What are they in it for? Marginalised group members' perceptions of allies differ depending on the costs and rewards associated with their allyship.

Advantaged group allies can incur costs or rewards as a result of their allyship. The present work investigates whether such costs and rewards affect how marginalised group members perceive these allies. Across four experiments that collectively examine marginalised group members' perceptions of individual and corporate allies in the context of allyship for women's rights, Black Lives Matter and the LGBTQI+ community, we find that allies are perceived differently as a function of the costs and rewards associated with their allyship. Allies who face costs are perceived more positively in terms of tenacity and genuine motivations, and are generally evaluated more favourably compared to allies who do not face costs and those who, instead, garner rewards for their allyship. These findings demonstrate that marginalised group members are cognisant of the costs and rewards allies may reap, and that this information can shape their judgements of allies' investment in the cause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of British Journal of Social Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)