Hu Young Jeong, Johanna Ray Vollhardt, Michelle S. Twali
{"title":"Power and resistance: Black Americans' multifaceted perceptions of ingroup strengths and their effects on collective efficacy and resistance","authors":"Hu Young Jeong, Johanna Ray Vollhardt, Michelle S. Twali","doi":"10.1111/bjso.12904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The current research examines perceived ingroup strengths and their relationship with collective efficacy, generalized power, and resistance among Black Americans. Two studies investigated how different perceptions of ingroup strengths (e.g. collective resilience, ingroup solidarity, intergroup coalitions, ingroup resistance, and intergroup respect) were associated with generalized power perceptions, perceived collective efficacy, and resistance behaviours. Study 1 demonstrated that collective resilience, ingroup solidarity, and intergroup coalitions predicted increased collective efficacy, which in turn predicted organized resistance but not everyday resistance. Perceived control over resources and influence predicted generalized power but not resistance behaviours. Study 2 extended these findings by including perceived ingroup resistance and intergroup respect. Ingroup resistance and intergroup respect predicted collective efficacy, which mediated their effects on both organized and everyday resistance. Unlike in Study 1, collective resilience, ingroup solidarity, and intergroup coalitions had no significant effects on collective efficacy in Study 2, though ingroup solidarity directly predicted organized resistance. Generalized power perceptions were linked to lower everyday resistance. These findings highlight the complex interplay between different perceived ingroup strengths and their distinct roles in fostering collective efficacy and resistance against racial oppression.</p>","PeriodicalId":48304,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"64 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjso.12904","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12904","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The current research examines perceived ingroup strengths and their relationship with collective efficacy, generalized power, and resistance among Black Americans. Two studies investigated how different perceptions of ingroup strengths (e.g. collective resilience, ingroup solidarity, intergroup coalitions, ingroup resistance, and intergroup respect) were associated with generalized power perceptions, perceived collective efficacy, and resistance behaviours. Study 1 demonstrated that collective resilience, ingroup solidarity, and intergroup coalitions predicted increased collective efficacy, which in turn predicted organized resistance but not everyday resistance. Perceived control over resources and influence predicted generalized power but not resistance behaviours. Study 2 extended these findings by including perceived ingroup resistance and intergroup respect. Ingroup resistance and intergroup respect predicted collective efficacy, which mediated their effects on both organized and everyday resistance. Unlike in Study 1, collective resilience, ingroup solidarity, and intergroup coalitions had no significant effects on collective efficacy in Study 2, though ingroup solidarity directly predicted organized resistance. Generalized power perceptions were linked to lower everyday resistance. These findings highlight the complex interplay between different perceived ingroup strengths and their distinct roles in fostering collective efficacy and resistance against racial oppression.
期刊介绍：
The British Journal of Social Psychology publishes work from scholars based in all parts of the world, and manuscripts that present data on a wide range of populations inside and outside the UK. It publishes original papers in all areas of social psychology including: • social cognition • attitudes • group processes • social influence • intergroup relations • self and identity • nonverbal communication • social psychological aspects of personality, affect and emotion • language and discourse Submissions addressing these topics from a variety of approaches and methods, both quantitative and qualitative are welcomed. We publish papers of the following kinds: • empirical papers that address theoretical issues; • theoretical papers, including analyses of existing social psychological theories and presentations of theoretical innovations, extensions, or integrations; • review papers that provide an evaluation of work within a given area of social psychology and that present proposals for further research in that area; • methodological papers concerning issues that are particularly relevant to a wide range of social psychologists; • an invited agenda article as the first article in the first part of every volume. The editorial team aims to handle papers as efficiently as possible. In 2016, papers were triaged within less than a week, and the average turnaround time from receipt of the manuscript to first decision sent back to the authors was 47 days.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
