Search

In this research, we aim to develop a better understanding of the different ways in which employees can advance or resist the diversity and inclusion (D&I) policies implemented by their organization. To this end, we complement prior work by distinguishing between employees' attitudinal and behavioral opposition versus support for D&I policies. We combine these to distinguish different combinations of attitudinal and behavioral responses that characterize specific groups of employees, which we label opponents, bystanders, reluctants, and champions. In a large‐scale survey study conducted among employees from seven organizations located in the Netherlands (n = 2913), we find empirical support for the validity of this taxonomy and its value in understanding the likelihood that employees advance or resist D&I policies. Furthermore, we find more convergence between attitudinal and behavioral support when employees perceive a more positive climate for inclusion. Together, these results advance existing scholarly work by providing both a theoretical account of and empirical evidence for the different ways in which D&I policies may find support or resistance from employees. In addition, our work offer practitioners a practical tool to examine the likelihood that D&I policies meet support or opposition from their employees and therefore enables them to design and implement more effective D&I interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current research investigated whether mothers of transgender youth experience stigma‐by‐association. Mturk participants (N = 489) were randomly assigned to read a vignette about a family in which the social identity (transgender, gay/lesbian, cisgender/heterosexual control) and gender (girl, boy) of a child was manipulated, while all other information was held constant. Results revealed stigma targeting mothers as a function of children's social identity (but not gender), such that mothers of transgender girls and boys were viewed substantially more negatively than identical mothers of cisgender/heterosexual youth. Moreover, this stigma was particularly robust among politically conservative participants. In contrast, mothers of gay/lesbian youth did not encounter systematic stigma, though they were sometimes perceived more negatively than mothers of cisgender/heterosexual youth. Results provide novel experimental evidence of stigma‐by‐association targeting mothers of transgender youth and raise serious concerns about the treatment of parents who seek to affirm their transgender children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mounting experimental evidence suggests that subtle gender biases favoring men contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), including many subfields of the life sciences. However, there are relatively few evaluations of diversity interventions designed to reduce gender biases within the STEM community. Because gender biases distort the meritocratic evaluation and advancement of students, interventions targeting instructors' biases are particularly needed. We evaluated one such intervention, a workshop called "Scientific Diversity" that was consistent with an established framework guiding the development of diversity interventions designed to reduce biases and was administered to a sample of life science instructors (N = 126) at several sessions of the National Academies Summer Institute for Undergraduate Education held nationwide. Evidence emerged indicating the efficacy of the "Scientific Diversity" workshop, such that participants were more aware of gender bias, expressed less gender bias, and were more willing to engage in actions to reduce gender bias 2 weeks after participating in the intervention compared with 2 weeks before the intervention. Implications for diversity interventions aimed at reducing gender bias and broadening the participation of women in the life sciences are discussed.

We examined whether gay men (Studies 1–2) and lesbian women (Study 1) who harbor internalized stigma due to their sexuality will desire a romantic relationship that reflects conventional, complementary gender roles where one partner is stereotypically feminine and the other is stereotypically masculine, in terms of both personality traits and division of household labor. Results showed that, among gay men with high (but not low) internalized stigma, self-ascribed masculinity was positively related to preferences for an ideal partner with stereotypically feminine traits. Preferences for partners with gender complementary traits did not emerge among women, or among men high in self-ascribed femininity. Contrary to predictions, internalized stigma was not associated with preferences for a gender-complementary division of household chores. Instead, internalized stigma was associated with the avoidance of tasks that are stereotypically gender incongruent—women high (vs. low) in stigma preferred for the partner (vs. self) to do so-called masculine (but not feminine) chores, whereas men high (vs. low) in stigma preferred for the partner (vs. self) to do stereotypically feminine (but not masculine) chores. Study 2 also included an experimental manipulation to test whether these effects were influenced by societal exclusion or acceptance, but there was no evidence of this. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the available body of knowledge on organizational humanness, and its relation with leadership behavior. We discuss three related concepts that were found in this review: organizational dehumanization, objectification, and organizational humanization, and present how they have been measured. The results of this review show that most studies concern the absence of humanness in organization, that is, organizational dehumanization or objectification, and measures therefore have a corresponding focus on the absence of humanness as well. Accordingly, the available literature on the relation between leadership and (de)humanization seems mostly focused on the absence of humanness. We emphasize the necessity of studying experienced humanness in organizations and the importance of clarifying the leadership behavior that can support and increase experienced humanness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

6 Twenty-six per cent of organisations formulated the goal to increase the influx of LGBTIQ+ employees, and four per cent of organisations had this goal with regard to the promotion or retention of employees. Scholarly interest in the workplace experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and queer (LGBTIQ+) employees has increased over the past decades ([28]; [6]). In both, language stood out as both a workplace-attitudes barometer, as well as an effective intervention method of creating safer, more inclusive workplaces for LGBTIQ+ employees. [Extracted from the article]

Many organizations have diversity statements in place in which they publicly declare their appreciation of and commitment to workforce diversity. These statements can either contain moral motives (e.g., "diversity reduces social inequalities"), business motives (e.g., "diversity enhances innovation"), or a combination of moral and business motives. In a desk study involving 182 Dutch organizations, we found that (a) private sector organizations more often than public sector organizations communicate business motives, (b) that public and private sector organizations are equally likely to communicate moral motives, and (c) that public sector organizations more frequently than private sector organizations communicate a combination of moral and business motives. Next, we used an experimental design to examine the causal influence of communicating different diversity motives on organizations' employment image (i.e., perceptions of organizational morality, competence, and attractiveness) among prospective employees (n = 393). Here, we used a scenario in which a healthcare organization was portrayed as either a public or a private sector organization and communicated either only moral motives, only business motives or a combination of moral and business motives for diversity. We found that for a public sector organization communicating moral instead of business motives for valuing diversity induced a more favorable employment image. For a private sector organization, there were no differences in employment image depending on the motive communicated. Together, these two studies shed new light on the role of diversity motives in establishing a positive employment image. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social Identity Theory (SIT) is commonly applied to explain social change. We aim to revive interest in the concept of social creativity in order to provide a SIT perspective on bolstering and challenging social stability. Social creativity allows people to maintain or achieve a positive social identity through re‐interpreting intergroup relations. Despite this crucial role in shaping intergroup comparisons, the causes and effects of social creativity are largely unknown. To understand how social creativity can contribute to social stability, we argue for a return to SIT's dynamic nature of constantly renegotiating intergroup relations, involving both higher‐ and lower‐status groups. Within these dynamics, we propose that social creativity can play the roles of coping with, promoting, and questioning social stability. Additionally, we outline a research agenda for future research on social creativity and discuss the impact that social stability can have in societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on promises and pitfalls of conducting inter and transdisciplinary research by describing the experiences with the establishment of the Privacy and Inclusion Consortium (P.INC). Topics include solving the apparent discordance between the requirement for privacy and the need for inclusion in organisations; and increasing employees' job satisfaction and reducing the work-related stress and the intentions for leaving the company.

We review empirical research on (social) psychology of morality to identify which issues and relations are well documented by existing data and which areas of inquiry are in need of further empirical evidence. An electronic literature search yielded a total of 1,278 relevant research articles published from 1940 through 2017. These were subjected to expert content analysis and standardized bibliometric analysis to classify research questions and relate these to (trends in) empirical approaches that characterize research on morality. We categorize the research questions addressed in this literature into five different themes and consider how empirical approaches within each of these themes have addressed psychological antecedents and implications of moral behavior. We conclude that some key features of theoretical questions relating to human morality are not systematically captured in empirical research and are in need of further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated how the perception of being dissimilar to others at work relates to employees' felt inclusion, distinguishing between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity. In addition, we tested the indirect relationships between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity and work-related outcomes, through social inclusion. Furthermore, we tested the moderating role of a climate for inclusion in the relationship between perceived dissimilarity and felt inclusion. We analyzed survey data from 887 employees of a public service organization. An ANOVA showed that felt inclusion was lower for individuals who perceived themselves as deep-level dissimilar compared to individuals who perceived themselves as similar, while felt inclusion did not differ among individuals who perceived themselves as surface-level similar or dissimilar. Furthermore, a moderated mediation analysis showed a negative conditional indirect relationship between deep-level dissimilarity and work-related outcomes through felt inclusion. Interestingly, while the moderation showed that a positive climate for inclusion buffered the negative relationship between deep-level dissimilarity and felt inclusion, it also positively related to feelings of inclusion among all employees, regardless of their perceived (dis)similarity. This research significantly improves our understanding of how perceived dissimilarity affects employees by distinguishing between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity and by demonstrating the importance of a climate for inclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across three studies, we examine the correlates of subjective well-being and mental and physical health among members of a historically disadvantaged group, namely, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals. Results show those who minimize (vs. acknowledge) the extent to which their group is the target of discrimination report better well-being across myriad indicators (Studies 1-3). We also demonstrate that this effect is mediated by perceived system fairness (Study 1); holds above and beyond internalized homonegativity (Studies 1 and 3) and ingroup identification (Studies 2-3); and is true regardless of whether individuals reside in hostile or accepting environments (Study 2), and regardless of whether individuals had personally experienced discrimination (Study 3). For some indicators (namely, body mass index [BMI], social well-being, self-esteem, depression, and mental illness diagnosis), the relationship between minimization of discrimination and well-being was stronger among those who had frequent (vs. rare) discriminatory experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Given its prevalence and impact, it is important that prejudice against sexual‐and gender identity minorities is reduced and that negative behaviors against these minorities are prevented. We introduce and provide a definition of the term Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Prejudice (SOGIP), and discuss its determinants and configurations as well as ways to measure it. Furthermore, we review the recent social psychological literature on SOGIP‐reducing interventions, identify scientific knowledge gaps regarding these interventions, and offer recommendations on how to apply the available knowledge to real‐life situations. We conclude that there are many interventions currently being employed to target SOGIP with some seeming more effective than others. Particularly promising interventions are those aimed at evoking empathy and perspective taking and those aimed at developing alliances between minority and majority members. However, there is still room for improvement. Overall, little empirical evidence speaks to the robustness of intervention effects, its underlying mechanisms, duration, and boundary conditions. Researchers should focus on all aspects of SOGIP (i.e., sexual orientation prejudice as well as gender identity prejudice); different expressions of prejudice (i.e., blatant and subtle), actual behavior towards minorities, and on both perpetrators and targets of prejudice. By joining forces, researchers and practitioners should aim to overcome practical and theoretical obstacles in evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. Policy makers should support initiatives that test, improve, implement and distribute intervention programs, and can help bring together researchers and practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arguments opposing same-sex marriage are often made on religious grounds. In five studies conducted in the United States and Canada (combined N = 1,673), we observed that religious opposition to same-sex marriage was explained, at least in part, by conservative ideology and linked to sexual prejudice. In Studies 1 and 2, we discovered that the relationship between religiosity and opposition to same-sex marriage was mediated by explicit sexual prejudice. In Study 3, we saw that the mediating effect of sexual prejudice was linked to political conservatism. Finally, in Studies 4a and 4b we examined the ideological underpinnings of religious opposition to same-sex marriage in more detail by taking into account two distinct aspects of conservative ideology. Results revealed that resistance to change was more important than opposition to equality in explaining religious opposition to same-sex marriage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three studies examined the hypothesis that system justification is negatively associated with collective protest against ingroup disadvantage. Effects of uncertainty salience, ingroup identification, and disruptive versus nondisruptive protest were also investigated. In Study 1, college students who were exposed to an uncertainty salience manipulation and who scored higher on system justification were less likely to protest against the governmental bailout of Wall Street. In Study 2, May Day protesters in Greece who were primed with a system-justifying stereotype exhibited less group-based anger and willingness to protest. In Study 3, members of a British teachers union who were primed with a "system-rejecting" mind-set exhibited decreased system justification and increased willingness to protest. The effect of system justification on nondisruptive protest was mediated by group-based anger. Across very different contexts, measures, and methods, the results reveal that, even among political activists, system justification plays a significant role in undermining willingness to protest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relationships between subjective status and perceived legitimacy are important for understanding the extent to which people with low status are complicit in their oppression. We use novel data from 66 samples and 30 countries ( N  = 12,788) and find that people with higher status see the social system as more legitimate than those with lower status, but there is variation across people and countries. The association between subjective status and perceived legitimacy was never negative at any levels of eight moderator variables, although the positive association was sometimes reduced. Although not always consistent with hypotheses, group identification, self-esteem, and beliefs in social mobility were all associated with perceived legitimacy among people who have low subjective status. These findings enrich our understanding of the relationship between social status and legitimacy., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest to report., (© 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Social Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)