Objectives:The present mixed-methods study examines allyship as a politicized collective identity and its associations with ethnic identity, personality traits, and sociopolitical engagement among IPPOC. Method: Participants in two samples in 2016 (n ϭ 256) and 2017 (n ϭ 305) completed measures of ally identity, ethnic identity, personality traits, and political engagement. Results: Results indicate two factors of ally identity (ally beliefs and behaviors). Quantitative findings suggest a) ethnic identity exploration predicts ally beliefs and behaviors, b) extraversion predicts ally behaviors, while agreeableness and neuroticism predicts ally beliefs, and c) ally beliefs and behaviors predict awareness, while ethnic identity exploration predicts involvement in political action, even when personality traits are considered. Thematic analysis findings suggest IPPOC allies are politically engaged through social media, individual actions, protests, and civic engagement. Conclusions: Ethnic and ally identity provide different paths to sociopolitical awareness and involvement. Public Significance StatementIn recent years, Indigenous People and People of Color (IPPOC) have noted increased experiences of prejudice in both social and political contexts, and consequently, people have questioned the extent to which shared oppression serves as a catalyst for IPPOC to defend, advocate, and relate to one another as allies. Allies adopt various behaviors and express various beliefs in support of people from marginalized groups and, in addition, tend to be more politically engaged through social media, individual actions, protests, and civic engagement.

Objectives: During an increasingly hostile social and political climate for ethnic-racial minorities, psychologists have begun to question the extent to which Indigenous People and People of Color (IPPOC) see one another as in the same boat (Rivas-Drake & Bañales, 2018). Consequently, the present mixed-methods study examines allyship as a potential politicized collective identity and its associations with ethnic identity, personality traits, and political engagement among IPPOC. Method: The present study was conducted across two samples in August 2016 (n = 256) and 2017 (n = 305). Participants were administered a questionnaire including measures of ally identity, ethnic identity, personality traits, and quantitative and qualitative measures of political engagement. Results: EFA and CFA findings suggest a two- factor solution for ally identity (ally beliefs and behaviors). For Sample 1, findings from the path analysis suggest 1) ethnic identity exploration predicts ally beliefs and behaviors (Model 1), 2) extraversion predicts ally behaviors, while agreeableness and neuroticism predicts ally beliefs (Model 2), and 3) ally beliefs and behaviors predict awareness, while ethnic identity exploration predicts involvement in political action (Model 3), even when personality traits are considered (Model 4). For Sample 2, findings were similar with some notable variations. Thematic analysis findings suggest IPPOC are politically engaged through social media, individual actions, protests, and civic engagement. Conclusions: There is no one pathway to sociopolitical engagement, as elements of ethnic and ally identity provide different paths to sociopolitical awareness and involvement, with ethnic identity exploration being a particularly powerful mechanism for allyship and sociopolitical action.

According to the Indigenist ecological systems model (Fish et al., 2020), Native American peoples’ histories and cultures are critical to their development. However, the inclusion of Native peoples’ histories and cultures in their environments is complicated by settler colonialism – a societal structure that seeks to eliminate such important contexts. The exclusion of Native peoples’ histories and cultures in their ecologies can have adverse effects on developmental outcomes (Fryberg & Townsend, 2008; Wexler, 2009). Despite this, Native peoples continue to access their histories and cultures throughout their development to promote their well-being (Hartmann et al., 2019). Though the Indigenist ecological systems model offers theoretical insight into the histories and cultures that contour Native peoples’ environments, there are no empirical studies that examine its most basic claims. The present study addresses this gap in the literature by exploring how historical and cultural contexts intersect with the environments that affect Native peoples’ development. Qualitative analyses of Native peoples’ digital story narratives (n=73) suggest that immediate (e.g., parents, peers, school) and distant (e.g., media, government, policies) environments are the most important to Native peoples’ developmental outcomes. Native peoples indicated that culture figured into their immediate and distant environments to a moderate to prominent extent, whereas history did so to a lesser extent. We discuss the implications of these findings for Indigenous development and recommendations for creating a more equitable developmental landscape via partnerships with Native peoples.

No abstract