I am, I am not: Strategies to cope with negative group labels

Abstract

Negative group labels (i.e., slurs) can reinforce stigma and perpetuate oppression of stigmatized groups. This research compares two label-coping strategies that stigmatized group members employ to cope with negative group labels: self-labeling (“I am X”) and label-rejection (“I am not X”). Seven studies demonstrate that self-labeling more effectively reduces outgroup observers' perceptions of a label's negativity compared to label-rejection. However, outgroup observers impose higher social costs on self-labelers (in terms of reduced likability, hireability, and promotability) than label-rejecters. These effects generalize across multiple stigmatized groups and contexts (Studies 1a-d). Moreover, the effect of label-coping strategy on label negativity is mediated by observers' perceptions of the stigmatized group's control over the label (Study 2), while the effect of label-coping strategy on social costs is mediated by observers' experience of symbolic threat (Study 3). Finally, observers who more strongly believe that status differences between groups are justified are more likely to penalize self-labelers vs. label-rejecters due to heightened threat (Study 4).