Four studies (N = 1554) examine whether women believe a man's allyship is sincere or not when they are exposed to new (and sometimes counter) allyship cues. These studies demonstrate that women's perceptions of a man's allyship sincerity influences whether the man is viewed as an identity-safety cue for women. Women reported a higher sense of identity-safety and likelihood of retention in a male-dominated workplace when an ally-identified man confronted (vs agreed with or ignored) sexism which was mediated by women's perceptions of the man's sincerity. An ally-identified man who ignored sexism was perceived as equally insincere and unlikely to promote women's identity-safety as an ally-identified man who agreed with a sexist comment (Study 1). Study 2 demonstrates that perceiving an ally-identified man as sincerely motivated determines his impact on women's identity-safety and retention. Studies 3-4 examine how the order in which women learn of a man's stated motivation to identify as an ally and his behavioral response to workplace sexism inform women's perceptions of the man's sincerity, hypocrisy, women's anticipated workplace treatment, and broader perceptions of the organization. These results indicate that perceived sincerity amplifies the positive effects of ally-identified men on women's identity-safety in male-dominated workplaces, whereas indications of insincerity severely undermine the extent to which ally-identified men signal identity-safety to women.

Fezzey et al. (2024) propose a novel typology of CEO activism based on two behavioral conceptual dimensions—CEO talk (leveraging communicative power) and CEO action (leveraging economic power)—resulting in four archetypes of CEO activists. While this classification of CEO activists addresses a gap in literature, we argue that a motivational framework grounded in social psychological theories of motivation (e.g., Batson et al., 2002; Lewin, 1951) is more theoretically and practically useful. A return to motivation would allow researchers to better predict CEOs’ long-term engagement in activism by identifying their underlying ultimate goals for action. We highlight different forms of motivation for CEO activism and emphasize the importance of altruistic motivation, particularly when coupled with a stable orientation toward social groups (i.e., valuing the welfare of disadvantaged communities). We examine the strengths and limitations of CEO altruistic motivation and call for more systematic research into how altruistically motivated CEOs navigate and strategically respond to demands for action in support of disadvantaged groups.

Across the world, women's personal responses to gender‐based violence are increasingly political. In the current paper, we consider whether positive changes in the collective self, arising from personal experience of gender‐based violence, which may lie at the heart of this phenomenon, can be evidenced. Four studies are reported that evidence and validate a proposed construct that reveals collective post‐traumatic growth (PTG) among people who have experienced sexual violence. Confirmatory factor analyses, including a preregistered analysis, indicate that collective PTG is a multidimensional construct and is distinct, yet related to personal PTG. A longitudinal analysis offers evidence of stability and highlights the importance of collective efficacy and group solidarity in determining collective PTG over time. A final experimental study provides evidence of collective PTG determining people's emotional responses to reminders of their trauma. Taken together, these studies emphasize the significance of collective growth as an often overlooked, though positive and important, sociopolitical response to direct experiences of very personal trauma.

Successful retirement adjustment requires careful planning in the lead up to this important life transition. While financial planning is routinely prioritized, evidence suggests that the social changes in retirement can be just as challenging to manage - if not more. GROUPS 4 RETIREMENT (G4R) is a new online intervention that addresses this gap by targeting the identity changes that people typically experience in retirement. This paper reports findings from two studies evaluating the acceptability and efficacy of this intervention. Study 1 (N = 89) used a pre-post design to assess G4R and found that the intervention was positively evaluated by users and led to significant increases in their sense of thriving, perceived control, life satisfaction, anticipated retirement satisfaction, and planning intentions. Study 2 (N = 98) tested the intervention using an experimental design in which participants were randomly assigned to either G4R or a financial planning control condition. Results showed that G4R was as effective as financial planning in improving most outcomes and showed a clear advantage in increasing anticipated retirement satisfaction and intentions to engage in social and activities planning. Together, these studies provide initial evidence of the value of engaging in social identity-focused social planning to support well-being and preparedness in the lead up to retirement.

Three studies ( N = 1,349) examined why allyship from men (vs. women) is often more impactful in decreasing women’s concerns of negative treatment within male-dominated spaces in the United States. Women anticipated more respect from their peers after a man (vs. woman), identified as a gender equality ally. Increased respect mediated women’s lower anticipation of negative workplace treatment and higher anticipation of support (Studies 1–3). This effect was driven by the belief that an allied man holds more influence within an organization than an allied woman (Study 2). Study 2 additionally contrasted allyship to workplace friendship to determine the unique impact of gender-equality allyship compared to other forms of support from peers. In Study 3, ally influence was manipulated to assess whether an ally’s ability to communicate respect to women is contingent upon perceived influence. These results indicate that the positive impact of allyship from men is due in part to the greater perceived influence of allied men and their ability to communicate respect to women.

When do male and female managers stop caring about workplace gender inequality and, instead, engage in actions that maintain the status quo? We examined the differences in male and female managers’ appraisals of workplace inequality and the role of power in their efforts to enact organizational justice. Specifically, we tested whether managers’ injustice standards are a function of their managerial power and gender and whether these standards mediate the effect of managerial power on managers’ organizational injustice appraisals and attitudes. An injustice standard is the amount of evidence needed to conclude that workplace gender wage inequality is unfair to female employees. Power was operationalized as economic advantage (i.e., having a higher salary than the salary of female workers; Studies 1 and 2) and as organizational charge (i.e., having managerial responsibilities; Study 2). Managers reported either their ingroup standards (evidentiary injustice thresholds they as members of their gender group set; Ingroup Focus condition) or outgroup standards (injustice thresholds they estimate members of the other gender group set, Study 1; or injustice thresholds they estimated disadvantaged women in the workplace set, Study 2; Outgroup Focus condition). In Study 1 ( N = 268) and Study 2 ( N = 389), injustice standards increase as a function of power for both male and female managers. Injustice standards mediated the effects of power on managers’ resistance to efforts to reduce workplace inequality, legitimizations of inequality, and attitudes toward workplace diversity policies. Different strategies for reducing workplace injustice are discussed.

We examined the implications of the institutional racial/ethnic designation of Arab Americans as White. Do Arab Americans prefer this categorization or another, and what factors predict categorization in one way or another? In Study 1, a representative sample of Arab Americans in Southeast Michigan (N = 1,001 57% female, ages 18 to 88, Age M = 43.64) completed measures of perceived discrimination, various forms of social identification, and self-categorized from Census-designated racial categories. Self-categorization as “Other” was significantly predicted by experiences of discrimination, Muslim religious affiliation, and having darker skin. In Study 2, with a convenience sample of Arab American college students (52% female, Age M = 20.25), participants were randomly assigned to self-categorize as either “White” or as “Middle Eastern/North African” and then completed measures of perceived discrimination and various forms of social identification. Assigned self-categorization as “Middle Eastern/North African” significantly predicted subgroup respect towards Arabs, but only among those who strongly identified as American. Far from being a neutral, merely reflective method of categorization, the Census and similar categorization forms are sites of racial/ethnic socialization. Respondents bring to such forms their social psychological experience. For many Arab Americans, a host of social experiences indicate the (in)appropriateness and meaning of being forced to self-categorize as White or being allowed to self-categorize differently.

Interpersonal allyship may serve as a justice cue to signal that an environment is fair to women without increasing men's expectations of anti-male bias. We investigated how exposure to justice cues communicated at the interpersonal and organizational level impact men's and women's perceptions of procedural justice and fairness at an organization. Men and women were asked to imagine working at one of three randomly assigned male-dominated workplaces. Women who imagined working with a White man who was a gender-equality ally (Study 1, N = 352, and Study 2, N = 488) perceived the organization as more procedurally just, identified more strongly with the organization, and were less likely to view their gender as a disadvantage compared to women who imagined a workplace with an organizational diversity statement (Study 2 only) or a control workplace with no justice cues. Men did not view the ally nor the diversity statement negatively in either study. Integrative data analysis revealed medium to large effects (Cohen's d range .74–1.30) across dependent measures included in both studies. Our results suggest that interpersonal allyship from men is a practical way to promote women's expectations of fair treatment without increasing the threat of anti-male bias among men. Additional online study materials, as well as online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843221140300 .

Does commitment to allyship from a dominant group member cue identity-safety for women in male-dominated environments? We examine this question by assessing women’s perceptions of workplaces that included the presence (vs. absence) of a male ally (Studies 1–3) or a female ally (Study 3), and determine the impact of Black versus White allies for Black and White women. Across three studies (N = 1,032) and an integrative data analysis, we demonstrate that an equality-supportive male ally reduces anticipated isolation and workplace hostility and increases anticipated support, respect, and gender-equality norms for women in general populations (Studies 1 and 2) and women in science, technology, and math (Study 3). These results represent a possible strategy to help retain women in male-dominated fields.

The current study examines the nature of actions that U.S. college women ( N = 267) engage in to promote, protect, or enhance the welfare of other women. The study had two goals: 1) to distinguish between traditional forms of action ( traditional collective action ) and more informal, interpersonal, forms of action ( small acts ) among college women; and 2) to test whether the classic antecedents of collective action (gender identity, feminist identity, women’s activist identity, efficacy, appraisals of gender inequality, and injustice standards) are differentially predictive of these two types of participation. A confirmatory factor analysis provided strong support for these two distinct forms of participation: traditional collective action and small acts. Moreover, whereas women’s activist identity was the only predictor of traditional collective action, all predictors except gender identification and perceived group efficacy predicted small acts. Practical and theoretical implications for mobilizing college women for traditional collective action versus small acts are discussed.

One of the most serious challenges inherent in retirement transition is coping with social identity changes. We investigated social identity processes and the role of social engagement during retirement transition by examining the life narratives of recently retired university faculty (14 males and 5 females) from 12 different academic areas. The interviews were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). The results revealed one overarching theme—the centrality and importance of academic identity—and 3 identity transition processes with their associated goals: identity continuity, identity change, and identity conservation. Four additional themes captured the manifestations of these identity processes as they play out in the lived experiences of identity transition among these recent academic retirees: awareness of negative aspects in academia and perceived lack of fit between self and academia; social disidentification with academic identity; identity discovery and seeking old and new identities; and embracing old and new identities, including hobby-related and place-anchored activities. Maintaining and transforming parts of their former identities, as opposed to an active search for new connections, was a prevalent strategy among the participants. We discuss implications for designing strategies to better prepare recent academic retirees and academics who are considering retirement to enable a smoother identity transition and improved well-being.

In the aftermath of intergroup harm, victim groups often claim rights for restitution. Research has assessed how members of perpetrator groups respond to such claims, revealing that group-based guilt, shame, and anger can predict support for reparations. Though they have distinct foci, these group-based emotions are based on appraisals of ingroup harmdoing and victim group disadvantage as illegitimate. This meta-analysis investigates the relationship between these three group-based emotions and support for reparations, defined as symbolic or material policies that address historical injustices or the legacies thereof. An overall estimate based on 101 effect sizes from 58 samples, N = 10,305, showed a strong effect, r = .44, and revealed no significant difference between the three types of emotions. Moderator analyses revealed that the relationship between group-based guilt and reparations was weaker when the reparations required effort and stronger when the victims were Indigenous people; for shame, the relationship was weaker when the reparations required effort and stronger when the reparations contained symbolic elements; and for anger, the relationship was stronger when the victims were Indigenous people. Future research can further disentangle the conceptual overlap between these group-based emotions by explicitly testing heretofore under-examined yet important facets of intergroup contexts such as the timeframe of harm and the nature and meaning of the proposed reparations.

The historical trauma associated with the Indian Residential School (IRS) system was recently brought to the awareness of the Canadian public. Two studies investigated how the salience of this collective victimization impacted non-Indigenous Canadians’ expectations that Indigenous peoples ought to derive psychological benefits (e.g., learned to appreciate life) and be morally obligated to help others. Study 1 found that modern racism was related to perceptions that Indigenous peoples psychologically benefitted from the IRS experience, which in turn, predicted greater expectations of moral obligation. Study 2 replicated the relations among racism, benefit finding, and moral obligation among non-Indigenous Canadians (historical perpetrators of the harm done) and Americans (third-party observers). Americans were uniquely responsive to a portrayal of Indigenous peoples in Canada as strong versus vulnerable. Factors that distance observers from the victim (such as racism or third-party status) appear to influence perceptions of finding benefit in victimization experiences and expectations of moral obligation.

Outgroup perpetrators of discrimination are perceived as more biased than ingroup perpetrators, potentially because perpetrator group membership drives inferences regarding their motivation to discriminate. Consequently, when outgroup perpetrators provide hostile justification, greater discrimination and illegitimacy will be perceived compared to when ingroup perpetrators do so. In contrast, benevolent justifications reduce differences in discrimination and illegitimacy perception for outgroup versus ingroup perpetrators. In two experiments ( N s = 243; 382) dealing with sexism and racism, results supported our reasoning that the perpetrator’s explicit justification moderates the influence of the perpetrator’s group membership on discrimination and illegitimacy perception. Results of a third experiment ( N = 489) show that when no justifications are provided, the prototype effect on discrimination perception mirrors the prototype effect under hostile justification, but not under benevolent justification. The results are more mixed concerning perceived illegitimacy. We discuss the implications of these findings regarding the processes underlying the prototype effect.

Abstract We investigated the effects of group-level perspective taking when the target is an outgroup versus an ingroup. Men and women adopted the perspective of women suffering from wage inequality or remained objective. Men set lower injustice standards (i.e., required less evidence to conclude that gender inequality was unfair) and experienced higher empathic concern for women when they adopted women’s perspective. For women, these perspective-taking effects were similar if they imagined the situation of an outgroup (Experiment 2) but were small or negligible when they imagined the situation of an ingroup (Experiments 1–4). Results suggest that group-level perspective-taking effects on empathic concern and injustice standards require the perception of a distinction between the group-level self and the target group.

In 2018, more women than ever have run for and been elected to public office in the United States. Moreover, there has been an increase in women’s collective actions aimed at improving the welfare of women. In this social and political context, we examined the motivational mechanisms of collective action among college women in response to gender inequality and discrimination. Little work has addressed how collective action among college women emerges in the context of their lives. Based on data from 20 interviews with U.S. college women and using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), we developed a model that describes the process of mobilizing and maintaining engagement in collective action among college women and identifies the obstacles that they experience. Our findings extend prior research documenting the important roles of college women’s personal, social, and cultural life experiences in self-identification and collective action and describe additional obstacles and mechanisms of collective action. Researchers and activists alike could use the developed model to design strategies for mobilizing and sustaining activism among college women on behalf of all women.

We propose that because members of discriminated (vs. advantaged) groups have a history of dealing with injustice, majority group members expect them to be more committed to social justice. By commitment to social justice, we mean supporting, and caring for, the basic rights of virtually any marginalized group. Studies 1a ( N = 145) and 1b ( N = 120) revealed that members of discriminated (vs. relatively advantaged) groups were seen as having a stronger commitment to social justice. This was explained by participants’ perception of discriminated groups as having a tradition of fighting injustice (Study 2; N = 174). Demonstrating implications of these perceptions, discriminated (relative to advantaged) group members were assigned more justice-related roles in the workplace (Study 3a: N = 120; Study 3b: N = 126; Study 4: N = 133), and their justice-related initiatives were rated more negatively (Study 5: N = 259). Theoretical and practical implications regarding minority–majority relations and minorities’ ability to advance in workplace hierarchies are discussed.

We test common sense psychology of intragroup relations whereby people assume that intragroup respect and ingroup prototypicality are positively related. In Study 1a, participants rated a group member as more prototypical if they learned that group member was highly respected rather than disrespected. In Study 1b, participants rated a group member as more respected by other group members if they learned that group member was prototypical rather than unprototypical. As a commonsense psychology of groups, we reasoned that the perceived relationship between prototypicality and intragroup respect would be stronger for cohesive groups compared to incohesive groups. The effect of intragroup respect on perceptions of prototypicality (Study 2a & 2c) and the effect of prototypicality on perceptions of intragroup respect (Study 2b) were generally stronger for participants considering cohesive groups relative to incohesive groups. However, the interaction effect of prototypicality and group cohesion on intragroup respect did fail to replicate in Study 2d. In Studies 3, 4a, and 4b we manipulated the relationship between prototypicality and intragroup respect and found that when these variables were in perceptual harmony participants perceived groups as more cohesive. The results of eight out of nine studies conducted are consistent with the prediction that people make inferences about intragroup respect, prototypicality, and group cohesion in a manner that maintains perceptual harmony.