Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest.

TLDR

The study investigates under what conditions members of disadvantaged groups accept their status, pursue individual actions, or initiate collective protest. Participants were asked to imagine moving into a higher‑status group and then respond to the rejection they faced. Results show that perceived openness of the high‑status group leads to acceptance and individual action, while perceived complete closure prompts disruptive collective action; near entry encourages individual protest, whereas distant participants tend to accept their position.

Abstract

The question addressed is, when do disadvantaged-group members accept their situation, take individual action, or attempt to instigate collective action? Ss attempted to move from a low-status group into an advantaged, high-status group and were asked to respond to their subsequent rejec­ tion. Ss who believed that the high-status group was open to members of their group endorsed acceptance and individual actions. When access to the high-status group was restricted, even to the point of being almost closed (tokenism), Ss still preferred individual action. Disruptive forms of collective action were only favored by Ss who were told that the high-status group was completely closed to members oftheirgroup. Ss who believed they were near togainingentry into the high-sta­ tus group favored individual protest, while Ss distant from entry were more likely to accept their position. The theoretical and societal implications ofthese findings are discussed.