The Role of Prosocial (Politicized) Identity and Prejudice in Collective Action Intentions to Help Women and Men Suffered from Domestic Violence

Objective. Analysis of the relationships between prosocial identity, ambivalent prejudice, self-efficacy, and anger in intentions to participate in collective action to help women and men suffered from domestic violence.
Background. Since the decriminalisation of domestic violence in Russia in 2017, researchers have noted various strategies to de-problematize domestic violence in Russian media and public opinion polls indicate the low willingness of Russians to help domestic violence survivors. A study of predictors of willingness to participate in collective action to help domestic violence survivors will help to clarify psychological mechanisms and barriers to the realisation of the prosocial potential of Russians, as well as develop recommendations for social campaigns aimed at helping violence survivors.
Study design. Theoretical framework of the current study was Dual Chamber Model of Collective Action (modification of Social Identity Model of Collective Action). The study examined the relationship between prosocial (politicized) identity (i.e. identification with helping groups), ambivalent prejudice towards women and men, self-efficacy to change a situation, anger and the intentions to participate in various forms of collective action to help women and men suffered from domestic violence. Direct and indirect associations were tested using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM).
Participants. Two Russian samples. N₁ (intentions to help women) = 323 (54,8% females, 45,2% males) from 18 to 78 years old (M = 36,63; SD = 12,15), N₂ (intentions to help men) = 267 (53,2% females, 46,8% males) from 18 to 64 years old (M = 35,46; SD = 10,32).
Measurements. Adapted to Russian scales of the in-group identification developed by C. Leach, the ambivalent sexism and ambivalence towards men inventories by P. Glick and S. Fiske, questions measuring self-efficacy to change situation, anger, and intentions to participate in various forms of collective action to help women and men suffered from domestic violence, adapted from European Social Survey.
Results. Prosocial identity makes a significant positive contribution to the intentions to help women and men suffered from DV, both directly and indirectly through self-efficacy (to help both women and men suffered from DV) and anger (to help men suffered from DV). Hostile sexism and benevolent attitudes (both towards women and men) directly undermine the willingness to engage in certain forms of prosocial collective action.
Conclusions. There are significant associations between prosocial identity, self-efficacy, anger towards the situation of survivors, ambivalent prejudice and willingness to participate in various forms of collective action to help women and men suffered from domestic violence.

1. Agadullina E.R. Seksizm po otnosheniyu k zhenshchinam: adaptatsiya shkaly ambivalentnogo seksizma (P. Glika i S. Fisk) na russkii yazyk [Sexism towards Women: Adaptation of the Ambivalent Sexism Scale (P. Glick and S. Fisk) on a Russian Sample]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki = Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 2018. Vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 447–463. (In Russ.).
2. Agadullina E.R., Lovakov A.V. Model' izmereniya ingruppovoi identifikatsii: proverka na rossiiskoi vyborke [Measurement Model of In-group Identification: Validation in Russian Samples]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki = Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 2013. Vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 143–157. (In Russ.).
3. Algoritm sveta – Konsortsium zhenskikh nepravitel'stvennykh ob"edinenii [Algorithm of light – Consortium of Women's Non-Governmental Organizations] [Electronic resource]. URL: https://wcons.net/projects/algorythm-sveta/ (Accessed 29.09.2024). (In Russ.).
4. Ananyeva O.A., Prusova I.S., Zakharova S.A. Pochemu lyudi opravdyvayut nasilie: rol' motivatsionnykh osnovanii v podderzhke mifov ob iznasilovanii [Why People Justify Violence: The Role of Motivational Foundations in Rape Myths Acceptance]. Psikhologiya i pravo = Psychology and Law, 2024. Vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–17. DOI:10.17759/psylaw.2024140101 (In Russ.).
5. Gulevich O.A., Guseva V.V. Opravdanie sistemy, gruppovaya identifikatsiya i politicheskoe povedenie: protesty v Khabarovskom krae [System Justification, Group Identification and Political Behavior: Protests in Khabarovsk Krai]. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, 2021. Vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 9–22. DOI:10.17759/sps.2021120302 (In Russ.).
6. Kazun A.P. et al. “B'et – znachit lyubit”? Strategii deproblematizatsii domashnego nasiliya v rossiiskikh SMI [“If He Beats You, It Means He Loves You”? Strategies for Deproblematizing Domestic Violence in the Russian Media]. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny = Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 2022, no. 5, pp. 149–171. DOI:10.14515/monitoring.2022.5.2220 (In Russ.).
7. Krivoshchekov V.S., Gulevich O.A., Lyubkina A.S. Hostile and benevolent attitudes toward men: psychometric properties of the Russian version of the Ambivalence toward Men Inventory. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki = Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 2018. Vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 427–446.
8. Kukhtova N.V. Identichnost': issledovatel'skii poisk (adaptatsiya metodiki "Soderzhanie prosotsial'noi identichnosti") [Identity: a research exploration (adaptation of the moral identity content assessment)]. Vestnik Minskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta. Seriya 2: Pedagogika, psikhologiya, metodika prepodavaniya inostrannykh yazykov = Bulletin of Minsk State Linguistic University. Vol. 2: Pedagogy, psychology, methods of teaching foreign languageds, 2011, no. 2, pp. 43–51. (In Russ.).
9. Sychev O.A. Teoriya moral'nykh osnovanii: sovremennyi vzglyad na psikhologicheskie faktory politicheskikh ubezhdenii [Moral Foundations Theory: Modern View on the Psychological Factors of Political Beliefs]. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, 2023. Vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 5–22. DOI:10.17759/sps.2023140101 (In Russ.).
10. Tyazhelobol'nye vzroslye: kto pomozhet? – VTsIOM [Seriously ill adults: who will help? – VCIOM (Russian Public Opinion Research Center)] [Electronic resource]. URL: https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/tjazhelobolnye-vzroslye-kto-pomozhet (Accessed 28.09.2024). (In Russ.).
11. Khudoi mir – ili dobraya ssora? – VTsIOM [A bad peace - or a good quarrel? – VCIOM (Russian Public Opinion Research Center)] [Electronic resource]. URL: https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/khudoj-mir-ili-dobraya-ssora (Accessed 28.09.2024). (In Russ.).
12. Agadullina E. et al. Ambivalent sexism and violence toward women: A meta‐analysis. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2022. Vol. 52, no. 5–6, pp. 819–859.
13. Agostini M., van Zomeren M. Toward a comprehensive and potentially cross-cultural model of why people engage in collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of four motivations and structural constraints. Psychological Bulletin, 2021. Vol. 147, no. 7, pp. 667–700.
14. Badenes-Sastre M. et al. How severity of intimate partner violence is perceived and related to attitudinal variables? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2024. Vol. 76, no. 101925, pp. 1–14.
15. Bareket O., Fiske S.T. A systematic review of the ambivalent sexism literature: Hostile sexism protects men’s power; benevolent sexism guards traditional gender roles. Psychological bulletin, 2023. Vol. 149, no. 11–12, pp. 637–698.
16. Becker J.C., Wright S.C. Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. Journal of personality and social psychology, 2011. Vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 62–77.
17. Corcoran K.E., Pettinicchio D., Young J.T.N. Perceptions of structural injustice and efficacy: Participation in low/moderate/high‐cost forms of collective action. Sociological Inquiry, 2015. Vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 429–461.
18. Ellemers N., Barreto M. Collective action in modern times: How modern expressions of prejudice prevent collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 2009. Vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 749–768.
19. Glick P., Fiske S.T. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996. Vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 491–512.
20. Glick P., Fiske S.T. The ambivalence toward men inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology of women quarterly, 1999. Vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 519–536.
21. Gracia E., Lila M., Santirso F.A. Attitudes toward intimate partner violence against women in the European Union: A systematic review. European Psychologist, 2020. Vol. 25, no. 2, pp.104–121.
22. Hamann K.R.S. et al. Believing that we can change our world for the better: A Triple-A (Agent-Action-Aim) Framework of self-efficacy beliefs in the context of collective social and ecological aims. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2024. Vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 11–53.
23. Henseler J., Ringle C.M., Sinkovics R.R. The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. New challenges to international marketing. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2009, pp. 277–319.
24. Kelly C., Breinlinger S. Identity and injustice: Exploring women's participation in collective action. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 1995. Vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 41–57.
25. Kruahiran P., Boonyasiriwat W., Maneesri K. Thai police officers’ attitudes toward intimate partner violence and victim blaming: The influence of sexism and female gender roles. Journal of interpersonal violence, 2022. Vol. 37, no. 9–10, pp. NP7426–NP7446.
26. Leach C.W. et al. Group-level self-definition and self-investment: a hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of personality and social psychology, 2008. Vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 144–165.
27. Macchia L., Whillans A.V. The link between income, income inequality, and prosocial behavior around the world. Social Psychology, 2022. Vol. 52, no. 6.
28. Nardi-Rodríguez A. et al. Willingness to help women victims of intimate partner violence in a Spanish context: Differential factors, interactions and predictors. PLoS one, 2024. Vol. 19, no. 7, pp. E0307274.
29. Osborne D. et al. Protesting to challenge or defend the system? A system justification perspective on collective action. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2019. Vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 244–269.
30. Petkanopoulou K. et al. Collective disadvantage in the context of socioeconomic crisis in Greece: The role of system‐directed anger, politicians‐directed anger and hope in normative and non‐normative collective action participation. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 2022. Vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 589–607.
31. Ringle C.M., Wende S., Becker J.-M. "SmartPLS 4." Oststeinbek: SmartPLS GmbH. 2022 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.smartpls.com (Accessed 28.09.2024).
32. Shepherd L. et al. The role of threat, emotions, and prejudice in promoting collective action against immigrant groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 2018. Vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 447–459.
33. Smeekes A., Sedikides C., Wildschut T. Collective nostalgia: Triggers and consequences for collective action intentions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 2023. Vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 197–214.
34. Subašić E., Schmitt M.T., Reynolds K.J. Are we all in this together? Co‐victimization, inclusive social identity and collective action in solidarity with the disadvantaged. British Journal of Social Psychology, 2011. Vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 707–725.
35. Taylor J.C. et al. Barriers to men’s help seeking for intimate partner violence. Journal of interpersonal violence, 2022. Vol. 37, no. 19–20, pp. NP18417–NP18444.
36. Wlodarczyk A. et al. Hope and anger as mediators between collective action frames and participation in collective mobilization: The case of 15-M. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2017. Vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 200–223.
37. Wright S.C., Taylor D.M., Moghaddam F.M. Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1990. Vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 994–1003.
38. Van Zomeren M., Postmes T., Spears R. Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: a quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological bulletin, 2008. Vol. 134, no. 4, pp. 504–535.
39. Van Zomeren M., Saguy T., Schellhaas F.M.H. Believing in “making a difference” to collective efforts: Participative efficacy beliefs as a unique predictor of collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2013. Vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 618–634.
40. Zhao M. et al. Subjective socioeconomic status: an alternative to objective socioeconomic status. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2023. Vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 73.