Complementary stereotyping of ethnic minorities predicts system justification in Poland

We investigate the phenomenon of complementary stereotyping of ethnic minorities in Poland and its relationship to system justification. Using results from a nationally representative survey we test the hypothesis that complementary stereotypes—according to which ethnic minorities are seen as possessing distinctive, offsetting strengths and weaknesses—would be associated with system justification among Polish majority citizens. For four minorities, results indicated that stereotyping them as (a) low in morality but high in competence or (b) high in morality but low in competence predicted greater system justification. These results suggest that even in a context that is low in support for the status quo, complementary stereotyping of ethnic minorities is linked to system justification processes. For the three minority groups that were lowest in social status, complementary stereotyping was unrelated to system justification. It appears that negative attitude towards these groups can be expressed openly, regardless of one’s degree of system justification

Suspicion of Motives Predicts Minorities' Responses to Positive Feedback in Interracial Interactions.

Strong social and legal norms in the United States discourage the overt expression of bias against ethnic and racial minorities, increasing the attributional ambiguity of Whites' positive behavior to ethnic minorities. Minorities who suspect that Whites' positive overtures toward minorities are motivated more by their fear of appearing racist than by egalitarian attitudes may regard positive feedback they receive from Whites as disingenuous. This may lead them to react to such feedback with feelings of uncertainty and threat. Three studies examined how suspicion of motives relates to ethnic minorities' responses to receiving positive feedback from a White peer or same-ethnicity peer (Experiment 1), to receiving feedback from a White peer that was positive or negative (Experiment 2), and to receiving positive feedback from a White peer who did or did not know their ethnicity (Experiment 3). As predicted, the more suspicious Latinas were of Whites' motives for behaving positively toward minorities in general, the more they regarded positive feedback from a White peer who knew their ethnicity as disingenuous and the more they reacted with cardiovascular reactivity characteristic of threat/avoidance, increased feelings of stress, heightened uncertainty, and decreased self-esteem. We discuss the implications for intergroup interactions of perceptions of Whites' motives for nonprejudiced behavior

Exit, Voice, and Disloyalty

This Lecture begins with a puzzle about Albert Hirschman’s famous work Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Why do we make much of exit and voice but utterly neglect loyalty? It’s a question that goes well beyond Hirschman’s book. For example, much of constitutional theory is preoccupied with a single question: What doesademocracy owe its minorities? And most of the answers to this question fit naturally into the two categories Hirschman made famous: voice and exit. On both the rights side and the structural side of constitutional theory, scholars worry about providing minorities with an adequate level of influence. And the solutions they propose almost inevitably offer minorities a chance at voice or exit, ] as if no other option exists. The First Amendment, for instance, offers minorities the right to free speech (voice) and private association (exit). Similarly, structural arrangements give minorities the chance to vote in national elections (voice) and in state elections (exit)

[Review of] Georgina Ashworth (Ed.). World Minorities

At the present time, World Minorities is a very appropriate title for a book, since it coincides with the thirtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and President Jimmy Carter\u27s strong, favorable stand for them. The publication of the second volume of World Minorities by the Minority Rights Group based in London, England, is a welcome addition to the many voices recently raised to safeguard and in defense of the rights of minorities around the world

Does Fiscal Decentralization Dampen All Ethnic Conflicts? The heterogeneous Impact of Fiscal Decentralization on Local Minorities and Local Majorities

Fiscal decentralization is widely proposed as an efficient means to accommodate ethnic violence. Yet while most of the econometric cross-country studies supports this view, case studies offer mixed results. In this paper, it is argued that this is partly due to the fact that fiscal decentralization exerts a heterogeneous impact across ethnic local majorities and minorities, both types of groups being regionally concentrated. The main argument in favour of fiscal decentralization is that by politically and fiscally empowering the local communities, these are enabled to allocate public spending in a way that is closer to their preferences. This paper hypothesises that such an empowerment mechanism, while relevant for local majorities, is likely to perform poorly for local minorities as they are not in a dominant position locally. This might feed ethnic violence as local minorities mobilize to obtain administrative regions in which they would control the decentralized policy. Similarly, fiscal decentralization could fuel communal violence as politically marginalized ethnic minorities clash against powerful local majorities. The article also hypothesises that the concern expressed by sceptics that fiscal decentralization undermines national cohesion and encourages secessionism is more acute for local majorities than for local minorities as the latter are usually too small to credibly envisage independence. Such hypotheses are discussed in the paper and then empirically tested on a panel dataset of ethnic local majorities and minorities across the world on the period 1985-2001. The main results are that i) fiscal decentralization does not encourage secessionism but on the contrary dampen rebellion of local majorities but, ii) fiscal decentralization fuels rebellion of local minorities, iii) fiscal decentralization reduces communal violence for both local majorities and minorities. As a result of its heterogeneous impact, the article calls into question the relevance of relying on fiscal decentralization to manage ethnic violence.Ethnic conflict; fiscal decentralization; panel data

Attitudes towards Immigrants, Other Integration Barriers, and Their Veracity

The paper studies opinions and attitudes towards immigrants and minorities and their interactions with other barriers to minorities’ economic integration. Specifically, we consider the minority experts’ own perceptions about these issues, the veracities and repercussions of unfavorable attitudes of natives. Employing newly available data from the IZA Expert Opinion Survey 2007 we depict main trends in the integration situation of ethnic minorities in Europe in a comparative manner. Using a unique dataset, this innovative study is the first to gauge the perspectives of expert stakeholders and ethnic minorities on their integration situation and the main barriers that hinder it. Robust findings show that ethnic minorities: face integration problems; natives’ general negative attitudes are a key factor of their challenging situation; discrimination is acknowledged as the single most important integration barrier; low education and self-confidence as well as cultural differences also hinder integration; minorities want change and that it come about by policies based on the principle of equal treatment. Well designed integration policies that take the specific situation of the respective ethnic minority into account, are persistent and enforce anti-discrimination laws are desirable.ethnic minorities, labor market, attitudes, immigrants, opinions

What are Companies Doing to Retain as Well as Develop People of Color and Women?

[Excerpt] Despite their best efforts, many corporations are unsuccessful in their attempts to create more inclusive environments that allow for progression and growth of women and minorities. More than 75% of CEOs include gender equality in their top ten business priorities, but gender outcomes across the largest companies are not changing. People of color represent 18% of directors and women of color represent only 4% of directors. Many leaders would theorize that this is a “pipeline” issue in that fewer qualified women and minorities are available in the workforce. However, the numbers just don’t support this hypothesis—the number of women and minorities in the workforce has been rising steadily since 1980; indeed, both groups have been in the workforce long enough to have been groomed for ascension to higher ranks. This research will identify key considerations for developing women and minorities as well as possible ways for building more inclusive mindsets

Foreword: The Political Geography of Race Data in the Criminal Justice System

Several months ago, there was a heated discussion on CrimProf, the listserv for criminal law professors, about the disproportionate representation of minorities in the criminal justice system. Few participants in this online discussion contested the reality that racial and ethnic minorities, especially African Americans, make up a far larger percentage of those arrested and incarcerated than should be expected from their percentage of the country\u27s total population