Literature DB >> 34516179

Why benefiting from discrimination is less recognized as discrimination.

L Taylor Phillips1, Sora Jun2.   

Abstract

Discrimination continues to plague society, creating stark inequities between groups. While existing work has considered the role of prejudice in perpetuating discrimination, we draw on emerging research on privilege and inequity frames to offer an overlooked, complementary explanation: Objectively discriminatory decisions that are described as favoring, compared with disfavoring, are less likely to be recognized as discrimination. We further theorize this is because favoring decisions are perceived to be motivated by positive intentions. We find support for our hypotheses across eight studies. First, using both qualitative (Studies 1a-b) and experimental approaches (Studies 2-7), across a range of discrimination contexts including race, sex, nationality, and age, we find that inequity frames affect perceptions of discrimination. Further, we find that even human resource employees are less likely to recognize discrimination when described as favoring (Study 3), in turn affecting their reporting behaviors: They are less likely to report potentially discriminatory decisions for review. Next, sampling language from U.S. Supreme Court cases, we find that people support litigation less when discrimination uses a favoring frame, versus disfavoring frame (Study 4). Then, we find that this pattern is driven by inequity frames shaping perceived intentions, rather than perceived harm (Studies 5-6). Finally, we find some evidence that inequity frames regarding a discriminatory decision committed by an organization may affect candidates' job pursuit behaviors (Study 7). This work contributes to a nascent perspective that advantaging mechanisms are critical for creating group inequity: given individuals are less likely to recognize favoritism as discriminatory, favoritism may especially contribute to the persistence of inequity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34516179     DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000298

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol        ISSN: 0022-3514


  1 in total

1.  Chronic frames of social inequality: How mainstream media frame race, gender, and wealth inequality.

Authors:  Sora Jun; Rosalind M Chow; A Maurits van der Veen; Erik Bleich
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 12.779

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.