Work, Employment and the Disabled*

Nagi, Saad Z.; Mcbroom, Wiixiam H.; Gollette, John

doi:10.1111/j.1536-7150.1972.tb03139.x

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further research might also focus on differential evaluations as a function of type of disability. Some disabilities (e.g., mental illness) are perceived more negatively by employers than are other disabilities (Nagi, McBroom, & Colletts, 1972). Thus, lower evaluations may be given to applicants with the most negatively viewed disability or handicap.…”

Section: Research On Race Age and The Handicappedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unfair discrimination in the employment interview: Legal and psychological aspects.

Arvey¹

1979

Psychological Bulletin

224

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The psychological and legal literature concerning evidence of bias or unfairness in the employment interview with regard to blacks, females, handicapped persons, and the elderly is reviewed. This review indicates that (a) the interview is highly vulnerable to legal attack and one can expect more future litigation in this area; (b) the mechanisms and processes that contribute to bias in the interview are not well specified by researchers; (c) findings based predominantly on resume research show that females tend to receive lower evaluations than males, but this varies as a function of job and other situational characteristics; (d) little evidence exists to confirm the notion that blacks are evaluated unfairly in interview contexts; (e) a relative dearth of research exists investigating interview bias against the elderly and handicapped individuals; and (f) evidence concerning the differential validity of the interview for these minority and nonminority groups is virtually nonexistent. A number of research needs and directions are specified.

show abstract

Section: Research On Race Age and The Handicappedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unfair discrimination in the employment interview: Legal and psychological aspects.

Arvey¹

1979

Psychological Bulletin

224

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other investigators (e.g., Armstrong, 1978;Segal, 1978) have reported that mentally ill individuals have historically been recipients of prejudice and discrimination. Hartlage and Roland (1971) and Nagi, McBroom, and Colletts (1972) suggested that employers are hesitant t o hire former mental patients since this disability is perceived as uncontrollable and is not well understood by nondisabled individuals. Similarly, Florian (1978) and Farina, Murray, and Groh (1978) have reported that mentally ill employees have greater difficulty gaining acceptance by their coworkers than other disability groups.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Hiring Decisions for Disabled Workers: Looking at the Cause

Bordieri

Drehmer

1986

J Applied Social Pyschol

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study experimentally explored hiring recommendations involving disabled job applicants. One hundred eight supervisors and mid‐level managers reviewed the cover letter and resume of an applicant and the job description for a simulated position. The applicant's type of disability and cause of disability were systematically manipulated in the resume and cover letter. The results demonstrated that subjects made different recommendations for hiring the applicant as a function of the type as well as the cause of the disability. Implications for employers' bias are discussed and suggestions for future research are presented.

show abstract

“…Stone and Sawatzki’s findings are consistent with other research reporting that mentally ill individuals have historically been subjected to prejudice and discrimination by the general public (e.g., Armstrong, 1978; Segal, 1978). Regarding employment opportunities, Hartlage and Roland (1971) and Nagi, McBroom, and Colletts (1972) have reported that employers are most hesitant to hire former mental patients, relative to persons with other types of disabilities, because this disability is perceived as uncontrollable and is the least understood by nondisabled individuals. Similarly, Florian (1978) and Farina, Murray, and Groh (1978) have reported that mentally ill employees have greater difficulty gaining acceptance by their coworkers than other disability groups.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Hiring decisions for disabled workers: The hidden bias.

Drehmer

Bordieri²

1985

Rehabilitation Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hiring recommendati ons involving disabled job applicants were explored. A group of 72 supervisors and midlevel managers revi ewed the resumes of three applicants and two different job descriptions for a position being sought. Applicants* resumes varied only in disability status; one was descri bed as nondisabled, one as paraplegic, and one as having a history of mental illness. Job descriptions varied only in the amount of social contact required by the position. The results demonstrated that subj ects made different recommendati ons for hiring the paraplegic applicant than for hiring the applicant with a history of mental illness, even though no differences were percei ved in the applicants' qualifications.

show abstract

Work, Employment and the Disabled*

Cited by 9 publications

References 21 publications

Unfair discrimination in the employment interview: Legal and psychological aspects.

Unfair discrimination in the employment interview: Legal and psychological aspects.

Hiring Decisions for Disabled Workers: Looking at the Cause

Hiring decisions for disabled workers: The hidden bias.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About