Non-dominant and dominant groups may prefer the same framing for different reasons

Evidence

We also examine how non-dominant groups respond to dominant groups’ use of competitive and digressive victimhood claims. Because our theorizing is rooted in the psychology of dominant groups, this investigation is more exploratory. We predict that members of nondominant groups will also prefer digressive victimhood claims, but only because they speak to a more universal benefit and operate at a higher construal level, not because they regard them as more effective in silencing further criticism. If dominant, but not non-dominant, groups favor digressive victimhood claims for their perceived efficacy in silencing criticism, this would lend additional support for our general prediction that these claims are often deployed to defend the existing hierarchy. — Felix Danbold, Ivuoma N. Onyeador, and Miguel M. Unzueta, Dominant groups support digressive…, 37

Categorization

• XREF: Directly bears on the reader’s question: it discriminates between endorsement of universal framing for its genuine appeal versus for its silencing function — the asymmetry is the evidence for bad-faith deployment. — connects to: Dominants adopt individualism as a new defense when group-based hierarchy is challenged — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 674

Broader Connections

• Dominants adopt individualism as a new defense when group-based hierarchy is challenged #exemplifies (0.71) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 674