Evil Thoughts But Angelic Actions: Responses to Overweight Job Applicants

Polinko, Natale K.; Popovich, Paula M.

doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02655.x

Cited by 50 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research has shown various factors such as attractiveness (e.g., Dipboye, Arvey, & Terpstra, 1977;Watkins & Johnston, 2000) or weight (e.g., Pingitore, Dugoni, Tindale, & Spring, 1994;Polinko & Popovich, 2001) can influence the perception of employability. Additionally, the mixed race and sex of the applicants as well as the varying appearance of the headshots, as the headshots were likely taken for different purposes, added further complication to the selection process.…”

Section: Development Of Video Interviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Social Class in the Hiring Process

Young

Reilly

2016

AMPROC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social class describes individuals' possession of economic, social, and cultural capital, and their subjective social rankings relative to others (Bourdieu, 1984). As social class can be easily detected, it is quite likely that it plays a significant role in many workplace processes, such as selection. By considering the context of the hiring process, my dissertation explores the impact of social class from the perspective of hiring managers. First, I conducted a construct clarity study to clarify the multidimensional nature of the construct of social class. Second, using the factors found from my construct clarity study, I developed applicant stimulus materials (e.g., referral email, resume, video interviews) representative of three stages of the hiring process (e.g., acquiring, screening, and interviewing). Stimulus materials were presented to 78 participants in the acquiring stage, 105 participants in the screening stage, and 220 participants in the interviewing stage. Results of this dissertation find that hiring managers' perceptions of applicant P-O fit are influenced by applicants' social class. These effects are found during the acquiring stage and decrease in significance and prevalence as the hiring process progresses. Implications to research and practice as well as future directions for continued research on social class in the management literature are presented.ii The Impact of Social Class in the Hiring Process

show abstract

Section: Development Of Video Interviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Social Class in the Hiring Process

Young

Reilly

2016

AMPROC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although "fit" has potential for explaining discrimination across multiple characteristics, few studies have applied "fit" outside of the sex discrimination literature (e.g., Pichler, Varma, & Bruce, 2010;Polinko & Popovich, 2001). Thus, an important step in establishing the generalizability of the idea of "fit" to explain discrimination is to extend this theory to applicant characteristics other than sex.…”

Section: Stereotypingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research has been conducted in both the lab (e.g., Bellizzi & Hasty, 2001;Brink, 1988;Ding & Stillman, 2005;Larkin & Pines, 1979;Polinko & Popovich, 2001;Rothblum, Miller, & Garbutt, 1988) and in the field (e.g., Averett & Korenman, 1996;Baum & Ford, 2004;Collins & Zebrowitz, 1995;Judge & Cable, 2011;Leigh & Berger, 1989;Morris, 2006;Zhang & Wang, 2004). This research has examined a wide range of criteria, including personality and behavioral dimensions (e.g., Larkin & Pines, 1979), attitudes (e.g., Kennedy & Homant, 1984), hiring decisions (e.g., Larwood, 1995), coworker desirability (e.g., Jasper & Klassen, 1990), income (e.g., Register & Williams, 1990), and employment status (e.g., Tunceli, Li, & Williams, 2006).…”

Section: Sex and Weight Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, comparatively little employment-based discrimination research has focused on the underlying processes by which employment decisions are made. One notable exception is the lack-of-fit model (Heilman, 1983(Heilman, , 2001, which proposes that discrimination occurs when the stereotypes evaluators hold of a person do not match the work requirements of the given job.Unfortunately, the lack-of-fit model has rarely been extended beyond sex discrimination (for exceptions, see Pichler, Varma, &Bruce, 2010, andPolinko &Popovich, 2001). However, research conducted outside of employment settings has provided valuable insight into the underlying processes of discrimination.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, the lack-of-fit model has rarely been extended beyond sex discrimination (for exceptions, see Pichler, Varma, &Bruce, 2010, andPolinko &Popovich, 2001). However, research conducted outside of employment settings has provided valuable insight into the underlying processes of discrimination.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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