Bias against overweight job applicants: Further explorations of when and why

Finkelstein, Lisa M.; DeMuth, Rachel L. Frautschy; Sweeney, Donna

doi:10.1002/hrm.20157

Cited by 61 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is not surprising, then, that research on the stigmatizer's perspective has dominated the literature, revealing the why, when, and consistency across situations in which stigmatizers feel negatively toward heavy targets [e.g. 12,22,37,44]. In fact, two recent meta-analyses have documented that employers and managers stigmatize heavy employees and subordinates across all stages of the employment cycle [10,45].…”

Section: The Stigmatizer And/or Target Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Weight Stigma

Ruggs

King²,

Hebl³

et al. 2010

Obes Facts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this review article is to familiarize readers with the common methodologies used to assess weight stigma. This article explores the most frequent ways weight stigma is assessed, offers relevant empirical examples of each methodology, examines the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, and offers recommendations for strengthening research assessment of weight stigma for the future. Furthermore, this article highlights 4 dimensions that are important to consider when assessing weight stigma, regardless of the research methodology used.

show abstract

Section: The Stigmatizer And/or Target Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Weight Stigma

Ruggs

King²,

Hebl³

et al. 2010

Obes Facts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They examined perceptions of weight-related employment discrimination and found few race differences and no consistent trends across racial groups. Similarly, Finkelstein et al (2007) failed to find significant race effects in their weight-based discrimination experiment. Lack of significant race differences may be a function of predominantly White raters (Hebl & Heatherton, 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Similarly, Crandall and Martinez (1993) found lower antifat attitudes amongst Mexican-American participants. However, one experimental study examining weight-based discrimination did not find support for race as a moderator (Finkelstein, DeMuth, & Sweeney, 2007).…”

Section: Racementioning

confidence: 98%

Weight Discrimination Against Females of Different Races

Bartels¹,

Nordstrom²,

Pyatt³

2013

JPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With increased obesity rates, more individuals are likely to experience weight-related employment discrimination.In this 2 (weight) by 3 (race) design, overweight female job applicants received lower hiring and salary recommendations than normal weight females. There were no significant race differences in hiring and salary recommendations across Black, Hispanic, and White female job applicants in hiring and salary recommendations.Explicit and implicit measures of weight bias were modestly correlated. Only explicit weight bias predicted hiring recommendations. Results showed that managers' explicit weight biases may impact their hiring recommendations and suggest that qualified, overweight individuals may be passed over in the hiring process.

show abstract

“…However, existing research has yet to explicitly test this process model. Instead, the theory has been based on the integration 11 of research findings using group membership (e.g., male/female, normal weight/overweight) as a predictor of (a) stereotypical attributes (Crocker et al, 1993;Harris, Harris, & Bochner, 1982;Koenig, Eagly, Mitchell, & Ristikari, 2011;, and/or (b) evaluative outcomes for specific work roles (Bowen et al, 2000;Davison & Burke, 2000;Dean et al, 2008;Finkelstein et al, 2007;Roehling et al, 2013;Swim et al, 1989). In other words, research has not explicitly tested the mediational hypothesis that possessing certain characteristics (e.g., being female or overweight) leads evaluators to ascribe stereotypical attributes to those individuals, which in turn leads to discrimination.…”

Section: Stereotypingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stereotypes of overweight individuals that have been found include: being lazy; low in competence, ability, and skill; sloppy; more likely to have negative personality traits; lacking selfdiscipline and control; and having poor work habits. Consistent findings of negative stereotypes toward overweight individuals have led a number of researchers to make a connection between weight stereotypes and discrimination in employment settings (e.g., Crocker et al, 1993;Finkelstein, Frautschy Demuth, & Sweeney, 2007;Roehling, 1999)."Fit" Theories. Early theory on stereotyping suggested that negative evaluative outcomes for individuals resulted from the negative stereotypes associated with the groups to which the individuals belonged (e.g., Allport, 1954).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of the Underlying Mechanism of Discrimination: The Prototype Matching Model

Vanhove

2014

AMPROC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AN INVESTIGATION OF THE UNDERLYING MECHANISM OF DISCRIMINATION: THE PROTOTYPE MATCHING MODELWithin this study a model explaining the underlying process that results in employment discrimination was proposed and tested. The prototype matching model represents a moderated mediational model that builds on the existing lack-of-fit model (Heilman, 1983) by considering evaluators' prototypes in determining "fit". Each of the propositions of the model was tested using the Goldberg paradigm design among a sample of Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) participants.Participants described their prototypical jobholders for two different positions (sales and customer service) using two factors: warmth and competence. Participants viewed a set of stimulus applicants to each position and indicated their warmth and competence stereotypes of each applicant, then rated each applicant on three evaluative outcomes (coworker desirability, coworker undesirability, and likelihood of success). The presence of discrimination was assessed with regard to two applicant characteristics: applicant sex (male/female) and weight (normal weight/overweight). Evidence of sex-based discrimination was found, as female applicants received more positive evaluations than males across all three outcomes. No differences in evaluations were found due to applicant weight. Females were stereotyped as both warmer and more competent than males. Normal weight applicants were stereotyped as more competent, while overweight applicants were stereotyped as warmer. Both warmth and competence were strong predictors of each of the three evaluative outcomes. Warmth stereotypes were more strongly associated with coworker desirability evaluations, competence stereotypes were more strongly associated with likelihood of success evaluations, and applicants stereotyped as both warm and competent generally received the most positive evaluations. In addition, stereotypes fully mediated the relationship between applicant sex and all three evaluative outcomes. Finally, evidence indicated that participants' evaluations of applicants were influenced by the (mis)match between evaluators' prototypical jobholder and the stereotypes they attributed to applicants, with stereotype-prototype iii competence match more strongly predicting evaluations for the sales position and stereotype-prototype warmth match more strongly predicting evaluations for the customer service position. Findings suggest that the prototype matching model may have utility in explaining evaluators' cognitive processes that lead to discrimination. Future directions are discussed.iv , Croteau, 1996). Discrimination based on these characteristics creates a number of negative consequences for individuals, organizations, and society (Cox, 2001; Kane, 2003). For brevity, I will use the term "discrimination" hereafter to refer specifically to discrimination based on job-irrelevant personal characteristics.Research on employment-related discrimination has typically focused on establishing the extent to which and u...

show abstract

Bias against overweight job applicants: Further explorations of when and why

Abstract: H Hu um ma an n R Re es so ou ur rc ce e M Ma an na ag ge em me en nt

Cited by 61 publications

References 34 publications

Assessment of Weight Stigma

Assessment of Weight Stigma

Weight Discrimination Against Females of Different Races

An Investigation of the Underlying Mechanism of Discrimination: The Prototype Matching Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About