Impact of Affirmative Action on Beneficiary Groups: Evidence From the 1990 General Social Survey

Taylor, Marylee C.

doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1501&2_7

Cited by 24 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is consistent with Wright et al (1990), who found that only when entry into the high-status group was completely closed did group members endorse action that protested their collective disadvantage. Perhaps for this reason, organizations employing affirmative-action procedures do not experience backlash (Taylor, 1994) in that it would be clear that the myth that affirmative action makes it impossible for any advantaged group member to succeed is, in fact, false.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, external validity is questionable to the extent that most selection procedures do involve an extensive evaluation of individuals' qualifications (e.g., interviews, selection tests), even under conditions of affirmative action (Taylor, 1994). As a result, the importance of qualifications would, in fact, be highly salient to beneficiaries of affirmative action; under these conditions, it is more likely that the less salient affirmative-action policy would be discounted as an explanation for selection than would the beneficiaries' qualifications.…”

Section: Resistance Because Of Stigmatization Of Beneficiariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reactions to Affirmative Action: Seeking the Bases for Resistance¹

Matheson

Warren

Foster

et al. 2000

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been argued that affirmative action negatively affects the self‐perceptions of beneficiaries. In contrast, it was hypothesized that this would not occur when individual qualifications were explicitly considered and, indeed, that failure under discrimination would be more self‐detrimental. However, perceptions of reverse discrimination may buffer negative self‐attributions on the part of nonbeneficiaries. Responses in an experimental simulation indicated that, of several affirmative actions for women, passive nondiscrimination was viewed as the fairest response to discrimination. While women's self‐perceptions were not affected by affirmative actions, they did suffer under failure. The presence of affirmative actions did not alleviate the effects of failure on men's self‐perceptions. Possible alternatives for resistance to affirmative action are assessed and discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resistance Because Of Stigmatization Of Beneficiariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reactions to Affirmative Action: Seeking the Bases for Resistance¹

Matheson

Warren

Foster

et al. 2000

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We know through research that modern stereotypes persist and that these stereotypes are cloaked in a socially acceptable manner. For example, instead of reporting a belief that blacks are innately inferior, survey researchers find whites believe that blacks should 'try harder', that blacks are less motivated, and that unqualified blacks get hired over more qualified white candidates (Heilman et al, 1997;Taylor, 1994). In other words, blatant racism has been replaced by something subtler called new racial attitudes, variously labeled modern, symbolic and laissez-faire racism.…”

Section: Diversity Transformedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity in the Post Affirmative Action Labor Market: A Proxy for Racial Progress?

Collins

2011

Critical Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores how concepts of diversity fit into the problem of racial progress and workplace inequality. Diversity can be viewed functionally as part of an ongoing effort in Corporate America to resolve conflict and reduce racial inequality in job allocation. On the other hand, consistent with new institutional theory, diversity can be viewed as a rubric for a set of activities meant to signal corporate 'good will'. In this case, the role it plays may forestall durable change in corporate cultures; as an organizing concept for human resource development diversity would be a tool that obscures underlying bias against racialized (i.e. black-oriented) private sector employment policies. I suggest that the concept of diversity is purposively fluid in organizations so that its meaning can shift to protect -rather than change -the racial status quo.

show abstract

“…However, such knowledge has little detrimental effect and does not undercut the minority students' approval of affirmative action provided that the students begin with adequate self-confidence (Elizondo & Crosby, 2004;Ponterotto, Martinez, & Hayden, 1986;Schmermund, Sellers, Mueller, & Crosby, 2001;Truax, Wood, Wright, Cordova, & Crosby, 1998). Nor is the sort of self-doubt of which Shelby Steele and Carter speak visible among women and people of color who have been hired in organizations with strong affirmative action programs (Ayers, 1992;Parker, Baltes, & Christiansen, 1997;Taylor, 1994;Tougas, Joly, Beaton, & St-Pierre, 1996).…”

Section: Self Esteemmentioning

confidence: 99%