Race matters more than racial identity disclosure when evaluating applicant diversity statements

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-04-09 DOI:10.1111/jasp.13030
Fiona Nguyen, Ellen M. Carroll, Ciara Atkinson, Tammi D. Walker, Alyssa Croft
{"title":"Race matters more than racial identity disclosure when evaluating applicant diversity statements","authors":"Fiona Nguyen,&nbsp;Ellen M. Carroll,&nbsp;Ciara Atkinson,&nbsp;Tammi D. Walker,&nbsp;Alyssa Croft","doi":"10.1111/jasp.13030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The present research investigated whether a target applicant's race and disclosure of their race in a personal diversity statement influenced White evaluators' perceptions of the applicant's egalitarian motivations and their likelihood of contributing to organizational diversity and inclusion outcomes. In Study 1 (<i>N</i> = 206), participants evaluated a diversity statement that was ostensibly written by a White or Black applicant who either referenced or did not reference his race within the statement. Participants judged Black applicants as more internally motivated to be egalitarian and White applicants as more externally motivated, regardless of whether they disclosed their race in the statement. Participants also judged Black applicants as more likely to contribute to diversity and inclusion outcomes than White applicants. Study 2 (<i>N</i> = 257) aimed to replicate Study 1 and tested a strengthened race disclosure condition. We again saw little evidence of race disclosure impacting evaluations of applicants: Black applicants were judged as more internally motivated, less externally motivated, and more likely to contribute to diversity and inclusion compared to White applicants. Study 3 (<i>N</i> = 297) aimed to further replicate and expand on these results by testing a disclosure manipulation wherein the applicant discussed the personal importance/centrality of his race. Once again, applicant race (and not disclosure) demonstrated consistent effects on applicant evaluations. Our results highlight flaws in the personal diversity statement evaluation process, such that factors beyond statement content (i.e., applicant race) influenced perceptions and outcomes of the applicants. Practical implications and solutions for applicant evaluation processes are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jasp.13030","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jasp.13030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present research investigated whether a target applicant's race and disclosure of their race in a personal diversity statement influenced White evaluators' perceptions of the applicant's egalitarian motivations and their likelihood of contributing to organizational diversity and inclusion outcomes. In Study 1 (N = 206), participants evaluated a diversity statement that was ostensibly written by a White or Black applicant who either referenced or did not reference his race within the statement. Participants judged Black applicants as more internally motivated to be egalitarian and White applicants as more externally motivated, regardless of whether they disclosed their race in the statement. Participants also judged Black applicants as more likely to contribute to diversity and inclusion outcomes than White applicants. Study 2 (N = 257) aimed to replicate Study 1 and tested a strengthened race disclosure condition. We again saw little evidence of race disclosure impacting evaluations of applicants: Black applicants were judged as more internally motivated, less externally motivated, and more likely to contribute to diversity and inclusion compared to White applicants. Study 3 (N = 297) aimed to further replicate and expand on these results by testing a disclosure manipulation wherein the applicant discussed the personal importance/centrality of his race. Once again, applicant race (and not disclosure) demonstrated consistent effects on applicant evaluations. Our results highlight flaws in the personal diversity statement evaluation process, such that factors beyond statement content (i.e., applicant race) influenced perceptions and outcomes of the applicants. Practical implications and solutions for applicant evaluation processes are discussed.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在评估申请人多样性声明时,种族比种族身份披露更重要
本研究调查了目标申请人的种族以及在个人多元化声明中披露其种族是否会影响白人评估者对申请人平等主义动机的看法,以及他们对组织多元化和包容性成果做出贡献的可能性。在研究 1(N = 206)中,参与者评估了一份表面上由白人或黑人申请人撰写的多元化声明,该申请人在声明中提及或未提及自己的种族。无论申请人是否在声明中披露了自己的种族,参与者都认为黑人申请人更具有平等主义的内在动机,而白人申请人更具有平等主义的外在动机。参与者还认为黑人申请者比白人申请者更有可能为多元化和包容性成果做出贡献。研究 2(N = 257)旨在复制研究 1,并测试了强化的种族披露条件。我们再次发现,几乎没有证据表明种族披露会影响对申请人的评价:与白人申请者相比,黑人申请者的内部动机更强,外部动机更弱,更有可能为多元化和包容性做出贡献。研究 3(N = 297)旨在通过测试申请人讨论其种族的个人重要性/中心性的披露操纵来进一步复制和扩展这些结果。结果再次表明,申请人的种族(而非信息披露)对申请人评价的影响是一致的。我们的研究结果凸显了个人多样性声明评估过程中的缺陷,即声明内容(即申请人种族)之外的因素影响了对申请人的看法和结果。我们还讨论了申请者评估过程的实际意义和解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1