“We Stand up for Each Other!” An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of Collective Action among U.S. College Women

Critical action to redress systemic oppression: a person-centered approach

Introduction

In 2020, public outcry against police brutality prompted many social media users to post black squares and use the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter (BLM). Many of the people who posted these squares were engaging in performative action in the sense that they failed to engage with BLM's history and core principles. Drawing from a critical action framework, the current research seeks to more deeply understand what drives people to engage in more versus less impactful forms of action to resist systemic oppression.

Methods

We employed a mixed-methods and person-centered methodological approach with the goal of providing nuanced information about factors that distinguish among individuals who engage in different forms of action. Participants were 359 undergraduates who reported that they engaged in some form of action to support BLM.

Findings

Latent profile analysis identified three subgroups (i.e., latent classes) in the larger sample, which we labeled (1) intentional action, (2) intermediate action, and (3) passive action. Participants in each latent class differed from one another in their sociopolitical attitudes, sociodemographic background, and level of action to support BLM. Through the qualitative coding process, the research team unearthed three overarching themes and a range of subthemes that help to explain why the members of each class engaged in different forms of action.

Discussion

We conclude by proposing a flexible intervention that may motivate individuals to engage in critical action to support BLM.

It’s a man’s world; right? How women’s opinions about gender inequality affect physiological responses in men

In two experiments, we examined how men respond to women who either challenge or legitimize societal gender inequality, and how gender identification moderates these responses. We hypothesized that men feel less threatened by women who legitimize (vs. challenge) the gender hierarchy, and evaluate these women more positively. To investigate these expectations, we assessed self-reports (Studies 1 and 2) and cardiovascular threat/challenge responses (Study 2). Both studies showed that men experience less negative emotions when presented with a woman who legitimized (vs. challenged) the gender hierarchy. Moreover, among men with a relatively high gender identification, a woman who challenged the gender hierarchy elicited a physiological response pattern indicative of threat, whereas a woman who legitimized the gender hierarchy elicited a pattern indicative of challenge. Results are discussed in terms of social identity theory, status threat, and self-distancing behavior.