Trust,But Verify: How (In)consistent Allyship Shapes Disadvantaged Group Members’ Perceptions

Abstract

Advantaged group members can play a significant role in advocating for social change on behalf of disadvantaged groups. Drawing on Kelley’s covariation model and the attribution-identity model of ally sincerity, we argue that allyship that is inconsistent over time raises doubt about advantaged group members’ motives. In four studies conducted in theUnited States, we found that Black Americans (Study 1, N = 330) perceived White Americans who participated consistently in protests for racial equality as more internally motivated and as better allies than those protesting for the first time, and that LGBTQIA+ individuals viewed inconsistent (i.e., decreasing or alternating) participation over time by straight allies as less internally motivated and less trustworthy than consistent participation (Study 2, 3, and 4, Ns = 287, 601, 434) or a control condition (Study 3). Our results highlight the importance of sustained allyship for positive perceptions of advantaged group allies.

Keywords

allyship temporal consistency attributions sincerity internal and external motives

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barden

Rucker

D. D.

Petty

R. E.

Rios

(2014). Order of actions mitigates hypocrisy judgments for ingroup more than outgroup members. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17(5), 590–601. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430213510192

Birnbaum

H. J.

Wilson

Waytz

(2024). Advantaged groups misperceive how allyship will be received. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 181, 104309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104309

Buchanan

Bui

Patel

J. K.

(2020, July 3). Black lives matter may be the largest movement in U.S. history. The New York Times.

Burns

M. D.

Granz

E. L.

(2023). “Sincere White people, work in conjunction with us”: Racial minorities’ perceptions of White ally sincerity and perceptions of ally efforts. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26(2), 453–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211059699

Chen

J. M.

Joel

Castro Lingl

(2023). Antecedents and consequences of LGBT individuals’ perceptions of straight allyship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 125(4):827–851. DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000422

Chu

Ashburn-Nardo

(2022). Black Americans’ perspectives on ally confrontations of racial prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 101, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104337

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

De Souza

Schmader

. (2024). When People do allyship: A typology of allyship action. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 29(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683241232732

Durante

K. Z.

(2023). Perceiving the poster: How suspicion of motives may impact perceptions of potential allies engaging in online activism (Honors thesis, University of Richmond). Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses/1664

10.

Equality Florida. (2024, March 1). Historic settlement achieved in challenge to Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” or “Trans” law. Equality Florida. https://eqfl.org/historic-settlement-achieved-challenge-floridas-dont-say-gay-or-trans-law

11.

Fiske

S. T.

Neuberg

S. L

. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1–74). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60317-2

12.

Harmon

Tavernise

(2020, June 12). One big difference about George Floyd protests: Many White faces. The New York Times.

13.

Horowitz

J. M.

Hurst

Braga

(2023, June 14). Support for the Black lives matter movement has dropped considerably from its peak in 2020. Pew Research Center.

14.

Hussain

Tangirala

Sherf

E. N.

(2023). Signaling legitimacy: Why Mixed-Gender coalitions outperform single-gender coalitions in advocating for gender equity. Academy of Management Journal, 66(4), 1233–1262. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2021.0174

15.

Iyer

Achia

(2021). Mobilized or marginalized? Understanding low-status groups’ responses to social justice efforts led by high-status groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(5), 1287–1316. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000325

16.

Kelley

H. H.

(1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034225

17.

Kunstman

J. W.

Tuscherer

Trawalter

Lloyd

E. P

. (2016). What lies beneath? Minority group members’ suspicion of Whites’ egalitarian motivation predicts responses to Whites’ smiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(9), 1193–1205.

18.

Kutlaca

Radke

H. R. M.

(2022). Towards an understanding of performative allyship: Definition, antecedents and consequences. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 17(2), Article e12724. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12724

19.

Kutlaca

Radke

Becker

J. C.

(2021). The impact of including advantaged groups in collective action against social inequality on politicized identification of observers from disadvantaged and advantaged groups. Political Psychology 43(5), 297-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12755

20.

Law Enforcement Epidemiology Project. (2022). U.S. data on police shootings and violence. University of Illinois Chicago. https://policeepi.uic.edu/u-s-data-on-police-shootings-and-violence/

21.

Livingstone

A. G.

Fernández Rodríguez

Rothers

. (2020). “They just don’t understand us”: The role of felt understanding in intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119(3), 633–656. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000221

22.

Lovakov

Agadullina

E. R.

(2021). Empirically derived guidelines for effect size interpretation in social psychology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51(3), 485–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2752

23.

Major

Kunstman

J. W.

Malta

B. D.

Sawyer

P. J.

Townsend

S. S.

Mendes

W. B.

(2016). Suspicion of motives predicts minorities’ responses to positive feedback in interracial interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.007

24.

Major

Sawyer

P. J.

Kunstman

J. W.

(2013). Minority perceptions of whites’ motives for responding without prejudice: The perceived internal and external motivation to avoid prejudice scales. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(3), 401–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213475367

25.

Manekin

Mitts

Zeira

(2024). The politics of allyship: Multiethnic coalitions and mass attitudes toward protest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(19). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2314653121

26.

Moser

C. E.

Branscombe

N. R.

Muragishi

G. A.

(2025). Talk is cheap: The role of (in) sincere allyship cues from men on women’s identity-safety and retention at work. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 120, 104767.

27.

Moser

C. E.

Wiley

(2024). “My aim is true”: An attribution-identity model of Ally sincerity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 29(3), 293-313. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683241273354

28.

Ostrove

J. M.

Brown

K. T.

(2018). Are allies who we think they are?: A comparative analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(4), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12502

29.

Parental Rights in Education Act. (2022). Parental Rights in Education Act, HB 1557. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557

30.

Park

J. W.

Vani

Saint-Hilaire

Kraus

M. W.

(2022). Disadvantaged group activists’ attitudes toward advantaged group allies in social movements. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 98(4), 104226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104226

31.

Pew Research Center. (2020, June 24). Recent protest attendees are more racially and ethnically diverse, younger than Americans overall. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/06/24/recent-protest-attendees-are-more-racially-and-ethnically-diverse-younger-than-americans-overall/

32.

Phillips

L. T.

Kreps

T. A.

Chugh

(2024). Different ally motivations lead to different outcomes: How self-transcendence and self-enhancement values predict effectiveness of self-identified allies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 182, 104333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104333

33.

Pietri

E. S.

Moser

C. E.

Derricks

Johnson

I. R.

(2024). A framework for understanding effective allyship. Nature Reviews Psychology, 3(10), 686–700. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00359-0

34.

Ponce de Leon

Carter

J. T.

Rosette

A. S.

(2024). Sincere solidarity or performative pretense? Evaluations of organizational allyship. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 180, Article 104296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104296

35.

Postmes

Haslam

S. A.

Jans

(2012). A single-item measure of social identification: reliability, validity, and utility. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(4), 597–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12006

36.

Public Religion Research Institute. (2024, March). LGBTQ rights in a shifting landscape: Findings from the 2023 American Values Atlas. https://www.prri.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/PRRI-Mar-2024-LGBTQ.pdf

37.

Radke

H. R. M.

Kutlaca

Becker

J. C.

(2022). Disadvantaged group members’ evaluations and support for allies: Investigating the role of communication style and group membership. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(6), 1437–1456. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211010932

38.

Radke

H. R. M.

Kutlaca

Siem

Wright

S. C.

Becker

J. C.

(2020). Beyond allyship: Motivations for advantaged group members to engage in action for disadvantaged groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24(4), 291-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320918698

39.

Salvati

Koc

(2022). Advancing research into the social psychology of sexual orientations and gender identities: Current research and future directions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 52(2), 225–232.

40.

Sharma

(2023). Perceptions of advantage-group and disadvantage-group allies. Undergraduate Research and Creative Activities Journal. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3vf078rd

41.

Thai

Nylund

J. L.

(2024). What are they in it for? Marginalised group members’ perceptions of allies differ depending on the costs and rewards associated with their allyship. British Journal of Social Psychology, 63(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12670

42.

Turner

J. C.

Hogg

M. A.

Oakes

P. J.

Reicher

S. D.

Wetherell

M. S.

(1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Basil Blackwell.

43.

van Zomeren

Postmes

Spears

. (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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504

44.

van Zomeren

Leach

C. W.

Spears

. (2012). Protesters as “Passionate Economists”: A dynamic dual pathway model of approach coping with collective disadvantage. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(2), 180–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311430835

45.

Willroth

E. C.

Atherton

O. E.

(2024). Best laid Plans: A guide to reporting preregistration deviations. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 7(1), Article 25152459231213802. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231213802

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.

0.00 MB

4.67 MB

0.14 MB