“I am (oppressed), therefore I see”: Multiple stigmatized identities predict belief in generalized prejudice and intraminority coalition

ABSTRACT

Integrating lay theory of generalized prejudice (LTGP) and intersectionality frameworks, the present research demonstrated that, across four samples (N = 7,121), people with a greater number of stigmatized identities (based on race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation) endorsed LTGP more strongly, perceived greater similarities across marginalized groups, and ultimately indicated stronger support for intraminority coalitions (Studies 1–3) and specifically stronger policy support for low-SES people (Study 3). Notably, multiply stigmatized people (especially those with three stigmatized identities) endorsed LTGP and intraminority coalitions more strongly than did singly stigmatized and non-stigmatized people, who did not significantly differ from each other on these outcomes. Together, these findings highlight the importance of intersectionality in understanding intraminority relations and contribute to coalition-building efforts across oppressed groups.

KEYWORDS:

• Intraminority coalition
• lay theories
• generalized prejudice
• identity
• intersectionality

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1. According to a pilot study conducted on data from the 2021 General Social Survey (GSS; Smith et al., 2021) – a nationally representative dataset, people with a greater number of stigmatized identities (based on the same three identity dimensions in the manuscript) demonstrated greater support for policies that benefit low-SES people, supporting the hypothesis that people with a greater number of stigmatized identities are more likely to engage in intraminority coalitions (see Supplement for full report).

2. Age was asked in a multiple choice format in which participants could indicate exact ages for 18–27 or choose the item “28 or older.”

3. Also included were SDO scale (Ho et al., 2015) and participation in Black and women’s rights organizations. Results reported in the Supplement.

4. An alternative model with LTGP and similarity in parallel showed that, consistent with the main findings, number of stigmatized identities was positively linked with only LTGP endorsement, but not perceived similarity (though both mediators were linked with support for intraminority coalitions; see Supplement for full report).

5. See Supplement for analyses ruling out specific stigmatized identities as confounds.

6. Post-hoc ANOVAs indicated that with the exception of the difference in LTGP between those with zero and one stigmatized identities, each increase in number of stigmatized identities was associated with a significant increase in LTGP endorsement and support for intraminority coalitions (see Supplement for full analyses).

7. The measure was responded on a Strongly Disagree-Strong Agree instead of Very Untrue-Very True scale.

8. None of the participants were on the autism spectrum.

9. The model was robust without participant SES as the covariate.

10. Recall that our pilot study also showed that those with greater stigmatized identities showed greater support for pro-low-SES-people policies.

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no financial support for this research.