The role of intent and harm in judgments of prejudice and discrimination.

Four experiments examined how an actor's intent and the harm experienced by a target influence judgments of prejudice and discrimination. The presence of intent increased the likelihood that participants judged an actor as prejudiced and the actor's behavior as discriminatory. When intent was uncertain, harm influenced judgments of the behavior, which in turn influenced judgments of the actor, and participants were more cautious in their judgments about an actor than an actor's behavior. Harm also played a stronger role in targets' than observers' judgments. Understanding the role of intent and harm on perceptions of prejudice can help explain variations in targets' versus observers', and possibly targets' versus actors', judgments of discrimination and prejudice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perceived versus meta-analytic effect sizes: An assessment of the accuracy of gender stereotypes.

Assessed the accuracy of people's stereotypes about gender differences in 2 studies by comparing perceptions of sizes of gender differences with meta-analytic findings. In Study 1, with 184 psychology students, perceptions of variability among men and women and perceptions of mean differences were incorporated into measures of perceived effect sizes. In Study 2, with 145 psychology students, Ss made direct judgments about the size of gender differences. Contrary to previous assertions about people's gender stereotypes, findings indicate that people do not uniformly overestimate gender differences. The results show that Ss are more likely to be accurate or to underestimate gender differences than overestimate them, and perceptions of the size of gender differences are correlated with meta-analytic effect sizes. Furthermore, degree of accuracy is influenced by biases favoring women, in-group favoritism, and the method used to measure perceptions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Joan McKay versus John McKay: Do gender stereotypes bias evaluations?

Examines research using a classic, influential experiment conducted by Goldberg (1968), showing that women were likely to rate male authors (e.g., John T. McKay) more favorably than female authors (e.g., Joan T. McKay) of identical articles. Although replications of this study have been inconclusive, Goldberg's research is still frequently cited as demonstrating an evaluative bias against women. A quantitative meta-analysis of research using Goldberg's experimental paradigm shows that the average difference between ratings of men and women is negligible. Furthermore, although the effect sizes are not homogeneous, the difference remains negligible when other factors such as sex of subject or year of publication are taken into consideration. Several explanations for the heterogeneity of effect sizes and the inconsistency of findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Adapting to and coping with the threat and impacts of climate change.

This article addresses the nature and challenge of adaptation in the context of global climate change. The complexity of “climate change” as threat, environmental stressor, risk domain, and impacting process with dramatic environmental and human consequences requires a synthesis of perspectives and models from diverse areas of psychology to adequately communicate and explain how a more psychological framing of the human dimensions of global environmental change can greatly inform and enhance effective and collaborative climate change adaptation and mitigation policies and research. An integrative framework is provided that identifies and considers important mediating and moderating parameters and processes relating to climate change adaptation, with particular emphasis given to environmental stress and stress and coping perspectives. This psychological perspective on climate change adaptation highlights crucial aspects of adaptation that have been neglected in the arena of climate change science. Of particular importance are intra-individual and social “psychological adaptation” processes that powerfully mediate public risk perceptions and understandings, effective coping responses and resilience, overt behavioral adjustment and change, and psychological and social impacts. This psychological window on climate change adaptation is arguably indispensable to genuinely multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research and policy initiatives addressing the impacts of climate change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Human behavioral contributions to climate change: Psychological and contextual drivers.

We are facing rapid changes in the global climate, and these changes are attributable to human behavior. Humans produce this global impact through our use of natural resources, multiplied by the vast increase in population seen in the past 50 to 100 years. Our goal in this article is to examine the underlying psychosocial causes of human impact, primarily through patterns of reproduction and consumption. We identify and distinguish individual, societal, and behavioral predictors of environmental impact. Relevant research in these areas (as well as areas that would be aided by greater attention by psychologists) are reviewed. We conclude by highlighting ethical issues that emerge when considering how to address human behavioral contributions to climate change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reporting discrimination in public and private contexts.

The authors tested the hypothesis that members of stigmatized groups would be unwilling to report that negative events that occur to them are the result of discrimination when they are in the presence of members of a nonstigmatized group. Supporting this hypothesis, women and African Americans were more likely to report that a failing grade assigned by a man or a European American was caused by discrimination, rather than by their own lack of ability, when they made the judgment privately and in the presence of a fellow stigmatized group member. However, they were more likely to indicate that the cause of the failure was lack of ability, rather than discrimination, when they expected to make these judgments aloud in the presence of a nonstigmatized group member. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When Do the Stigmatized Make Attributions to Discrimination Occurring to the Self and Others? The Roles of Self-Presentation and Need for Control.

Two experiments examined how the goals of self-presentation and maintenance of control over one's outcomes influence women's tendencies to make or to avoid making attributions to discrimination. Demonstrating the importance of self-presentational goals, Experiment 1 showed that targets of discrimination were just as likely as similar others to make attributions to discrimination under private reporting conditions, but they were significantly less likely to do so under public reporting conditions. This experiment also provided initial evidence that need for personal control increases discrimination attributions. Experiment 2 demonstrated that targets' minimization of discrimination, observed in public reporting conditions, was eliminated when the need to reassert personal control was induced. Both experiments also demonstrated that failing to view events as discrimination has negative psychological costs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices.

Prejudice and discrimination against women has become increasingly subtle and covert (N. V. Benokraitis & J. R. Feagin, 1986). Unlike research on racism, little research about prejudice and discrimination against women has explicitly examined beliefs underlying this more modern form of sexism. Support was found for a distinction between old-fashioned and modern beliefs about women similar to results that have been presented for racism (J. B. McConahay, 1986; D. O. Sears, 1988). The former is characterized by endorsement of traditional gender roles, differential treatment of women and men, and stereotypes about lesser female competence. Like modern racism, modern sexism is characterized by the denial of continued discrimination, antagonism toward women's demands, and lack of support for policies designed to help women (for example, in education and work). Research that compares factor structures of old-fashioned and modern sexism and racism and that validates our modern sexism scale is presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychology's contributions to understanding and addressing global climate change.

Global climate change poses one of the greatest challenges facing humanity in this century. This article, which introduces the American Psychologist special issue on global climate change, follows from the report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change. In this article, we place psychological dimensions of climate change within the broader context of human dimensions of climate change by addressing (a) human causes of, consequences of, and responses (adaptation and mitigation) to climate change and (b) the links between these aspects of climate change and cognitive, affective, motivational, interpersonal, and organizational responses and processes. Characteristics of psychology that cross content domains and that make the field well suited for providing an understanding of climate change and addressing its challenges are highlighted. We also consider ethical imperatives for psychologists' involvement and provide suggestions for ways to increase psychologists' contribution to the science of climate change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)