The Effect of Target Status on Witnesses' Reactions to Confrontations of Bias

Rasinski, Heather M.; Czopp, Alexander M.

doi:10.1080/01973530903539754

Cited by 179 publications

(186 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

169

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, educators note that when teaching about inequality, they often experience resistance, whereby students deny or legitimize injustice, ignore or silence the educator (e.g., Higginbotham, 1996, Meacham, 1995. Similarly, attempting to educate the perpetrator often involves repeated resistance from the perpetrator(s), perhaps in the form of justification of their behaviour, or hostility (Czopp & Monteith, 2003;Czopp, Monteith & Mark, 2006;Rasinski & Czopp, 2010). Thus, if those trying to educate received resistance from perpetrators, this may have led participants to feel their confrontations had little impact, consistent with their declining sense of mastery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Everyday Confrontation of Discrimination: The Well-Being Costs and Benefits to Women over Time

Foster¹

2013

IJPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking action against discrimination has positive consequences for well-being (e.g., Cocking & Drury, 2004) but most of this research has focused on collective actions and has used methodologies assessing one point in time. This study therefore used a diary methodology to examine how women's everyday confrontations of discrimination would affect measures of subjective and psychological well-being, and how these relationships would change over time. In a 28-day online diary study, women indicated their daily experience of discrimination, described their response, and completed measures of well-being. Results showed that at the beginning of the study, using indirect confrontation predicted greater well-being than using angered confrontation. However, continued use of indirect and educational confrontation decreased well-being whereas continued use of angered confrontation increased well-being over time. By the end of the study, using angered confrontation predicted greater well-being than using indirect confrontation. Analyses of linguistic markers were consistent with the explicit measures of well-being. Implications for distinguishing between types of confrontations and integrating time analyses are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Everyday Confrontation of Discrimination: The Well-Being Costs and Benefits to Women over Time

Foster¹

2013

IJPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Broadly speaking, research shows that confronting prejudice can reduce prejudice in both perpetrators (Czopp et al 2006) and observers (Citron et al 1950;Rasinski and Czopp 2010). Both men and women, therefore, may be able to reduce everyday sexism and its consequences if they confront it.…”

Section: Confronting Sexismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Confronting Sexism: The Role of Relationship Orientation and Gender

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined whether relationship orientation was associated positively with confronting sexism and whether confronting sexism was associated positively with competence, self-esteem, and empowerment for women but not men in stereotypically masculine domains. Men and women undergraduates from a United States Midwestern university (n=165) were exposed to a sexist statement during a staged, online interaction. Relationship orientation, confronting (i.e., publically rating the sexist statement as problematic and inappropriate), competence, self-esteem, and empowerment were assessed. Consistent with hypotheses, relationship orientation was associated positively with confronting. Additionally, confronting was associated positively with competence, self-esteem, and empowerment for women but not men. Implications for interpersonal confrontation, relationship orientation, and gender differences in response to everyday sexism are discussed.

show abstract

“…Respecto al estatus de los testigos en las atribuciones de culpa, Swenson et al (1984) evaluaron el efecto del estatus de los testigos en la credibilidad de su testimonio, encontrando que se atribuía mayor credibilidad a los testigos con estatus social alto. De igual forma, se han comparado las opiniones acerca de las atribuciones de culpa y responsabilidad entre personas de grupos socialmente reconocidos, los blancos, en cuanto a etnia se refiere, con las atribuciones emitidas de grupos étnico minoritarios, encontrando que mientras es más probable admitir como verosímiles las atribuciones de culpa y responsabilidad y mejor fundamentadas las argumentaciones que las sustentan, las atribuciones de los grupos minoritarios eran tomadas como quejumbrosas y mal fundamentadas (Rasinski & Czopp, 2010). Además, las personas consideran como más creíbles a testigos que son percibidos como más seguros y precisos, siempre y cuando en la información dada no se evidencien errores posteriores (Tenney, MacCoun, Spellman & Hastie, 2007).…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

Atribuciones de culpa a partir del estatus del testigo y la intencionalidad

Contreras

Urueña

2014

SumaPsi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Effect of Target Status on Witnesses' Reactions to Confrontations of Bias

Cited by 179 publications

References 25 publications

Everyday Confrontation of Discrimination: The Well-Being Costs and Benefits to Women over Time

Everyday Confrontation of Discrimination: The Well-Being Costs and Benefits to Women over Time

Confronting Sexism: The Role of Relationship Orientation and Gender

Atribuciones de culpa a partir del estatus del testigo y la intencionalidad

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About