Discrimination Discrepancy Research Articles

Social identity, modern sexism, and perceptions of personal and group discrimination by women and men

Perceptions of gender-related discrimination against the self and group were examined in women and men, with a focus on the predictive utility of modern sexism and 3 dimensions of social identification (ingroup ties, centrality, and ingroup affect). Questionnaires were completed by 321 undergraduates (206 women and 115 men), of whom 78% self-identified as White and 10% as Asian. Higher levels of personal and group discrimination tended to be perceived by high-neosexism men and low-neosexism women. The centrality of gender identification was positively related to men's personal-level perceptions of discrimination, whereas effects of the emotional facets of social identity—ingroup ties and ingroup affect—occurred jointly with both gender and modern sexism. The results are discussed with reference to social identity theory and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy.

Now you see it, now you don't: explicit versus implicit measures of the personal/group discrimination discrepancy.

When making explicit self-report ratings, members of status- and racial-minority groups report less personal experience with discrimination than that encountered by their group--a phenomenon called the personal/group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD). This study provides evidence, for the first time, that the PGDD may be, in part, a product of the procedure used to measure it. White women and men completed explicit and implicit measures of personal and group discrimination based on sex. The PGDD surfaced among women in the explicit measures, but not in the implicit measures. These findings suggest that explicit and implicit measures might provide different assessments of experience with discrimination.

The Personal-Group Discrimination Discrepancy in Persons Living With Psoriasis

Prior research has shown that women, ethnic minorities, gay men, and lesbians perceive more discrimination directed at their group than at themselves. This study examined whether or not this personal-group discrimination discrepancy extends to members of a physically stigmatized group. Men (N = 58) and women (N = 43) living with psoriasis were asked to imagine the extent to which the average person with psoriasis is discriminated against and the degree to which they are personally discriminated against because of psoriasis in specific domains and in general. Women with psoriasis showed a smaller personal-group discrimination discrepancy than did men with psoriasis because of higher ratings for personal discrimination. These results point to the "double jeopardy" of life as a woman and as a person living with psoriasis. The fact that women's ratings for group discrimination showed less variability than their ratings for personal discrimination also suggests that women may be using a shared stereotype about the level of discrimination encountered by their group.

The Personal-Group Discrimination Discrepancy in Persons Living With Psoriasis

Prior research has shown that women, ethnic minorities, gay men, and lesbians perceive more discrimination directed at their group than at themselves. This study examined whether or not this personal-group discrimination discrepancy extends to members of a physically stigmatized group. Men (N = 58) and women (N = 43) living with psoriasis were asked to imagine the extent to which the average person with psoriasis is discriminated against and the degree to which they are personally discriminated against because of psoriasis in specific domains and in general. Women with psoriasis showed a smaller personal-group discrimination discrepancy than did men with psoriasis because of higher ratings for personal discrimination. These results point to the "double jeopardy" of life as a woman and as a person living with psoriasis. The fact that women's ratings for group discrimination showed less variability than their ratings for personal discrimination also suggests that women may be using a shared stereotype about the level of discrimination encountered by their group.

Defining Discrimination in the Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy

Members of low-status groups typically report that their group experiences more discrimination than they do personally, a phenomenon referred to as the personal/group discrimination discrepancy. It is hypothesized that manipulating the meaning of discrimination affects the personal/group discrimination discrepancy. In three studies, 301 female undergraduates (259 Whites; 42 non-Whites) from a large midwestern university read vignettes depicting discriminatory events that varied according to severity and frequency. Participants in high-frequency conditions perceived both more personal and group discrimination than low-frequency participants, and they showed smaller personal/group discrepancies. This effect was found for work-related discrimination and social sexism. Results indicate that severe and infrequent events are what people typically think of as discrimination and that using the term “discrimination” affects personal and group judgments. The importance of defining discrimination when investigating the personal/group discrimination discrepancy is discussed.

The Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy: The Role of Informational Complexity

The personal/group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD) refers to the tendency of disadvantaged group members to report higher levels of discrimination against their group in general than against themselves personally as members of that group. In two studies, the authors examined the cognitive mechanisms that underlie the PGDD. In Experiment 1, the authors demonstrated that the PGDD emerges from a divergence in the comparison standards on which personal and group judgments are made and that specifying that the same standards be used for both types of judgments eliminates or reduces the PGDD. In Experiment 2, the authors demonstrated that the magnitude of the PGDD was a function of the degree of informational complexity in the comparison targets. Implications for conceptualizations of the PGDD are discussed.

Perceiving and Responding to the Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy

To explain why minority group members recognize less personal than group discrimination, research has focused on cognitive processes. Although within self-categorization theory it may be argued that the discrepancy is a function of a salient social self that perceptually discounts the personal self, it can also be argued that depersonalization allows for the cognitive possibility of perceiving similar amounts of personal and group discrimination. The present study suggests that, consistent with group consciousness theories, the social self may serve to both discount as well as integrate the social self, depending on the way in which the social self is defined. Using structural equation modeling, the present study finds that defining the social self along social experiences is associated with lower personal/group discrimination discrepancy scores, which in turn are associated with greater participation in collective action. Implications for different definitions of the social self are discussed.

The Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy

This article extends Allport's (1954) analysis of targets of discrimination by examining why minority group members perceive more discrimination directed at their group than at themselves. Two studies were conducted to explain this personal/group discrimination discrepancy by focusing on the role of stereotypes, which allow people to process information faster. Women (Study 1) and African Americans (Study 2) made ratings of personaland group discrimination while a computer recorded the time it took them to respond. Both took less time to make ratings of group discrimination than personal discrimination. Moreover, the less time it took for them to respond to questions about group discrimination, the larger the discrepancy was between their ratings of personal and group discrimination. These results suggest that the personal/group discrimination discrepancy emerges when minority groupmembers are using a stereotype in which discrimination encountered by their group is believed to be high.

A Generalized Personal/Group Discrepancy: Testing the Domain Specificity of a Perceived Higher Effect of Events on One's Group than on Oneself

Studies on the personal/group discrimination discrepancy show individuals to perceive higher levels of discrimination directed at their group as a whole than at themselves personally. The authors hypothesized that the discrepancy is not restricted to the domain of discrimination. Research participants in Studies I and 2 completed questionnaires asking them to rate the degree to which they personally, their close friends, their gender group, and the general population (in Study 2, the average person in these groups) were affected by events in eight domains, including gender discrimination. In both studies, participants rated group levels of affectedness higher than personal levels, demonstrating a generalized personal/group discrepancy. Study 3 showed that this discrepancy also extends to positive events, thus arguing against a denial hypothesis and perhaps supporting an availability heuristic interpretation.

The Sky is Falling, But Not on Me: A Cautionary Tale of Illusions of Control, in Four Acts

Since the early 1980s, researchers have attempted to unravel the sources of a tendency for minority group members to report higher levels of discrimination directed at their group than at them selves personally. The favored explanation for this personal/group discrimination discrepancy has been denial of personal discrimi nation. However, subsequent research has revealed that this discrep ancy is not specific to the domain of discrimination, or to negative events, or even to minoritygroup members. Rather, it is a generalized personal/group discrepancy, perhaps explained by a culture-based heuristic that leads people to calculate the magnitude of the effect of an event to be proportional to the size of the social unit being affected. Thusgroups are affected more than individual persons and the size of the effect increases with the size of the group.

Ethnicity and perceived discrimination in Toronto: Another look at the personal/group discrimination discrepancy.

Perceptions of personal and group discrimination in five domains (jobs, pay, loans, promotions, and clubs) were investigated using the 1992 Minority Survey, which consisted of telephone interviews with 902 respondents from different ethnic groups in Toronto. The reported analyses concern six ethnic groups, representing visible, racial minorities (Blacks, Chinese, and South Asians) as well as white minorities (Italians, Jews, and Portuguese). The personal/group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD) - i.e., perceiving greater discrimination toward one's group than oneself personally - was observed to varying extent across all domains and ethnic groups, though with some exceptions. Visible minorities perceived greater discrimination toward their group than did white minorities, especially in the economic domains of jobs, pay, and promotions. Among visible minorities, Black respondents perceived higher levels of group and personal discrimination than most other ethnic groups across domains, followed in turn by Chinese and South Asian respondents. By contrast, white minority group members perceived considerably less group or personal discrimination than members of visible minorities, except for Jewish respondents who reported greater group discrimination in joining clubs than any other ethnic group. Implications for Toronto and Canadian society, along with a critical analysis of the PGDD phenomenon, are discussed.

Personal/group discrimination discrepancy: Towards a two-factor explanation.

A two-factor explanation is explored for the personal/group discrimination discrepancy; the finding that members of disadvantaged groups rate group-level discrimination to be higher than discrimination directed at them personally. Four experiments involving female, Asian, and Black students, as well as Black teenagers, are reviewed. On the one hand, disadvantaged group members minimize the discrimination that is directed at them personally. On the other hand, ratings of group-based discrimination appear to arise from a shared auto-stereotype.

The Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy: Women Talk About Their Experiences1

Participants in research on discrimination consistently rate discrimination directed at their group higher than at themselves personally as a member of that group. In order to examine this personal/group discrimination discrepancy, women were asked to spontaneously verbalize their thoughts as they made ratings for personal and group discrimination on 11‐point scales. In Study 1, university women who raised a greater number of life domains for group discrimination than for personal discrimination showed a larger personal/group discrimination discrepancy because of lower ratings for personal discrimination. An analysis of participants' protocols revealed that many attended to different domains when rating personal and group discrimination, and that these participants showed a larger personal/group discrimination discrepancy because of lower ratings for personal discrimination. Participants' ratings for group discrimination did not differ as a function of the number or content of the domains. The findings were replicated in Study 2 with working women, and are identified as two contributing factors to the personal/group discrimination discrepancy. The societal implications of the results are discussed in terms of the tendency for disadvantaged group members to downplay their personal experience with discrimination because it does not fit the stereotype of what is being experienced by the group.

The Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy: Responses to Experimentally Induced Personal and Group Discrimination

Abstract Participants in research on discrimination consistently perceived a higher level of discrimination directed at their group as a whole than at themselves as individual members of that group. Explanations for this personal/group discrimination discrepancy are all based on the assumption that some form of perceptual distortion is operating. However, research has not allowed for any measure of the objective reality of people'S experiences with discrimination, and thus there has been no objective standard against which researchers can test for perceptual distortion. This study involved the experimental inducement of personal and group discrimination, alone and in combination, among female students. The results indicated that subjects responded to objective reality and that personal experiences with discrimination affected their perceptions at the group level more than the reverse.

The Personal/Group Discrimination Discrepancy

An unexpected finding that has surfaced in research on discrimination is that respondents perceive a higher level of discrimination directed at their group as a whole than at themselves as individual members of that group. The present study directly tested this personal/group discrepancy by focusing on two groups of Canadian immigrants who have been the targets of much discrimination, Haitian and South Asian women. Respondents were questioned about their personal and group discrimination on four separate dimensions: race, culture, status as newcomers to Canada, and gender Strong support was found for the generality of the personal/group discrimination discrepancy. Three possible explanations for the discrepancy point to possible avenues for future research: the denial of personal discrimination, the exaggeration of group discrimination, and information-processing biases.