The current study explores the significance of race and gender on bystander attitudes before and after an online bystander intervention program to prevent sexual assault. A diverse sample of 750 college students participated in an online intervention and participants’ perceived bystander intervention ability and intent were assessed. The interaction of participant race and gender had a marginally significant impact on bystander ability and intent baseline scores. Furthermore, when analyzing gain scores from pre- to posttest, there was a significant race by gender interaction. Specifically, Latinx and Black men had higher preintervention scores, and White men had higher gains postintervention. Relevant cultural and social factors and directions for future research are discussed.

How can we best connect and understand issues of power, privilege and justice in a human rights framework? One approach, offered here, is to explicitly position intersectionality as a useful theoretical lens that can assist a critical understanding of the connections between the three substantive issues. It does this via a close examination of the situation in Scotland via Show Racism the Red Card, an anti-racist NGO that works with school-age children to raise awareness on the power of prejudice and discrimination in everyday, interrelated lives. It is shown that despite its often-reported complexities, intersectionality in practice can be made to work both conceptually and methodologically in environments such as classrooms. The realization of rights is foregrounded but it is argued that in order to achieve this standing, an appreciation of context, politics, social divisions and outcomes vis-à-vis inclusive equalities needs to be fully grasped. The case study of Show Racism the Red Card helpfully situates the nuances of intersectionality as both theory and method in Scotland, illustrating the need for human rights to be mindful of where it is as much as where it comes from. Overall, it is suggested that the example of Scotland offers opportunities to witness a critique of how power, privilege and justice are connected and challenged in a human rights context and how rights can be realized in everyday settings.

We conducted three studies to examine the relationship between gender and persuasion. We tested the notion that making gender roles salient affects the strength of individuals' attitudes and the way they respond to persuasive information. In Studies 1 and 2, we found that priming women with the female gender role reduced the strength of their attitudes (Study 1, N ¼ 50) and increased their susceptibility to persuasion through a low-thought process (Study 2, N ¼ 98). In Study 3, we manipulated the salience of both the female and male gender roles among men and women and assessed persuasion to a counter-attitudinal message (N ¼ 185). We found that the female and male primes affected men and women similarly, with the female prime causing participants to process messages superficially and the male prime leading to thoughtful message processing. These findings help to explain women's slightly greater persuadability in meta-analyses and provide evidence of harms that stereotypes about women can cause. Moving forward, we urge researchers to be wary of gender salience in the research context, especially when conducting persuasion research.

No abstract

No abstract