揭示第一代身份的后果

IF 4.9 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Organization Science Pub Date : 2023-07-20 DOI:10.1287/orsc.2023.1682
Peter Belmi, Kelly Raz, M. Neale, Melissa C. Thomas-Hunt
{"title":"揭示第一代身份的后果","authors":"Peter Belmi, Kelly Raz, M. Neale, Melissa C. Thomas-Hunt","doi":"10.1287/orsc.2023.1682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"College is regarded as the great equalizer. People with four-year degrees expect to reap the rewards of their education. This paper examines the pivotal transition from college to the labor market. How do candidates fare when they reveal to prospective employers that they are “first-gen”? Based on the literature, one may advance two competing predictions. One perspective predicts the possibility of a first-gen advantage. This view predicts that revealing one’s first-gen status can help applicants, by making them seem motivated, committed, responsible, and hardworking. It also makes for a compelling narrative; many Americans love stories of “bootstrapped” success. In contrast, a competing perspective predicts the possibility of a first-generation disadvantage. According to this view, there are forces that block decision makers from recognizing the strengths of first-gen students. We tested these two perspectives with an audit study (n = 1,783) and four follow-up studies (n = 4,920). The results supported the first-gen disadvantage hypothesis. Even in the mainstream labor market, first-gen students were evaluated less favorably. We traced this bias to the impact of one possible mechanism: deficit thinking. Despite overcoming hardships, first-gen students were often viewed through the lens of deficits. As a consequence, they were often denied opportunities to gain entry into organizations. Importantly, we found that a mindset shift can help ameliorate the problem. When we nudged decision makers to adopt a strengths-based lens, they became more receptive to hiring first-gen applicants. This work extends knowledge on the mechanisms that drive social class gaps in hiring. It also invites a reassessment of how to study social class in organizations. Deficit models dominate the study of social class. However, as we demonstrated, focusing on deficits can exacerbate inequality. It is important to consider people’s experiences and humanity holistically. Supplemental Material: The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1682 .","PeriodicalId":48462,"journal":{"name":"Organization Science","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Consequences of Revealing First-Generational Status\",\"authors\":\"Peter Belmi, Kelly Raz, M. Neale, Melissa C. Thomas-Hunt\",\"doi\":\"10.1287/orsc.2023.1682\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"College is regarded as the great equalizer. People with four-year degrees expect to reap the rewards of their education. This paper examines the pivotal transition from college to the labor market. How do candidates fare when they reveal to prospective employers that they are “first-gen”? Based on the literature, one may advance two competing predictions. One perspective predicts the possibility of a first-gen advantage. This view predicts that revealing one’s first-gen status can help applicants, by making them seem motivated, committed, responsible, and hardworking. It also makes for a compelling narrative; many Americans love stories of “bootstrapped” success. In contrast, a competing perspective predicts the possibility of a first-generation disadvantage. According to this view, there are forces that block decision makers from recognizing the strengths of first-gen students. We tested these two perspectives with an audit study (n = 1,783) and four follow-up studies (n = 4,920). The results supported the first-gen disadvantage hypothesis. Even in the mainstream labor market, first-gen students were evaluated less favorably. We traced this bias to the impact of one possible mechanism: deficit thinking. Despite overcoming hardships, first-gen students were often viewed through the lens of deficits. As a consequence, they were often denied opportunities to gain entry into organizations. Importantly, we found that a mindset shift can help ameliorate the problem. When we nudged decision makers to adopt a strengths-based lens, they became more receptive to hiring first-gen applicants. This work extends knowledge on the mechanisms that drive social class gaps in hiring. It also invites a reassessment of how to study social class in organizations. Deficit models dominate the study of social class. However, as we demonstrated, focusing on deficits can exacerbate inequality. It is important to consider people’s experiences and humanity holistically. Supplemental Material: The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1682 .\",\"PeriodicalId\":48462,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organization Science\",\"volume\":\"85 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organization Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1682\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organization Science","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1682","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

大学被认为是伟大的均衡器。拥有四年制学位的人期望获得教育的回报。本文考察了从大学到劳动力市场的关键转变。当求职者向潜在雇主透露自己是“第一代”时,他们会有什么反应?根据文献,人们可以提出两种相互竞争的预测。一种观点预测了第一代优势的可能性。这种观点预测,揭示自己的第一代身份可以帮助申请人,让他们看起来有动力、有承诺、有责任感和勤奋。这也构成了引人入胜的叙事;许多美国人喜欢“自力更生”的成功故事。相比之下,竞争的观点预测了第一代劣势的可能性。根据这一观点,有一些力量阻碍决策者认识到第一代学生的优势。我们通过一项审计研究(n = 1,783)和四项随访研究(n = 4,920)来检验这两种观点。结果支持第一代劣势假说。即使在主流劳动力市场,第一代学生的评价也不那么好。我们将这种偏见追溯到一种可能的机制:缺陷思维。虽然克服了困难,但第一代学生经常被视为缺陷。因此,他们经常被剥夺进入组织的机会。重要的是,我们发现心态的转变可以帮助改善这个问题。当我们推动决策者采用基于优势的视角时,他们变得更容易接受雇用第一代求职者。这项工作扩展了对在招聘中驱动社会阶级差距的机制的认识。它还促使人们重新评估如何研究组织中的社会阶层。赤字模型主导着社会阶层的研究。然而,正如我们所证明的那样,关注赤字会加剧不平等。全面考虑人们的经历和人性是很重要的。补充材料:电子伴侣可在https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1682上获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Consequences of Revealing First-Generational Status
College is regarded as the great equalizer. People with four-year degrees expect to reap the rewards of their education. This paper examines the pivotal transition from college to the labor market. How do candidates fare when they reveal to prospective employers that they are “first-gen”? Based on the literature, one may advance two competing predictions. One perspective predicts the possibility of a first-gen advantage. This view predicts that revealing one’s first-gen status can help applicants, by making them seem motivated, committed, responsible, and hardworking. It also makes for a compelling narrative; many Americans love stories of “bootstrapped” success. In contrast, a competing perspective predicts the possibility of a first-generation disadvantage. According to this view, there are forces that block decision makers from recognizing the strengths of first-gen students. We tested these two perspectives with an audit study (n = 1,783) and four follow-up studies (n = 4,920). The results supported the first-gen disadvantage hypothesis. Even in the mainstream labor market, first-gen students were evaluated less favorably. We traced this bias to the impact of one possible mechanism: deficit thinking. Despite overcoming hardships, first-gen students were often viewed through the lens of deficits. As a consequence, they were often denied opportunities to gain entry into organizations. Importantly, we found that a mindset shift can help ameliorate the problem. When we nudged decision makers to adopt a strengths-based lens, they became more receptive to hiring first-gen applicants. This work extends knowledge on the mechanisms that drive social class gaps in hiring. It also invites a reassessment of how to study social class in organizations. Deficit models dominate the study of social class. However, as we demonstrated, focusing on deficits can exacerbate inequality. It is important to consider people’s experiences and humanity holistically. Supplemental Material: The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1682 .
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Organization Science
Organization Science MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
4.90%
发文量
166
期刊介绍: Organization Science is ranked among the top journals in management by the Social Science Citation Index in terms of impact and is widely recognized in the fields of strategy, management, and organization theory. Organization Science provides one umbrella for the publication of research from all over the world in fields such as organization theory, strategic management, sociology, economics, political science, history, information science, communication theory, and psychology.
期刊最新文献
Can You Go Home Again? Performance Assistance Between Boomerangs and Incumbent Employees Cautious Exploitation: Learning and Search in Problems of Evaluation and Discovery Embrace the Unexpected: How Organizations Foster Participatory Improvisation with Customers Temporal Miscoupling: The Challenges and Consequences of Enacting a Practice in Decline Mavericks and Diplomats: Bridging Commercial and Institutional Entrepreneurship for Society’s Grand Challenges
×
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