Disadvantaged groups use different means to protest inequality. Normative protest is more likely when the societal context of inter-group inequality signals that there is opportunity for status improvement. Non-normative protest is more likely to occur in systems in which status improvement is unlikely. However, little is known about how advantaged groups react to (normative vs. non-normative) protest as a function of the likelihood for status improvement of the disadvantaged offered by the context (high vs. low). Four experiments (N = 1092) assessed endorsement of protest among advantaged group members using different operationalizations of likelihood for status improvement and type of protest in four different intergroup contexts. Advantaged group members scoring lower in self-investment in their group identity endorsed protest more when the form of protest matched likelihood for status improvement than when it did not. Specifically, less invested members most supported normative protest (i.e., marches, petitions) when likelihood for status improvement was high and non-normative protest (i.e., hacking, destruction of property) occurring in contexts in which status improvement was unlikely. Highly self-invested individuals tended to be unaffected by the form of protest or type of inequality. Mediated moderation analyses suggested that increased appraisals of illegitimacy of inequality explained why support (i.e. among the less invested) was higher when the form of protest fitted opportunity for societal improvement. Results suggest that those less committed to their advantaged position jointly consider type of protest and its context of occurrence when forming opinions on acceptability of disadvantaged protest.

弱势群体使用不同的方式来抗议不平等。当群体间不平等的社会背景表明存在改善地位的机会时，规范抗议更有可能发生。非规范性抗议更有可能发生在不太可能改善地位的系统中。然而，关于优势群体对（规范性与非规范性）抗议的反应如何作为上下文提供的弱势群体地位改善可能性（高与低）的函数，知之甚少。四个实验 ( N = 1092) 在四种不同的群际环境中，使用不同的地位改善可能性操作和抗议类型，评估了优势群体成员对抗议的认可。当抗议形式与改善地位的可能性相匹配时，优势群体成员在其群体身份中的自我投资得分较低时比不匹配时更支持抗议。具体来说，当地位改善的可能性很高时，投入较少的成员最支持规范抗议（即游行、请愿），而在不太可能改善地位的情况下发生非规范抗议（即黑客攻击、破坏财产）。高度自我投资的人往往不受抗议形式或不平等类型的影响。中介调节分析表明，增加对不平等的非法性的评估解释了为什么当抗议形式适合社会改善的机会时支持（即投资较少的人）更高。结果表明，那些不太忠于自己优势地位的人在形成对弱势抗议的可接受性的意见时，会共同考虑抗议的类型及其发生的背景。