Testing the effects of affirmative action rationale on attitudes towards affirmative action programs and their beneficiaries.
Item
-
Title
-
Testing the effects of affirmative action rationale on attitudes towards affirmative action programs and their beneficiaries.
-
Identifier
-
AAI3283723
-
identifier
-
3283723
-
Creator
-
Donovan, Corinne Baron.
-
Contributor
-
Advisers: Harold Goldstein | Richard L. Wiener
-
Date
-
2007
-
Language
-
English
-
Publisher
-
City University of New York.
-
Subject
-
Psychology, Industrial | Psychology, Social | Business Administration, Management | Sociology, Industrial and Labor Relations
-
Abstract
-
Beneficiaries of affirmative action programs are often stereotyped and stigmatized (Kravitz et al., 1997). Research on stereotypes shows that when two cognitive processes, sub-grouping (many groups created based on similarities and differences) and sub-typing (distinct groups of stereotype confirming and disconfirming individuals), are elicited they differentially alter the extent to which individuals stereotype target groups and attitudes towards those groups (Mauer, Rothbart & Park, 1995; Baron-Donovan, Wiener, Arnot & Felix, 2003). The purpose of the current research was to replicate prior findings about the influence of cognitive processing and also determine if it influences evaluations of affirmative action beneficiaries (AABs). Additionally, two legally justified rationales for affirmative action programs (AAPs) were tested to see if they elicit these cognitive processes. A compensation rationale for AAPs (making up for past harms) was predicted to cause an "us vs. them" mentality, eliciting sub-typing, while a diversity rationale (valuing differences in individual thinking, personality styles, speech patterns, ethnicity, national origin, religion, age, gender, and experiences) was predicted to elicit sub-grouping. Sub-grouping was expected to reduce stereotype strength and enhance attitudes towards AAPs and AABs. Results from Study 1, a laboratory study where affirmative action new hires were reviewed and sorted, showed that different rationales produced differences in cognitive processing in the predicted direction, but there were no differences between conditions for either stereotype or attitude measures. Results from Study 2, an on-line evaluation of newly hired employees conducted with full time working adults, showed that hire status (affirmative action or not) influenced anticipated career outcomes, but not attitudes or stereotyping. However, no differences were found between the 3 rationale conditions (compensation, diversity, or none) on any dependent variables (anticipated career outcomes, attitudes, or stereotyping). Results revealed that the AAP rationale manipulations were weak and may have contributed to the lack of differences on the outcome measures in both studies. Finally, organizational diversity climate (individual perceptions of organizational diversity culture) was examined as an exploratory variable in Study 2, and was not related to any of the stereotype, attitude, or evaluation measures.
-
Type
-
dissertation
-
Source
-
PQT Legacy CUNY.xlsx
-
degree
-
Ph.D.
