Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article extends Michael L. Radelet's 1989 study of rare cases in which Whites have been executed for committing capital crimes against Blacks to include an assessment of White executions involving Latinx and Asian victims. The threefold aim is to (1) establish the frequency of such rare cases, and (2) explore the extent to which status characteristics (beyond race, ethnicity or gender) are present for these rare events; and (3) offer social dominance theory as a viable explanation for the patterns found in the data. An analysis of unique data from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice shows that out of 570 executions imposed between April 1982 and July 2020, only six cases led to the execution of Whites for crimes against Blacks (1.1%), sixteen cases for crimes against Hispanics (2.8%), and one case for crimes against an Asian American (0.18%). Beyond the minority status of the victim, two or more status markers were present when Whites were executed for crimes against people of color. The results, which are consistent with expectations drawn from social dominance theory, highlight the differential value placed on minority lives and call into question the legitimacy of the death penalty in the United States.

In this short article, we provide an update and extension of Thomas C. Wilson's study, "Whites' Opposition to Affirmative Action: Rejection of Group-based Preferences as well as Rejection of Blacks." Wilson drew on data from the 1996 General Social Survey (GSS) to revisit a long-standing debate in the racial attitudes literature concerning whether anti-black prejudice (e.g., "new racism") or ostensibly race-neutral opposition to group-based policies generally (i.e., "principled objections") is the primary determinant of whites' opposition to affirmative action in the form of "preferential hiring and promotion for blacks." We analyze data from the 2000–2018 GSS to replicate and extend key aspects of Wilson's work. As in the prior study, we find mixed support for the new racism and principled objections perspectives, providing an important update on white Americans' beliefs about affirmative action for the twenty-first century.

AbstractThis study examines the racial stratification beliefs of white Americans who have decision-making power at work (managers and supervisors) and of those (subordinates) who lack such power. We focus on whether these groups vary in overall levels of support for, and in determinants of, beliefs about racial inequality. Pooled cross-sectional analyses of data from the 1977 to 2014 General Social Surveys (GSS) reveal that, among both white supervisors and subordinates, support is greatest for a motivation-based explanation of black disadvantage, followed by (in order) explanations focusing on blacks' lesser educational chances, discrimination against blacks, and finally, blacks' supposed lesser ability. In line with Group Position Theory, our multivariate analyses reveal few differences across the supervisory divide in levels of support for, or in the determinants of, whites' beliefs about black disadvantage. Differences that do exist align with alternative perspectives including Social Dominance Theory, a Group Self-Interest Model, and Intergroup Contact Theory. We conclude by discussing the theoretical and methodological implications of our findings for future research pertaining to what does and does not work to ameliorate racial inequality in the workplace.

The UK is set to become Europe's largest construction market by 2030. However, UK construction productivity performance is regarded as weak, with low skills levels considered to be a key contributory factor. Consequently, off-site construction has been identified by the UK Government as a vehicle for improving productivity levels if the skills deficiencies in this particular market segment can be addressed. A series of projects were, therefore, launched by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES) to encourage an R&D approach to skills and development application in the workplace. This paper reports on one of these research projects, a University and Industry collaboration between two of the largest off-site timber platform frame manufacturers in the UK. The paper explains how a needs analysis process was utilised to develop skills training content tailored to the immediate needs of the industry partners. It also explores how working with academia and a wider community of stakeholders allowed this training content to result in sector-level impact via knowledge exchange activities and generic skills material creation. Finally, the novel approach of utilising 'Hoshin' planning to form a larger regional Offsite HUB (Scotland) Community of Practice, with a developed plan for collaboration aligned with international off-site research objectives, is also explained. The case study presented in this paper is evidence of success in mobilising industry through creating communities of practice to advance the construction sector regionally. It also provides a generalisable method that is reproducible by other university–industry cohorts in order to realise shared industry-wide goals.

This study examines how dimensions of family structure, specifically marriage and parenthood, influence authority attainment among men and women of different racial and ethnic identities. Using survey data from the Multi-City Survey of Urban Inequality, we reach several empirical conclusions. First, the link between family structure and authority attainment is much stronger for women than men, and it revolves more strongly around marriage than parenthood. Second, while marriage decreases White women's odds of holding positions of higher authority, it increases these odds for Black women and Latinas. Third, this "marital bonus" for Black women is most pronounced in predominantly White work settings, allowing them to "play against" stereotypes of group members as single mothers. Fourth, and by contrast, the "marital bonus" for Latinas is strongest in predominantly Latina workplaces, suggesting that Latinas must conform to strong cultural expectations for marriage if they are to gain authority in ingroup work settings. These findings help to illuminate how race, ethnicity, and gender intersect to produce unique linkages between family structure and individual opportunities for organizational power.

Survey data support hypotheses regarding differential access to workplace power among women and minorities relative to white men. Specific findings indicate that, relative to white men, all groups encounter increasing inequality at higher levels of power, but only black women seem to experience this form of inequality as a result of direct discrimination. Further analysis indicates that network assistance is more a response to this form of discrimination than an indirect cause. Finally, analysis shows that most groups attain power through homosocial reproduction, but what differs is the opportunity to engage in such reproduction, wherein white men excel. These findings imply that while women and minorities face lower odds than white men of achieving higher levels of workplace power, the reasons for this disadvantage vary among respective groups and thus will likely require different remedies.