While social class has recently become a prominent topic in social psychological research, much of this effort has focused on the psychological consequences of objective and subjective indices of class (e.g., income, perceived status). This approach sheds light on the consequences of social class itself, but overlooks a construct of central importance in earlier theorizing on class: class consciousness, or the extent to which individuals acknowledge and situate themselves within class relations. The current paper offers a psychological model of class consciousness comprised of five elements: awareness of social class, perceptions of class conflict, beliefs about the permeability of class groups, identification with a class group, and personal experience of being treated as a member of one’s class. We offer a measure assessing those central dimensions and assess differences in these dimensions by age, gender, indices of social class, political ideology, and among different class groups. Finally, we offer suggestions for how an awareness of class consciousness may enrich social psychology and ultimately foster political change.

Dominant groups (e.g., White U.S. citizens) are more associated with "American" identity and they feel greater ownership over American national identity compared to ethnic minority groups. We extended this perception to gender and tested whether American national identity is constructed in masculine, versus feminine, terms. We examined whether U.S. men feel greater symbolic ownership over the nation and represent what it means to be a prototypical American, more than U.S. women. In Study 1, men and women considered male-associated traits more American than female-associated traits and listed more men as examples of "true" Americans than women. In Study 2, men reported higher levels of nationalism than women. Women's nationalism was moderated by their conception of male-associated traits as American-women who viewed American identity as more masculine were less nationalistic. Men showed a stronger correlation between gender identity and American identity compared to women. However, correlations between gender identity and nationalism did not differ by participant gender. Results suggest men and masculinity are considered more American than are women and femininity. We provide support for the subgroup asymmetry hypothesis through the novel lens of gender. We discuss means of attenuating the gendered construction of national identity in terms of media, policy, and education.

No abstract

Women increasingly occupy jobs in psychological research, but continue to face career barriers. One such barrier is fewer authorship and publication opportunities, with women often having fewer first authorships than men. In this research, we examine the overlooked role of middle authorship. Middle authorship contributes to various indices of productivity, while having lower costs. Study 1 looks at five years of authorship in two major journals in social and personality psychology. Study 2 examines publication records of all social psychology faculty in the Netherlands. Both studies find that women have fewer authorship possibilities: In Study 1, women were underrepresented as authors in academic journals, while women in Study 2 had shorter publication lists. More importantly, this tendency was exacerbated for middle authorship positions. Furthermore, the percentage of middle authorship publications were positively related to more publications overall. A focus on middle authorship highlights previously underestimated challenges women continue to face in psychological research.

Past research in social psychology has explored the effects of considering a given policy or issue from different perspectives. In the case of political information, for example, this might mean thinking about broad systemic factors or values that cause an outcome or alternatively focusing on the local actors who are responsible for and/or affected by that system. In the present studies, we explore whether beliefs about systemic (vs. personal) features of social class are more effective at predicting their positions about policies or norms that change inequality. Results consistently showed that system‐level perceptions of social class were more predictive of support for social change than perceptions of personal disadvantage. We discuss the implications of these findings for work on the psychology of inequality.