Framing Matters: The Influence of Group-Image Threat on Reactions To Affirmative Action Policies

Abstract

Affirmative action (AA) attempts to rectify the institutional effects of prior employment discrimination toward minority groups. Although AA has played a large role in increasing workplace diversity, organizations may vary in their perspectives towards diversity itself, ranging from a sole focus on increasing diversity to appreciating the value diversity may add. Support for AA has been considered as a form of White identity management (Knowles, Lowery, Chow, & Unzueta, 2014) and is impacted by the extent to which White people experience group-image threat to their racial identity. Our findings suggest that the level of group-image threat experienced by White people impacts both their organizational trust and AA policy attitudes depending on whether the policy rationale was framed around rectifying past discrimination or highlighting the importance of diversity to the organization. These results have implications for how organizations can attract, maintain, and develop a workforce with White employees who value and support diversity.

Majority members misperceive even “win-win” diversity policies as unbeneficial to them.

“…This evidence is reminiscent of past findings that majority group members often believe that diversity policies do more harm than good (Dover et al, 2016;Jones et al, 2019;Nishii et al, 2018) and are inherently unfair (Gu et al, 2014;Hideg & Ferris, 2017;Leslie, 2019). However, we must note that we were unable to replicate either moderation effect in our paper.…”

“…We found that the more participants believed that diversity initiatives are generally helpful (Study 3) or the specific policy was procedurally fair (Study 4), the less likely they were to show the observed effects. This evidence is reminiscent of past findings that majority group members often believe that diversity policies do more harm than good (Dover et al, 2016;Jones et al, 2019;Nishii et al, 2018) and are inherently unfair (Gu et al, 2014;Hideg & Ferris, 2017;Leslie, 2019). However, we must note that we were unable to replicate either moderation effect in our paper.…”

Understanding advantaged groups' opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies: The role of perceived threat

“…In the organizational context, defensive responses elicited by ingroup morality threat can increase opposition to DEI policies that draw attention to the advantaged group's moral failings (Iyer et al., 2004). When the rationale for a race‐based DEI policy was framed in terms of rectifying past discrimination (compared to highlighting the importance of diversity to the organization), for instance, White Americans reported higher levels of group‐image threat and more opposition to the DEI policy (Jones et al., 2019). Even the acknowledgement of ingroup responsibility for group‐based inequality does not necessarily lead to substantial social change, but rather is associated with limited efforts at restitution (Greenwood, 2015; Iyer & Leach, 2010).…”