Intergroup Bias

Dovidio, John F.; Gaertner, Samuel L.

doi:10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy002029

Cited by 288 publications

(261 citation statements)

References 264 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

223

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They, hence, tend to promote the image of their social groups, which can result in preferential treatment of ingroup members over outgroup members (Dovidio and Gaertner 2010). Under certain conditions, however, ingroup biases do not manifest.…”

Section: Social Identity Theory (Sit) and The Threat-based Skill Paramentioning

confidence: 99%

The skill paradox: explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants

Dietz

Joshi

Esses

et al. 2015

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

119

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Social Identity Theory (Sit) and The Threat-based Skill Paramentioning

confidence: 99%

The skill paradox: explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants

Dietz

Joshi

Esses

et al. 2015

The International Journal of Human Resource Management

119

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Individuals' weight has been shown to influence a wide range of work-related evaluative judgments (Roehling, 1999;Roehling et al, 2013), even when controlling for target job qualifications (see Roehling et al, 2013). Second, the stereotypes -"shared beliefs about a group" (Dovidio & Gaertner, 2010, p. 1084) -attributed to individuals differ based on sex and weight. Researchers have long argued that stereotypes play an important role in evaluations (e.g., Allport, 1954).…”

Section: Sex and Weight Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, simplifying the process of perceiving others through social categorization plays an important role in our ability to manage the world around us and efficiently function within it (Allport, 1954;Brewer, 1988;Fiske & Neuberg, 1990; also see Dovidio &Gaertner, 2010, andBodenhausen, 2000) by allowing us to perceive others through abstract, yet simplified categories. In turn, 8 categorizing the people we encounter based on salient characteristics is believed to free up valuable cognitive resources (Sherman et al, 1998).…”

Section: Stereotypingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, research conducted outside of employment settings has provided valuable insight into the underlying processes of discrimination. For example, a considerable amount of cognitive and social psychology research has supported the importance of stereotypes (e.g., Allport, 1954; Devine, 1989; for reviews see Dovidio &Gaertner, 2010 andBodenhausen, 2000) and prototypes (e.g., Smith & Minda, 1998;Nosofsky, 1987) in evaluative judgments, although the types of judgments in these studies are seldom made with regard to discrimination in employment contexts.The goal of this study is to integrate existing theory by proposing and testing a model of the underlying mechanism of discrimination, which can be applied across multiple discriminable personal characteristics. The model provides a flexible framework for understanding discrimination in personnel decision making, and this framework may provide valuable insight for (a) researchers studying both discrimination processes and specific types of discrimination, and (b) practitioners whose goal is to avoid discrimination in decision making.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Social Conflict, Harmony, and Integration

Dovidio

Gaertner

et al. 2012

Handbook of Psychology, Second Edition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intergroup Bias

Cited by 288 publications

References 264 publications

The skill paradox: explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants

The skill paradox: explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants

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

Social Conflict, Harmony, and Integration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About