkler, & Erickson, 2009). The posited processes have also been generalized beyond the lab with nationally representative (Brezina & Winder, 2003) and international (Brashears, 2008) survey data. Furthermore, scholars have expanded the mechanisms of status construction theory, finding the distribution of other valued things, such as honors, a better office, or praise (i.e., “goal objects”), create status value in addition to exchangeable resources, and things such as personal characteristics and behaviors may gain status value as well (Webster & Hysom, 1998). Much empirical work on status construction theory focuses on how the lower status actor comes to internalize status value beliefs about one’s self and others and behaves in accordance with these norms. For instance, in an experiment, Ridgeway and Erickson (2000) found that repeatedly witnessing those like themselves treated as unworthy led subjects to believe that those like themselves have low status value, though subjects resisted evaluating themselves as such. Hysom (2009) also found that those arbitrarily given goal objects, such as an honorary title, were more resistant to influence from others and evaluated themselves as the most competent in the task group. Together these findings reinforce how referential structures differentially influence individual’s perceptions of self and their beliefs about how others view people similar to one’s self based on status value.

DEGENERALIZATION OF STATUS VALUE

Ridgeway suggests “for the status value of a nominal characteristic to be undermined in a sustainable way, resource differences between those who differ on the characteristics must be eliminated” (1991, p. 382), and one has to have numerous disconfirm...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Editorial Advisory Board
• “Can a Girl’s Best Friend be Born in a Lab?” The Role of Ritual in Production Process Conservatism
• Accelerometers as a Methodological Tool in Group Processes Research
• Modeling Small Group Status and Power Dynamics Using Vocal Accommodation
• Identity Theory Paradigm Integration: Assessing the Role of Prominence and Salience in the Verification and Self-Esteem Relationship
• Occupational Status, Impression Formation, and Criminal Sanctioning: A Vignette Experiment
• Understanding White Americans’ Perceptions of “Reverse” Discrimination: An Application of a New Theory of Status Dissonance
• When do We Feel Responsible for Other People’s Behavior and Attitudes?
• Expectations and Coordination in Small Groups
• Index