The Motivational Quality of Global Attributions in Hypothetical and Experienced Situations of Gender Discrimination

Traditionally, global attributions have been thought to reduce instrumental behavior aimed at resolving negative events. However, the present research shows global attributions for gender discrimination are related to taking action against unfair treatment. In Study 1, women ( N = 157) completed a questionnaire assessing attributions for hypothetical scenarios of discrimination and collective responses to discrimination. In Study 2, women ( N = 79) were placed into a laboratory situation of discrimination and asked to indicate their attributions for and responses to their unfair treatment. In both studies, hierarchical regression analyses showed that global attributions were related to both individual and collective responses to their discrimination. Implications for examining attributions in an intergroup context were discussed. The Motivational Quality of Global Attributions in Hypothetical and Experienced Situations of Gender Discrimination If something bad happens to you (e.g., getting sick, being in an accident), and you believe, “It must be me! Nothing ever changes. It’s everywhere! ”, an understandable reaction might be, “I give up --I can’t change anything, I might as well accept it. ” Certainly, according to learned helplessness theories (Abramson, Metalsky & Alloy, 1989; Abramson, Seligman & Teasdale, 1978; Seligman, 1975), “giving up” or helplessness behavior is most likely when people make internal, stable, and global attributions for uncontrollable, negative events. These attributions reflect the belief that the cause of an event is the individual’s fault, is not likely to change, and affects a variety of situations in the person’s life. Consistent with learned helplessness theories, research has shown that the more people use these attributions, the more they exhibit negative psychological (e.g., Amirkhan, 1998; Bruder-Mattson & Hovanitz, 1990; Peterson & Seligman, 1984) and physical symptoms (e.g., Peterson & Seligman, 1987; Peterson, Seligman & Vaillant, 1988). However, the goal of the present studies was to show that in an intergroup context of discrimination, global attributions in particular may promote more positive, instrumental behaviors. Attributions in an Intergroup Context Learned helplessness theories have, for the most part been applied in an intrapersonal context, whereby attributions are being made about an event that is happening to that individual alone (e.g., getting sick or being in an accident). However, intrapersonal events are not the only events about which people make causal attributions. “Why did this happen? ” is also a question asked in an intergroup context, namely when a disadvantaged group member experiences discrimination. A woman who has noticed she is being paid less than her male colleagues, of course experiences this event on an individual level. Indeed, defining discrimination as an intrapersonal experience is often a first response by the victim. According to the five stage model of intergroup relations (Taylor & McKirnan, 1984), a disadvantaged group member may recognize the group’s lower status (i.e., recognizing that gender discrimination exists), but given prevalent social ideologies, has been socialized to make internal attributions for his/her own disadvantaged status (e.g., “I’m not good enough to overcome barriers”). Yet, the experience of gender discrimination is, by definition, an event also affecting a collection of individuals. In trying to discern why she is receiving less pay, a woman is also making an attribution for an event that happens to other women. Thus, unlike in an intrapersonal context, the recognition of gender discrimination does not necessarily involve a focus on the individual alone. Instead, there can also be an awareness that others in her group are having a similar experience. As such, intergroup attributions may have different consequences than have traditionally been found in an intrapersonal context. In particular, the question that arises is whether internal, stable and global attributions for why discrimination occurs will promote negative consequences, but on a social level. In other words, will internal, stable and global attributions for discrimination promote a social helplessness (accepting unfair treatment) whereas external, unstable and specific attributions promote instrumental social behaviors such as collective action (actions designed to enhance the status of the group)? External, Unstable Attributions Several psychological and sociological theories of intergroup behavior address how causal attributions are related to responses to discrimination. In particular, these literatures agree that making external and unstable attributions for discrimination should be motivational. For example, consistent with learned helplessness theories (e.g., Abramson et al., 1978) both psychology-based intergroup theories such as social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and the five stage model (Taylor & McKirnan, 1984) as well as sociology-based group consciousness theories (e.g., Bartky, 1977; Bowles & Duelli Klein, 1982; Kimmel, 1989) agree that collective actions to change the system will most likely occur once group members view their social status as due to barriers placed in their way by the social system (external attribution), and when members believe the system can be changed (unstable attribution). Research has shown that external attributions have positive psychological consequences (Crocker & Major, 1989; Dion & Earn, 1975; Major & Schmader, 1998; Ullman, 1996). There is also some research showing that external (Cochran, Frazier & Olson, 1997; Foster, Matheson & Poole, 1994) and unstable attributions (Bourhis, 1994; Ellemers, Wilke & van Knippenberg, 1993) are associated with increased actions to change a negative intergroup situation. Thus, consistent with learned helplessness theories, external and unstable attributions appear to have positive consequences in an intergroup context.