Robert J. Boeckmann, Department of Psychology, University of Alaska Anchorage; N. T. Feathers, School of Psychology, Flinders University.
GENDER, DISCRIMINATION BELIEFS, GROUP-BASED GUILT, AND RESPONSES TO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR AUSTRALIAN WOMEN
Article first published online: 6 AUG 2007
Psychology of Women Quarterly
Volume 31, Issue 3, pages 290–304, September 2007
How to Cite
Boeckmann, R. J. and Feather, N. T. (2007), GENDER, DISCRIMINATION BELIEFS, GROUP-BASED GUILT, AND RESPONSES TO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR AUSTRALIAN WOMEN. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31: 290–304. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00372.x
This study was supported by a grant from the Australian Research Council. We are sincerely grateful to Ian R. McKee for assistance with statistical analyses and to several anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.
- Issue published online: 6 AUG 2007
- Article first published online: 6 AUG 2007
- Initial submission: August 10, 2004Initial acceptance: July 12, 2006Final acceptance: April 5, 2007
Views of a selection committee's decision to promote a woman over a man on the basis of affirmative action were studied in a random sample of Australians (118 men and 111 women). The relations between perceptions of workplace gender discrimination, feelings of collective responsibility and guilt for discrimination, and judgments of entitlement to and, secondarily, deservingness of affirmative action were examined. AMOS analyses indicated that men's reports of collective guilt predicted attitudes toward women's entitlement. No coherent model was observed for women, which suggested ambivalent attitudes toward affirmative action. Gender differences in discrimination beliefs also suggested that women believe men are unfairly advantaged and that men believe women are responsible for their own disadvantage. Implications for research examining collective emotions and their role in social justice judgments are discussed.