The way we understand an inequality can depend on small differences in how the inequality is described. This research focuses on one subtle but potentially powerful difference in how inequalities are described: advantage vs. disadvantage framing. When an inequality is described using an advantage frame (e.g., “men have higher wages than women”), it puts the focus on the advantages held by the advantaged group. In contrast, when an inequality is described using a disadvantage frame (e.g., “women have lower wages than men”), it puts the focus on the disadvantages faced by the disadvantaged group. This dissertation investigates the hypothesis that when advantaged by an illegitimate inequality, individuals will avoid using advantage frames. I hypothesize that this will occur because focusing on one’s unfair advantages is more threatening that focusing on another’s unfair disadvantages. In four pilot studies and seven experiments (N = 2,669), I found tentative support for these hypotheses: In Studies 1-3, I found evidence that when advantaged by an inequality (but not when disadvantaged by an inequality), individuals were less likely to use advantage frames when the inequality they were describing was illegitimate (vs. legitimate). This suggests that individuals may avoid using advantage frames when their group is illegitimately favored in order to avoid focusing on their unfair advantages. Studies 4-7 investigated the role of threat in how individuals advantaged by illegitimate inequalities use and respond to inequality frames. I found that advantage frames prompted more cardiovascular threat than disadvantage frames among Whites preparing to discuss illegitimate racial inequality. However, I did not find concrete evidence for the two theorized mechanisms behind this threat, nor did I find direct evidence that threat influences which inequality frames individuals choose to use when describing the illegitimate inequalities. This research helps illuminate the potentially large effects of small linguistic differences in our descriptions of inequality. It also highlights the subtle ways that those who are advantaged by inequality may shift their descriptions of inequality to avoid challenges to their position.

This longitudinal study examined whether individual differences in intergroup suspicion at college entry predicted a sense of belonging at the end of racial/ethnic minority students’ freshman year. More specifically, I first tested whether the quantity of interactions with Whites, vs. Latinxs, along with identity compatibility, mediated the relationship between suspicion and sense of belonging. I also tested whether the perceived quality of interactions with Whites, vs. Latinxs, along with identity compatibility, mediated the relationship between suspicion and sense of belonging. No support for the mediation model was found such that initial levels of suspicion did not indirectly predict decreased sense of belonging through either the quantity or perceived quality of interactions with Whites and decreased identity compatibility. I also tested whether the quantity and/or quality of interactions with Whites moderated the relationship between initial levels of suspicion in predicting both identity compatibility and sense of belonging. Neither the quality or quantity of interactions with Whites interacted with suspicion to predict identity compatibility or sense of belonging at the end of students’ freshman year. Though my theoretical models were not supported, results from this study pose interesting questions for future research. This research contributes to the existing literatures on cross-group friendships, cross-group interactions, and sense of belonging among racial/ethnic minority populations in college.

Multiracial people commonly experience racial identity denial, in which their racial identity is questioned, invalidated and/or rejected by others. The current studies examined majority-minority Multiracials’ forecasted and actual experiences with identity denial, specifically investigating whether the race of the identity denied (racial minority vs. White) and race of the identity denial perpetrator (racial minority vs. White) differentially impacted the experience of and responses to identity denial. In Study 1, an online sample of 247 majority-minority Multiracial participants (i.e., individuals with White ancestry and racial minority ancestry) imagined having either their racial minority or White identity denied by either a monoracial White or matched monoracial racial minority perpetrator. Participants who imagined having their racial minority (vs. White) identity denied forecasted stronger internal negative affect (such as shame and sadness), external negative affect (such as anger and irritation) and likelihood of identity assertion, irrespective of race of denial perpetrator. Participants also forecasted stronger external negative affective responses when they imagined the denial perpetrator was White (vs. racial minority). Using an experimental design in which 85 Multiracial participants experienced actual instances of identity denial, Study 2 similarly found that participants whose racial minority identity was denied reported stronger internal negative affect, irrespective of the race of the denial perpetrator. However, the effects of the race of the denied identity on external negative affect and likelihood of identity assertion differed as a function of the race of the denial perpetrator. When a White perpetrator denied their racial minority identity, participants reported greater external negative affect and were more likely to assert their identity than when their racial minority identity was denied by a racial minority perpetrator. Additionally, Study 2 examined three identity-specific responses – flexible self-presentation, self-perception and self-identification – to experiencing identity denial. Findings indicate that majority-minority Multiracials whose racial minority identity is denied by a White perpetrator perceive their own racial identity, present their racial identity to others and shift their racial self-identification in alignment with their racially minoritized identity. In contrast, Multiracials whose racial minority identity is denied by a racial minority perpetrator perceive their own racial identity, present their racial identity to others and shift their racial self-identification in alignment with their White identity. Surprisingly, these patterns of results are not moderated by initial levels of racial identification or feelings of autonomy in navigating between racial identities. The findings imply that the specific components of an identity denial experience (race of denied identity and race of denial perpetrator) are important for predicting how Multiracials will respond to said experiences. Furthermore, responses to identity denial are more multifaceted and identity-specific than previously demonstrated, including shifts in racial identification, flexible self-presentation and fluid self-perception.

Objective

Method

Results

Conclusions

Membership in a racial or ethnic minority group may increase the likelihood of being inappropriately classified or being denied the opportunity to accurately self-categorize. As a result, racial/ethnic minorities may feel less valued as members of the culture that denies these possibilities. This research explored whether giving racial/ethnic minorities the opportunity to self-categorize with their preferred racial/ethnic group affects minorities’ emotions, feelings of inclusion as U.S. Americans, and personal judgments about their social rank in relation to others. I predicted that being recognized as, and being able to choose, a preferred racial/ethnic identity provides both optimal identity distinctiveness and inclusion in the superordinate American group, and thus the most positive emotions, feelings of inclusion, and judgments of social rank.