The DOI matches its Crossref record; 153 of the 153 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beyond Allyship: Motivations for Advantaged Group Members to Engage in Action for Disadvantaged Groups
Open accessAbstract
White Americans who participate in the Black Lives Matter movement, men who attended the Women’s March, and people from the Global North who work to reduce poverty in the Global South—advantaged group members (sometimes referred to as allies) often engage in action for disadvantaged groups. Tensions can arise, however, over the inclusion of advantaged group members in these movements, which we argue can partly be explained by their motivations to participate. We propose that advantaged group members can be motivated to participate in these movements (a) to improve the status of the disadvantaged group, (b) on the condition that the status of their own group is maintained, (c) to meet their own personal needs, and (d) because this behavior aligns with their moral beliefs. We identify potential antecedents and behavioral outcomes associated with these motivations before describing the theoretical contribution our article makes to the psychological literature.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
American Psychiatric Association (2013) · doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 · Cited by 116,369
Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color
Crenshaw, K. (1991) · Stanford Law Review · doi:10.2307/1229039 · Cited by 32,792
Schwartz, S. H. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6 · Cited by 14,619
The Social psychology of intergroup relations
Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,577
Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464 · Cited by 9,210
Handbook of Positive Psychology
(2001) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195135336.001.0001 · Cited by 9,059
Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self‐Categorization Theory
REID, F. (1987) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00799.x · Cited by 8,091
Nash, J. F. (1950) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1907266 · Cited by 7,840
Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3 · Cited by 5,758
The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.70.3.491 · Cited by 5,202
Metadata
- Authors
- Radke, H. R. M., Kutlaca, M., Siem, B., Wright, S. C., & Becker, J. C.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-05-11
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 291-315
- ISSN
- 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7957
- OpenAlex
- W3013215247
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 153
- FWCI
- 45.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Beyond Allyship: Motivations for Advantaged Group Members to Engage in Action for Disadvantaged Groups. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1088868320918698
- The paper
- Radke, H. R. M., Kutlaca, M., Siem, B., Wright, S. C., & Becker, J. C. (2020). Beyond Allyship: Motivations for Advantaged Group Members to Engage in Action for Disadvantaged Groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320918698
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.