This paper investigates when and why members of privileged groups choose to describe inequality using disadvantage frames (e.g., “women have lower wages than men”) or advantage frames (e.g., “men have higher wages than women”). Four studies (N = 1,251) test the hypothesis that advantage frames are more threatening than disadvantage frames for privileged groups, and that privileged groups may strategically avoid using advantage frames when discussing illegitimate—but not legitimate—inequality. In Study 1, members of a privileged group (White Americans) exhibited more behavioral and cardiovascular indicators of threat when reading about, reflecting on, and discussing racial inequality framed as White advantage versus Black disadvantage. In Studies 2–4, members of privileged groups (but not underprivileged groups) used advantage frames less often when describing illegitimate inequality than when describing legitimate inequality. These studies suggest that subtle linguistic changes in descriptions of inequalities can threaten privileged groups, and that privileged groups may adjust their descriptions of inequality depending on its legitimacy.

本文调查了特权群体成员何时以及为何选择使用劣势框架（例如，“女性工资低于男性”）或优势框架（例如，“男性工资高于女性”）来描述不平等。四项研究（N =1,251）检验优势框架比劣势框架对特权群体更具威胁性的假设，并且特权群体在讨论非法但不合法的不平等时可能会战略性地避免使用优势框架。在研究 1 中，特权群体（美国白人）的成员在阅读、反思和讨论被视为白人优势与黑人劣势的种族不平等时，表现出更多的行为和心血管威胁指标。在研究 2-4 中，特权群体（但不是弱势群体）的成员在描述非法不平等时比在描述合法不平等时更少使用优势框架。这些研究表明，对不平等的描述中细微的语言变化会威胁到特权群体，