The Comparative Status Hypothesis: Inferences About Discrimination Vary Based on Identity Salience

Past research examining when people label an outcome as discrimination has largely ignored contextual factors beyond the victim-perpetrator dyad. We contend that the person who benefits from the outcome-referred to here as competitor-also influences how likely someone is to be labeled a victim of discrimination. Specifically, we argue that because people hold multiple social identities, which vary in their perceived status, the identity of a target's competitor can change how likely the same target is to be seen as a victim. In three studies, we show that White U.S. adults were more likely to infer that a target had faced discrimination when the target's competitor highlighted a lower status aspect of the target's identity. This pattern was seen for targets from multiple backgrounds, including Asian men, White women, and Asian women. These results highlight the importance of moving beyond the victim-perpetrator dyad when considering whether an outcome is seen as discrimination.