Intersectional Invisibility: Whose Discrimination Experiences Are Recognized?

Abstract

In two studies, diverse Canadian undergraduate samples evaluated vignettes depicting ambiguous anti-Black racism, sexism, or homophobia towards a target individual. Pre-Study participants (N = 226) rated how typical the vignette was of identity-specific discrimination. Study 1 (N = 867) tested whether attributions to identity-specific discrimination varied based on the number of marginalized identities held by the target (one, two, or three). Consistent with predictions derived from intersectional invisibility theory, "prototypical" targets with only a single marginalized identity were seen as more likely to be experiencing discrimination than targets who held multiple marginalized identities. Within discrimination domain, this effect remained significant only for homophobia evaluations, but had a comparable marginal effect for racism evaluations. Participants who held more (vs. fewer) marginalized identities or who had higher (vs. lower) intersectional awareness made stronger attributions to discrimination, both overall and within each domain. Notably, the focal target marginalization (or intersectional invisibility) effect was not moderated by participants' own marginalization, their intersectional awareness, or vignette typicality and harm (as rated during material validation). I discuss the implications of these findings for discrimination recognition, as well as limitations and future directions.