People of color (PoC) face common threats as marginalized ethno-racial groups, yet it remains unclear what drives a diverse range of people to collectively mobilize. Relative to White Americans, PoC are disproportionately endangered by environmental pollution. We suggest that when facing common threats, such as environmental injustice, making salient PoC-Identity (PoC-ID)—a superordinate category encompassing non-White groups—may motivate its members to collectively act. In a study with nationally representative samples of Black, Latinx, and Asian Americans (N = 1,866), we found that higher levels of PoC-ID predicted attitudes and behavioral intentions to confront environmental injustices, which were mediated by anger about environmental injustices and efficacy as PoC. Although PoC-ID consistently explained Black Americans’ attitudes and behavioral intentions, its influence among Latinx and Asian Americans was moderated by self-perceived prototypicality as PoC. We discuss how these findings advance understanding of the psychological mechanisms of coalition-building among marginalized groups.
AnollA. P. (2021). The obligation mosaic: Race and social norms in U.S. political participation. University of Chicago Press.
2.
BastianB.HaslamN. (2008). Immigration from the perspective of hosts and immigrants: Roles of psychological essentialism and social identity. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11(2), 127–140.
3.
BenjaminA. (2017). Racial coalition building in local elections: Elite cues and cross-ethnic voting. Cambridge University Press.
4.
BollenK. A. (1989). A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303–316.
5.
BranscombeN. R.EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 35–58). Blackwell Science.
6.
BrewerM. B., (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482.
7.
BrownT.A., (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford Press.
8.
ChenJ. M.RatliffK. A. (2018). Psychological essentialism predicts intergroup bias. Social Cognition, 36(3), 301–323.
9.
CortlandC. I.CraigM. A.ShapiroJ. R.RichesonJ. A.NeelR.GoldsteinN. J. (2017). Solidarity through shared disadvantage: Highlighting shared experiences of discrimination improves relations between stigmatized groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(4), 547–567.
10.
CraigM. A.DeHartT.RichesonJ. A.FiedorowiczL. (2012). Do unto others as others have done unto you? Perceiving sexism influences women’s evaluations of stigmatized racial groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(9), 1107–1119.
11.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2012). Coalition or derogation? How perceived discrimination influences intraminority intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 759–777.
12.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2016). Stigma-based solidarity: Understanding the psychological foundations of conflict and coalition among members of different stigmatized groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(1), 21–27.
13.
DanboldF.HuoY. J. (2021). Welcome to be like us: Expectations of outgroup assimilation shape dominant group resistance to diversity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211004806
14.
DixonJ.TroppL. R.DurrheimK.TredouxC. (2010). “Let them eat harmony”: Prejudice-reduction strategies and attitudes of historically disadvantaged groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(2), 76–80.
15.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L.SaguyT. (2009). Commonality and the complexity of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(1), 3–20.
16.
EidgahyK. (2021). White without privilege: Examining MENA identity as people of color. Masters’ thesis. University of California.
17.
EllemersN.JettenJ., (2013). The many ways to be marginal in a group. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(1), 3–21.
FowlerJ. H.KamC. D. (2007). Beyond the Self: Social identity, altruism, and political participation. The Journal of Politics, 69(3), 813–827.
20.
FredricksonG. M. (1999). Models of American ethnic relations: A historical perspective. In PrenticeD. A.MillerD. T. (Eds.), Cultural divides: Understanding and overcoming group conflict (pp. 23–34). Russell Sage Foundation.
21.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F.NierJ. A.WardC. M.BankerB. S., (1999). Across cultural divides: the value of a superordinate identity. Russell Sage Foundation.
22.
HuoY. J.MolinaL. E. (2006). Is pluralism a viable model of diversity? The benefits and limits of subgroup respect. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9(3), 359–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206064639
23.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2003). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13(1), 111–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280240000046
24.
KimC. J. (1999). The racial triangulation of Asian Americans. Politics & Society, 27(1), 105–138.
25.
LazriA. M.KoniskyD. M. (2019). Environmental attitudes across race and ethnicity. Social Science Quarterly, 100(4), 1039–1055. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12626
26.
LeachC. W.van ZomerenM.ZebelS.VliekM. L. W.PennekampS. F.DoosjeB.OuwerkerkJ. W.SpearsR. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 144–165.
McClainP. D.LyleM. L.CarterN. M.DeFrancesco SotoV.LackeyG. F.Davenport CottonK.NunnallyS. C.ScottoT. J.GrynaviskiJ. D.KendrickJ. A. (2007). Black Americans and Latino immigrants in a southern city: Friendly neighbors or economic competitors?Du Bois Review, 4, 97–117.
29.
McGurtyE. M. (1997). From NIMBY to civil rights: The origins of the environmental justice movement. Environmental History, 2, 301–323.
30.
MohaiP.BryantB. (1998). Is there a” race” effect on concern for environmental quality?Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 475–505.
31.
OlsonM. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press.
32.
OsborneD.JostJ. T.BeckerJ. C.BadaanV.SibleyC. G. (2019). Protesting to challenge or defend the system? A system justification perspective on collective action. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(2), 244–269.
33.
PérezE. O. (2021). Diversity’s child: People of color and the politics of identity. The University of Chicago Press.
34.
RikerW. H.OrdeshookP. C. (1968). A theory of the calculus of voting. American Political Science Review, 62(1), 25–42.
35.
SchmittM. T.BranscombeN. R. (2001). The good, the bad, and the manly: Threats to one’s prototypicality and evaluations of fellow in-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(6), 510–517. https://doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1476
36.
SearsD. O.SavaleiV. (2006). The political color line in America: Many “peoples of color” or Black exceptionalism?Political Psychology, 27(6), 895–924.
37.
SegerC. R.SmithE. R.MackieD. M. (2009). Subtle activation of a social categorization triggers group-level emotions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), 460–467.
38.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge University Press.
39.
SongH.LewisN. A.BallewM. T.JrBravoM.DavydovaJ.GaoH. O.GarciaR. J.HiltnerS.NaimanS. M.PearsonA. R.Romero-CanyasR.SchuldtJ. P (2020). What counts as an “environmental” issue? Differences in issue conceptualization by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68, 101404.
40.
TangE. (2011). A gulf unites us: The Vietnamese Americans of Black New Orleans East. American Quarterly, 63(1), 117–149.
41.
TessumC. W.ApteJ. S.GoodkindA. L.MullerN. Z.MullinsK. A.PaolellaD. A.PolanskyS.SpringerN. P.ThakrarS. K.MarshallJ. D.HillJ. D. (2019). Inequity in consumption of goods and services adds to racial–ethnic disparities in air pollution exposure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(13), 6001–6006.
42.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Basil Blackwell.
43.
TurnerJ. C.OakesP. J.HaslamS. A.McGartyC. (1994). Self and collective: Cognition and social context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 454–463.
44.
United Church of Christ, Commission for Racial Justice. (1987). Toxic wastes and race: A national report on the socio-economic characteristics and communities with hazardous waste sites. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1310/ML13109A339.pdf
van ZomerenM.PostmesT.SpearsR. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535.
48.
van ZomerenM.SpearsR.FischerA. H.LeachC. W. (2004). Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 649–664.
49.
WaldzusS.MummendeyA.WenzelM.WeberU. (2003). Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(1), 31–47.
50.
WilkinsonB. C. (2015). Partners or rivals? Power and Latino, Black and White relations in the 21st century. University of Virginia Press.
51.
WrightS. C.LubenskyM. E. (2009). The struggle for social equality: Collective action versus prejudice reduction. In DemoulinS.LeyensJ.DovidioJ. F. (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities; intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 291–310). Psychology Press.
52.
ZouL. X.CheryanS. (2017). Two axes of subordination: A new model of racial position. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 696–717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000080
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
