When Women’s Gains Equal Men’s Losses: Predicting a Zero-Sum Perspective of Gender Status

Ruthig, Joelle C.; Kehn, Andre; Gamblin, Bradlee W.; Vanderzanden, Karen; Jones, Kelly

doi:10.1007/s11199-016-0651-9

Cited by 102 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, students may perceive that women are generally favored over men in academia, a perception that women quotas may have contributed to. Previous research showed that perceptions of anti-male discrimination have been rising in recent years (Kehn and Ruthig, 2013;Ruthig et al, 2017). From this perspective, men quotas may be perceived as a beneficial and fair tool to counter anti-male discrimination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Women Quotas vs. Men Quotas in Academia: Students Perceive Favoring Women as Less Fair Than Favoring Men

Zehnter

Kirchler

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we analyze the free verbal associations to the stimuli women quotas and men quotas of 327 medical students. Women and men quotas are characterized by the same modus operandi (i.e., preferential treatment based on sex/gender). However, women quotas help a low-status group, whereas men quotas help a high-status group. In line with a support paradox, that is, the perception that support for women is less fair and less legitimate than support for men, we expected that students would reject women quotas in academia more vehemently than men quotas. Specifically, we hypothesized that students would have more negative and more emotional associations with women quotas than men quotas. As predicted, students had more negative associations with women quotas than with men quotas. However, students did not have more emotional associations with women quotas than with men quotas. In addition, we explored the semantic content of the free associations to identify specific concerns over each quota. Students perceived women quotas as counterproductive, derogatory, and unfair, whereas they perceived men quotas as beneficial and fair. Concerns over the negative perceptions of quota beneficiaries were associated more frequently with women quotas than men quotas. Potential factors underlying students' perceptions of both quotas are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Women Quotas vs. Men Quotas in Academia: Students Perceive Favoring Women as Less Fair Than Favoring Men

Zehnter

Kirchler

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, one possible reason why advantaged groups are not likely to be found at these protests is because they perceive that providing further concessions to disadvantaged groups means that their group will lose out. The perception that intergroup relations is a zero-sum game, whereby gains for one group imply losses for other groups (e.g., Esses et al, 1998;Ruthig et al, 2017), as opposed to a positive-sum game (e.g., Deutsch, 2006), decreases advantaged groups' support for actions and policies benefitting disadvantaged groups (e.g., Radke et al, 2018). Two papers in this special issue provide further empirical support for the generalizability of this effect both cross-culturally (Kosakowska-Berezecka et al, 2020), and across various contexts of social inequality, that is, racism, heterosexism (Stefaniak et al, 2020), and sexism (Kosakowska-Berezecka et al, 2020).…”

Section: Advantag Ed G Roups' Per S Pec Tive On Allys Hipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding allies’ participation in social change: A multiple perspectives approach

Kutlaca

Radke

Iyer

et al. 2020

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction to the EJSP special issue brings together recent literature on allyship. We present and discuss different definitions of allyship and highlight a multiple perspectives approach to understanding the predictors and consequences of allyship. This approach suggests that engagement in allyship can be driven by egalitarian and non‐egalitarian motivations and that the behaviours identified as allyship can have different meanings, causes and consequences depending on whether researchers take into account the allies’ perspective or the disadvantaged groups’ perspective. We use this approach as an organizing principle to identify themes that emerge in the papers included in this special issue. We start with four papers that consider the perspective of the advantaged group, followed by two papers that consider the perspective of the disadvantaged group. Finally, we introduce two theoretical papers that examine the relations between disadvantaged groups and allies, and we set out directions for future research.

show abstract

“…Zero-sum thinking is the belief that one group's gains can only be acquired at the expense of another group's losses, and it corresponds with lower interpersonal trust (Davidai & Ongis, 2019). In the context of gender, those higher in zero-sum thinking view women's gains as directly related to men's losses (e.g., in status, power, and the workplace; Ruthig et al, 2017). In general, men endorse zero-sum thinking about gender more strongly than women do (Bosson, Vandello, Michniewicz, & Lenes, 2012;Kuchynka, Bosson, Vandello, & Puryear, 2018;Wilkins, Wellman, Babbitt, Toosi, & Schad, 2015), indicating that men relative to women generally view gender group relations in a competitive "us vs. them" manner.…”

Section: Individual-level Predictors Of Men's Collective Action Intenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Country‐level and individual‐level predictors of men's support for gender equality in 42 countries

Kosakowska‐Berezecka

Besta

Bosson

et al. 2020

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

When Women’s Gains Equal Men’s Losses: Predicting a Zero-Sum Perspective of Gender Status

Cited by 102 publications

References 28 publications

Women Quotas vs. Men Quotas in Academia: Students Perceive Favoring Women as Less Fair Than Favoring Men

Women Quotas vs. Men Quotas in Academia: Students Perceive Favoring Women as Less Fair Than Favoring Men

Understanding allies’ participation in social change: A multiple perspectives approach

Country‐level and individual‐level predictors of men's support for gender equality in 42 countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About