Many organizations want to achieve diversity, yet who counts as contributing to diversity is malleable. Across four experiments, we explore how contextual influences shape perceptions of diversity, including what happens when information at different contextual levels conflicts. In Study 1 (N = 160) and Study 2 (N = 69, preregistered), we find that when participants believe White women, White men, and Black men to be overrepresented in a profession at the national level, individuals with those identities are rated as contributing less to the diversity of a group of workers within that profession. In Study 3 (N = 164), participants were asked to make diversity judgments within the same profession (American elementary school teachers), but the composition of the target group under evaluation was either White female-dominated (aligned with the profession) or White male-dominated (diverged from the profession). Presenting the group as White male-dominated (compared to White female-dominated) increased perceptions of White women's contributions to diversity and decreased perceptions of White men's, and men of color's, contributions to diversity. In Study 4 (N = 216, preregistered), we attempted to call participants' attention to representation at a single level only (i.e., national vs. target group), when representation information conflicted across levels. However, perceived contributions to diversity did not shift based on experimental conditions. It appears that Americans' judgments of who increases a group's diversity can be affected by representation at multiple levels, although it may be difficult for perceivers to prioritize one contextual level only when such information conflicts.

Students with Learning Disabilities (LDs) can experience classroom challenges that may negatively impact their social and emotional development, and these struggles can put them at risk for mental health issues and lower quality of life. Programs designed to support students with LDs need to consider not only academic skills and accommodations, but also the broader well-being of these students. Among interventions that address holistic student development are mentoring programs that utilize peer mentors (older students who also have LDs). The purpose of this article was to review key literature on the potential benefits of peer mentoring for students with LDs. According to reviewed articles, peer mentoring programs have been implemented in both school and university settings. In addition to conferring academic benefits to mentees, participation in these programs is associated with increased emotional well-being, higher self-esteem, and better communication skills among mentees. These programs may also benefit mentors, but these benefits have been understudied. More research is needed to determine the positive benefits of mentoring for mentors and mentees with similar learning characteristics, above and beyond positive benefits of mentorship in general.

People often self-identify as allies to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. This research examined on what basis LGBT individuals perceive others to be allies and documents the consequences of perceived allyship. Studies 1a (n = 40) and 1b (n = 69) collected open-ended descriptions of allyship provided by LGBT participants. Coding of the responses suggested multiple components to being an ally: (a) being nonprejudiced toward the group, (b) taking action against discrimination and inequality, and (c) having humility about one’s perspective in discussions about LGBT issues. In Studies 2a (n = 161) and 2b (n = 319, with nationally representative characteristics), an allyship scale was developed and validated for general and specific relational contexts, respectively. Study 2b also showed that LGBT individuals’ perceptions of close others’ allyship were positively associated with their own well-being and relationship quality with the close other. Study 3, an experiment, demonstrated that nonprejudice and action had an interactive effect on perceived allyship, such that action increased perceived allyship more when prejudice was low (vs. high). Study 4 was a weekly experience study of LGBT participants and an outgroup roommate. Perceiving one’s roommate to be a good ally predicted higher self-esteem, greater subjective well-being, and better relationship quality with the roommate, both between and within participants. Furthermore, perceived allyship in 1 week was associated with increases in LGBT individuals’ mental health and relationship quality with the roommate the following week. This research advances knowledge about what allyship means to LGBT individuals and identifies intra-and interpersonal benefits of allyship. © 2023 American Psychological Association

Four studies examine the faculty-student relationship as a mechanism through which students ascertain their place in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Studies 1 and 2 use experimental methods to demonstrate STEM faculty who behave communally, relative to independently, increase undergraduates' belonging and interest in STEM roles through anticipation of greater role-specific support (i.e., support that emphasizes guiding students through structures and activities of field-specific roles). Study 3 then examined the consequences of role-specific support for undergraduates' belonging and interest in STEM. Students anticipated more belonging and interest in STEM roles when faculty provided high levels of role-specific support. Finally, STEM doctoral students' perception of role-specific support from faculty related to their belonging and future identification in STEM fields (Study 4). Taken together, these studies demonstrate the importance of students' construals of role-specific support from faculty, and how faculty behavior signals role-specific support, with benefits for student involvement in STEM.