Accounting for Ethnic Discrimination:A Discursive Study Among Minority and Majority Group Members

This article discusses the ways in which ethnic minority and majority group members account, in an interview context, for the existence of discrimination in Dutch society. Taking a discursive approach, the focus is on the strategies used to describe and explain discrimination. In both groups, certain members were found to use discursive strategies questioning the omnipresence of discrimination and problematizing its causes, whereas others employed devices that made discrimination appear factual, with the Dutch as its main agents. The use of these strategies was examined in relation to subject positions that the participants took up throughout the interview. It is concluded that the discursive strategies used can be understood in relation to the way speakers position themselves within particular discourses. Hence, similar discursive strategies function in different ways in different contexts, and both mainstream and discourse analytical studies on discrimination should not start from a simple majority-minority dichotomy

Ethnic Group Identification and Group Evaluation Among Minority and Majority Groups:Testing the Multiculturalism Hypothesis

Following social identity theory, the author hypothesized that members of minority groups are more likely than majority group members to endorse multiculturalism more strongly and assimilationist thinking less strongly. In addition, the multiculturalism hypothesis proposes that the more minority groups endorse the ideology of multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the more (or less) likely they will be to identify with their ethnic in-group and to show positive in-group evaluation. In contrast, the more majority group members endorse multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the less (or more) likely they are to identify with their ethnic group and to show negative out-group evaluation. Results from 4 studies (correlational and experimental) provide support for this hypothesis among Dutch and Turkish participants living in the Netherlands

Accounting for Ethnic Discrimination:A Discursive Study Among Minority and Majority Group Members

This article discusses the ways in which ethnic minority and majority group members account, in an interview context, for the existence of discrimination in Dutch society. Taking a discursive approach, the focus is on the strategies used to describe and explain discrimination. In both groups, certain members were found to use discursive strategies questioning the omnipresence of discrimination and problematizing its causes, whereas others employed devices that made discrimination appear factual, with the Dutch as its main agents. The use of these strategies was examined in relation to subject positions that the participants took up throughout the interview. It is concluded that the discursive strategies used can be understood in relation to the way speakers position themselves within particular discourses. Hence, similar discursive strategies function in different ways in different contexts, and both mainstream and discourse analytical studies on discrimination should not start from a simple majority-minority dichotomy

Preadolescents’ understanding and reasoning about asylum seeker peers and friendships

Preadolescents’ understanding and reasoning about asylum seeker peers and friendship

Being tolerated and being discriminated against:Links to psychological well-being through threatened social identity needs

We investigated whether and how the experience of being tolerated and of being discriminated against are associated with psychological well‐being in three correlational studies among three stigmatized groups in Turkey (LGBTI group members, people with disabilities, and ethnic Kurds, total N = 862). Perceived threat to social identity needs (esteem, meaning, belonging, efficacy, and continuity) was examined as a mediator in these associations. Structural equation models showed evidence for the detrimental role of both toleration and discrimination experiences on positive and negative psychological well‐being through higher levels of threatened social identity needs. A mini‐meta analysis showed small to moderate effect sizes and toleration was associated with lower positive well‐being through threatened needs among all three stigmatized groups