Difference between revisions of "Wilkes2021a"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Julie Wilkes; Susan A. Speer |Title=Reporting Microaggressions: Kinship Carers’ Complaints about Identity Slights |Tag(s)=EMCA; In p...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m (AndreiKorbut moved page Wilkes2020 to Wilkes2021a without leaving a redirect) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
|Author(s)=Julie Wilkes; Susan A. Speer | |Author(s)=Julie Wilkes; Susan A. Speer | ||
| − | |Title=Reporting Microaggressions: | + | |Title=Reporting Microaggressions: Kinship Carers’ Complaints about Identity Slights |
| − | Kinship Carers’ Complaints | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Alternative families; Identity; Kinship care; Microaggressions; Prejudice; Social action |
| − | about Identity Slights | + | |Key=Wilkes2021a |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA | + | |Year=2021 |
| − | |Key= | ||
| − | |Year= | ||
|Language=English | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Journal of Language and Social Psychology | |Journal=Journal of Language and Social Psychology | ||
| + | |Volume=40 | ||
| + | |Number=3 | ||
| + | |Pages=303–327 | ||
|URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0261927X20966356 | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0261927X20966356 | ||
| − | |DOI= | + | |DOI=10.1177/0261927X20966356 |
|Abstract=The psychological concept of “microaggression” has refocused interest on what counts as prejudicial action. It redirects attention from standard socio-cognitive explanations of overt prejudice among social groups toward recipients’ perspectives of largely unwitting and subtle everyday racism. Microaggression studies define common implicit identity challenges faced by minority groups, including kinship carers. However, criticisms of the “microaggressions program” raise difficulties inherent in establishing prejudicial action from accounts of necessarily ambiguous actions, and contend that reliance on self-reporting inevitably lacks validity. This conversation analytic (CA) study offers a complementary approach: from videos of ten kinship carer support groups it shows how participants construct accountabilities for prejudicial actions in their retrospective reports of questions, challenges and suspicions in ways that build these actions as microaggressive. It addresses methodological shortcomings in microaggression studies, and extends CA research on accountability in offense construction, and on prejudicial social actions that are contested and difficult to analyze. | |Abstract=The psychological concept of “microaggression” has refocused interest on what counts as prejudicial action. It redirects attention from standard socio-cognitive explanations of overt prejudice among social groups toward recipients’ perspectives of largely unwitting and subtle everyday racism. Microaggression studies define common implicit identity challenges faced by minority groups, including kinship carers. However, criticisms of the “microaggressions program” raise difficulties inherent in establishing prejudicial action from accounts of necessarily ambiguous actions, and contend that reliance on self-reporting inevitably lacks validity. This conversation analytic (CA) study offers a complementary approach: from videos of ten kinship carer support groups it shows how participants construct accountabilities for prejudicial actions in their retrospective reports of questions, challenges and suspicions in ways that build these actions as microaggressive. It addresses methodological shortcomings in microaggression studies, and extends CA research on accountability in offense construction, and on prejudicial social actions that are contested and difficult to analyze. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:04, 16 June 2021
| Wilkes2021a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Wilkes2021a |
| Author(s) | Julie Wilkes, Susan A. Speer |
| Title | Reporting Microaggressions: Kinship Carers’ Complaints about Identity Slights |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Alternative families, Identity, Kinship care, Microaggressions, Prejudice, Social action |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2021 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Language and Social Psychology |
| Volume | 40 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 303–327 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/0261927X20966356 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The psychological concept of “microaggression” has refocused interest on what counts as prejudicial action. It redirects attention from standard socio-cognitive explanations of overt prejudice among social groups toward recipients’ perspectives of largely unwitting and subtle everyday racism. Microaggression studies define common implicit identity challenges faced by minority groups, including kinship carers. However, criticisms of the “microaggressions program” raise difficulties inherent in establishing prejudicial action from accounts of necessarily ambiguous actions, and contend that reliance on self-reporting inevitably lacks validity. This conversation analytic (CA) study offers a complementary approach: from videos of ten kinship carer support groups it shows how participants construct accountabilities for prejudicial actions in their retrospective reports of questions, challenges and suspicions in ways that build these actions as microaggressive. It addresses methodological shortcomings in microaggression studies, and extends CA research on accountability in offense construction, and on prejudicial social actions that are contested and difficult to analyze.
Notes
