My Kind of Guy: Social Dominance Orientation, Hierarchy-Relevance, and Tolerance of Racist Job Candidates.

Social psychology suggests that racism, as captured by explicit prejudice and racial discrimination, is perceived negatively in the United States. However, considering the hierarchy-enhancing nature of racism, it may be that negative perceptions of racism are attenuated among perceivers high in anti-egalitarian sentiment. The reported studies support this, suggesting that racist candidates were tolerated more and had relatively greater hireability ratings as a function of perceivers' social dominance orientation (SDO; Studies 1-4). Candidate race did not impact these evaluations-only the hierarchy relevance of their actions did (i.e., whether the candidate's behavior was hierarchy enhancing or had no clear implication for the hierarchy; Study 2). Furthermore, anti-racist candidates (e.g., those displaying hierarchy-attenuating behavior) were tolerated less and had lower hireability ratings as a function of perceivers' SDO (Study 3). Finally, the perceived intentionality of the candidate's actions affected tolerance toward them as a function of SDO. This suggests hierarchy relevance impacts evaluative outcomes.

Drawing the diversity line: Numerical thresholds of diversity vary by group status.

This research estimates the points of relative group representation at which members of dominant and nondominant groups declare an organization to be diverse. Across 7 studies, members of dominant groups, relative to members of nondominant groups, reported that diversity was achieved at lower representations of the nondominant group within an organization. This was explained by the dominant group members' relative opposition to using the equal representation of groups as a standard against which to judge diversity. This mediation was also replicated with the antiegalitarian dimension of social dominance orientation, suggesting that the setting of diversity thresholds serves a hierarchy relevant function. Group differences in thresholds of diversity were strongest when people were evaluating whether an organization was sufficiently (vs. descriptively) diverse, when group status was perceived to be threatened, and when the nondominant group was also a numerical minority in the relevant context. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Diverse According to Whom? Racial group membership and concerns about discrimination shape diversity judgments.

People often treat diversity as an objective feature of situations that everyone perceives similarly. The current research shows, however, that disagreement often exists over whether a group is diverse. We argue that diversity judgments diverge because they are social perceptions that reflect, in part, individuals' motivations and experiences, including concerns about how a group would treat them. Therefore, whether a group includes in-group members should affect how diverse a group appears because the inclusion or apparent exclusion of in-group members signals whether perceivers can expect to be accepted and treated fairly. Supporting our claims, three experiments demonstrate that racial minority group members perceive more diversity when groups included racial in-group members rather than members of other racial minority groups. Moreover, important differences exist between Asian Americans and African Americans, which underscore the need for more research to explore uniqueness rather than commonalities across racial minority groups.

Deny, Distance, or Dismantle? How White Americans Manage a Privileged Identity.

Social scientists have traditionally argued that whiteness-the attribute of being recognized and treated as a White person in society-is powerful because it is invisible. On this view, members of the racially dominant group have the unique luxury of rarely noticing their race or the privileges it confers. This article challenges this "invisibility thesis," arguing that Whites frequently regard themselves as racial actors. We further argue that whiteness defines a problematic social identity that confronts Whites with 2 psychological threats: the possibility that their accomplishments in life were not fully earned (meritocratic threat) and the association with a group that benefits from unfair social advantages (group-image threat). We theorize that Whites manage their racial identity to dispel these threats. According to our deny, distance, or dismantle (3D) model of White identity management, dominant-group members have three strategies at their disposal: deny the existence of privilege, distance their own self-concepts from the White category, or strive to dismantle systems of privilege. Whereas denial and distancing promote insensitivity and inaction with respect to racial inequality, dismantling reduces threat by relinquishing privileges. We suggest that interventions aimed at reducing inequality should attempt to leverage dismantling as a strategy of White identity management.

Diversity is what you want it to be: how social-dominance motives affect construals of diversity.

We propose that diversity is a malleable concept capable of being used either to attenuate or to enhance racial inequality. The research reported here suggests that when people are exposed to ambiguous information concerning an organization's diversity, they construe diversity in a manner consistent with their social-dominance motives. Specifically, anti-egalitarian individuals broaden their construal of diversity to include nonracial (i.e., occupational) heterogeneity when an organization's racial heterogeneity is low. By contrast, egalitarian individuals broaden their construal of diversity to include nonracial heterogeneity when an organization's racial heterogeneity is high. The inclusion of occupational heterogeneity in perceptions of diversity allows people across the spectrum of social-dominance orientation to justify their support for or opposition to hierarchy-attenuating affirmative-action policies. Our findings suggest that diversity may not have a fixed meaning and that, without a specific delineation of what the concept means in particular contexts, people may construe diversity in a manner consistent with their social motivations.

Diversity is in the eye of the beholder: how concern for the in-group affects perceptions of racial diversity.

The reported studies suggest that concern for the in-group motivates Asian Americans and African Americans to define diversity specifically, that is, as entailing both minorities' numerical and hierarchical representation, while motivating White Americans to define diversity broadly, that is, as entailing either minorities' high numerical and/or hierarchical representation in an organization. Studies 2-4 directly assess if a concern for the in-group affects conceptions of diversity by measuring Black and White participants' racial identity centrality, an individual difference measure of the extent to which individuals define themselves according to race. These studies suggest that the tendency to conceive diversity in ways protective of the in-group is especially pronounced among individuals who identify strongly with their racial in-group.

Paying for positive group esteem: how inequity frames affect whites' responses to redistributive policies.

This article finds that, when faced with racial inequity framed as White advantage, Whites' desire to think well of their racial group increases their support for policies perceived to harm Whites. Across 4 studies, the article provides evidence that (a) relative to minority disadvantage, White advantage increases Whites' support for policies perceived to reduce their group's economic opportunities, but does not increase support for policies perceived to increase minority opportunities; and (b) the effect of White advantage on Whites' esteem for their ingroup drives the effect of inequity frame on support for policies perceived to reduce Whites' opportunities.

Which racial groups are associated with diversity?

This article examines which racial groups are associated with the concept of diversity. Results indicate that regardless of perceivers' racial in-group, minorities (Asians, Blacks, and Latinos) tend to be more associated with diversity than do Whites. In addition, members of minority racial groups were found to associate their respective in-groups more strongly with the concept of diversity relative to minority out-groups. Consequences for addressing issues of racial equity and representation through the pursuit of diversity are discussed.

An unconscious desire for hierarchy? The motivated perception of dominance complementarity in task partners.

In 6 studies, the authors examined the perception of dominance complementarity, which is the perception of a target as different from the self in terms of dominance. The authors argue that these perceptions are motivated by the desire for positive task relationships. Because dominance complementarity bodes well for task-oriented relationships, seeing dominance complementarity allows one to be optimistic about a work relationship. As evidence that perceptions of dominance complementarity are an instance of motivated perception, the authors show that complementary perceptions occur when participants think about or expect task-oriented relationships with the target and that perceptions of dominance complementarity are enhanced when individuals care about the task component of the relationship.

Framing inequity safely: Whites' motivated perceptions of racial privilege.

Racial inequity was theorized to threaten Whites' self-image when inequity is framed as White privilege but not when framed as anti-Black discrimination. Manipulations of Whites' need for self-regard were hypothesized to affect their perceptions of White privilege but not of anti-Black discrimination. In Experiment 1, White participants reported less privilege when given threatening (vs. affirming) feedback on an intelligence or personality test; in contrast, perceptions of anti-Black discrimination were unaffected by self-concept manipulations. In Experiment 2, threatening (vs. affirming) feedback decreased privilege perceptions only among Whites high in racial identity. Using a value-based self-affirmation manipulation, Experiment 3 replicated the effect of self-image concerns on Whites' perceptions of privilege and provided evidence that self-concerns, through their effect on perceived privilege, influence Whites' support for redistributive social policies.

Concern for the in-group and opposition to affirmative action.

The present experiments suggest that the desire to benefit the in-group drives dominant-group members' policy preferences, independent of concern for out-groups' outcomes. In Experiment 1, the effect of a manipulation of affirmative action procedures on policy support was mediated by how Whites expected the policy to affect fellow Whites, but not by the expected effect on minorities. In Experiments 2 and 3, when focused on losses for the White in-group, Whites' racial identity was negatively related to support for affirmative action. However, when focused on gains for the Black out-group or when participants were told that Whites were not affected by the policy, racial identity did not predict attitudes toward the policy. In Experiments 2 and 3, perceived fairness mediated these effects.

Compliance with recommendations for follow-up care in Latinos: the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study.

PURPOSE: To determine rates of follow-up eye and health care in the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study (LALES), a population-based sample of Latinos. METHODS: Participants received a complete ophthalmic examination and were referred to a local healthcare provider for follow-up care, if ocular or systemic disease was found. Participants receiving referrals were later contacted by telephone and interviewed in their language of choice (English or Spanish) by a trained bilingual interviewer, to determine follow-up rates, and to discuss the barriers preventing follow-up care. RESULTS: Of 430 referred participants, 335 (78%) completed the follow-up survey; 278 (68%) of the responders obtained follow-up care. Among the 108 (32%) individuals who did not seek follow-up care, 54 (50%) cited cost of care as the main reason, while 30 (28%) indicated a lack of knowledge as to where to go for care, and 18 (17%) indicated the unavailability of health care. Logistic regression analyses (controlling for acculturation, co-morbid conditions, and patients' prior knowledge of their diagnoses) revealed that participants with insurance coverage, diagnosis with a systemic disease, and higher educational level were more likely to have received follow-up care. CONCLUSION: More than two thirds of the participants reported seeking the recommended follow-up care. Although cost, availability of services, and convenience of accessing care were found to be major barriers to obtaining health care, higher education, insurance coverage, and prior knowledge of the disease, were associated with receiving recommended care. Knowledge of barriers to seeking health care is important when developing community based healthcare programs directed toward the Latino population.