This study examined the joint impact of gender and ethnicity on expectations of general discrimination against oneself and one's group. According to the double-jeopardy hypothesis, women of color will expect to experience more general discrimination than men of color, White women, and White men because they belong to both a low-status ethnic group and a low-status gender group. Alternatively, the ethnic-prominence hypothesis predicts that ethnic-minority women will not differ from ethnic-minority men in their expectations of general discrimination because these expectations will be influenced more by perceptions of ethnic discrimination, which they share with men of color, than by perceptions of gender discrimination. All results were consistent with the ethnic-prominence hypothesis rather than the double-jeopardy hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BealeF. (1970). Double jeopardy: To be black and female. In CadeT., (Ed.), The black woman (pp. 90–100). New York: New American Library.
2.
BenokraitisN.V.FeaginJ.R. (1986). Modern sexism: Blatant, subtle, and covert discrimination. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3.
ColemanL.M.JussimL.IsaacJ.L. (1991). Black students' reactions to feedback conveyed by White and Black teachers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 460–481.
4.
CrockerJ.MajorB.SteeleC. (1998). Social stigma. In GilbertD.FiskeS.T.LindzeyG., (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 504–553). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
5.
CrosbyF.J.CordovaD.JaskarK. (1993). On the failure to see oneself as disadvantaged: Cognitive and emotional components. In HoggM.A.AbramsD., (Eds.), Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 87–104). Hertfordshire, England: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
6.
FiskeS.T.StevensL.E. (1993). What's so special about sex? Gender stereotyping and discrimination. In OskampS.CostanzoM., (Eds.), Gender issues in contemporary society (pp. 173–196). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
7.
GlickP.FiskeS.T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.
8.
GlickP.FiskeS.T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135.
9.
GutekB.A.CohenA.G.TsuiA. (1996). Reactions to perceived sex discrimination. Human Relations, 49, 791–813.
10.
JackmanM.R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.
11.
KingM. (1975). Oppression and power: The unique status of the black woman in the American political system. Social Science Quarterly, 56, 123–133.
12.
KlonoffE.A.LandrineH.ScottJ. (1995). Double jeopardy: Ethnicity and gender in health research. In LandrineH., (Ed.), Bringing cultural diversity to feminist psychology (pp. 335–360). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
13.
KobrynowiczD.BranscombeN.R. (1997). Who considers themselves victims of discrimination? Individual difference predictors of perceived gender discrimination in women and men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 347–363.
14.
LandrineH.KlonoffE.A.AlcarazR.ScottJ.WilkinsP. (1995). Multiple variables in discrimination. In LottB.MalusoD., (Eds.), The social psychology of interpersonal discrimination (pp. 183–224). New York: Guilford Press.
15.
MajorB.GramzowR.H.McCoyS.K.LevinS.SchmaderT.SidaniusJ. (2002). Perceiving personal discrimination: The role of group status and legitimizing ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 269–282.
16.
McGuireW.J.McGuireC.V. (1988). Content and process in the experience of the self. In BerkowitzL., (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology: Vol. 21. Social psychological studies of the self: Perspectives and programs (pp. 97–144). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
17.
RansfordH.E. (1980). The prediction of social behavior and attitudes. In JeffriesV.RansfordH., (Eds.), Social stratification: A multiple hierarchy approach (pp. 265–295). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
18.
ReidP.T. (1988). Racism and sexism: Comparisons and conflicts. In KatzP.A.TaylorD.A., (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 203–221). New York: Plenum Press.
19.
ReidP.T.Comas-DiazL. (1990). Gender and ethnicity: Perspectives on dual status. Sex Roles, 22, 397–408.
20.
ReidP.T.KellyE. (1994). Research on women of color: From ignorance to awareness. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 477–486.
21.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
SidaniusJ.VeniegasR.C. (2000). Gender and race discrimination: The interactive nature of disadvantage. In OskampS., (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 47–69). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23.
SmithA.StewartA.J. (1983). Approaches to studying racism and sexism in Black women's lives. Journal of Social Issues, 39(3), 1–15.
24.
SwimJ.K.StangorC., (Eds.). (1998). Prejudice: The target's perspective. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
25.
TaylorD.M.WrightS.C.PorterL.E. (1994). Dimensions of perceived discrimination: The personal/group discrimination discrepancy. In ZannaM.P.OlsonJ.M., (Eds.), The psychology of prejudice: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 7, pp. 233–255). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1998). Census of population and housing. Washington, DC: Author.
27.
WeberL.HigginbothamE. (1997). Black and White professional-managerial women's perceptions of racism and sexism in the workplace. In HigginbothamE.RomeroM., (Eds.), Women and work: Exploring race, ethnicity and class (pp. 153–175). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
