While the legal guidelines developed to ensure that protected classes are given a fair chance in the selection process and in gaining accommodations to work are present, they are perceived as lacking social effectiveness as factors outside of the legal system’s control such as socialization, interpersonal perceptions, and organizational culture, are hindering such outcomes. Thus, it seems like progress toward the acceptance of and willingness to accommodate protected classes must come from a social, rather than legal, movement. How can organizations promote acceptance of many forms of diversity and disability in the workplace?
SIOP Guidelines question I had - The guidelines suggest that “researchers should develop strategies to anticipate that the validity of inferences for a selection procedure used in a particular situation may change over time” (p. 59). If an organization/researcher discovers that the inferences made from using a selection procedure are no longer valid, the guidelines suggest evaluating the procedure and doing additional research. But what happens to potential applicants/hires during that process? It seems this raises the problem of practicality vs. ethics. Practically, the organization would probably continue to use the predictor while the research is being conducted. Ethically, it seems unfair to use a selection procedure if evidence suggests the validity of the inferences is in question. What do legal guidelines suggest about this predicament?
The SIOP guidelines addressed the concerns others have raised about unintended negative consequences of some selection tests as possible threats to legitimacy by basically stating that if the test has been shown to predict performance, then it is valid regardless of the unintended consequences. I have to wonder; however, shouldn't a test demonstrate that it is unrelated to race (discriminant validity)? Or are we saying that race and performance are correlated and if so, what have the last 50 years of civil rights regulation accomplished? Why not use cognitive ability tests to demonstrate that an applicant has adequate cognitive ability and then rely on a demonstration of job-related skill such as a work samples test? Heck, I think putting all applicants names in a hat who have demonstrated adequate cognitive ability and drawing out the number you have openings for and hiring them would be more fair than taking the top scorers on cognitive ability tests. I know I keep banging away the same old tune here, but really what are we doing?
I agree Shay. It seems more reasonable to determine what adequate cognitive ability is and then use that as a cutoff. I would say they are very few jobs where the person with the highest cognitive ability will be the best performer rather there is a range of how much cognitive ability is needed.
If there are differences between groups in cognitive ability, how large are these differences? More specifically, not just are there significant differences between groups, rather what are the effect sizes? Unfortunately people see it as a black or white issue (is one class more intelligent than another) and don't really consider the magnitude of the effect.
I believe it is Bandura who is known for research on the importance of role modeling. The Wygant Case (v Jackson Board of Education in 1986), ruled that role modeling was not a compelling reason for affirmative action. What obligation do psychologists have to contribute to research and expert witness in this area of on-going debate in law?
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Adarand v Pena (1995) case wrote –“We wish to dispel the notion that strict scrutiny is 'strict in theory but fatal in fact' … The unhappy persistence of both the practice and the lingering effects of racial discrimination against minority groups in this country is an unfortunate reality, and government is not disqualified from acting in response to it.” (p. 258 Gutman, 2nd Edition) When states like Nebraska pass a law banning affirmative action in public institutions, are they in effect denying reality and disqualifying themselves from acting in response to the reality? What will be the longer term effects of this for employment in Nebraska?
@Shay & Amy. I don't think any of the readings have really advocated for using cognitive ability measures alone. Although, in practice that may be how cognitive ability tests are utilized. But I think the readings (or our discussions of them) have been saying to use cognitive ability test to be sure the candidates are at an adequate-above average range and then start adding other predictors. If the cognitive ability tests accurately measure cognitive ability and this is important to the job, then it should be used. Another example on the other side of the coin: If I am a basketball team owner and I want to select the right players for the team, I would start with a speed or a jumping test. I would expect these measures are also correlated with race (blacks outperforming their white counterparts). So it would discriminate against white people, but that does not mean as an owner I should be expected to hire white men who can't jump (movie reference there). This does not mean that I should not use this as a measure. Rather, you should be sure everyone can jump to a certain level (regardless of race) and then add other predictors such as shooting ability or ball handling skills. Factors less correlated with race. Assuming what we have read about cognitive ability tests as an accurate predictor of job performance is true; these measures are showing a real difference in the population. The problem here is not how we are handling this issue now (because I think we are heading in the right direction). The consequences of having terrible race relations in this country until about 10-20 years ago are minorities who are at a competitive disadvantage because of lower SES, more urban living environment, and less opportunities for advancement or education. Each generation prior had a more difficult life which perpetuates this disadvantage.
I also agree with vicki in how do we address the social negative affects on using ADA accomadations and how organizations can eliminate this issue so that more people with disabilities feel comfortable to work.
On another note...has increasing our international business and building U.S. companies overseas helped at all in providing a more supportive climate and culture within a U.S. company in enhancing positive views toward diversity thus lessening the effects of bias and discrimination amongst minorities?
I think it is unfortunate/disheartening that we need all this legislation to protect minorities and people with disabilities. Despite some of the negative research findings related to such legislation (as read about for today’s readings), do you think it is getting better? That is, has there been a reduction in stigma associated with people who benefit from these programs? Are employees who need reasonable accommodations feeling more comfortable requesting them?
While the legal guidelines developed to ensure that protected classes are given a fair chance in the selection process and in gaining accommodations to work are present, they are perceived as lacking social effectiveness as factors outside of the legal system’s control such as socialization, interpersonal perceptions, and organizational culture, are hindering such outcomes. Thus, it seems like progress toward the acceptance of and willingness to accommodate protected classes must come from a social, rather than legal, movement. How can organizations promote acceptance of many forms of diversity and disability in the workplace?
ReplyDeleteSIOP Guidelines question I had - The guidelines suggest that “researchers should develop strategies to anticipate that the validity of inferences for a selection procedure used in a particular situation may change over time” (p. 59). If an organization/researcher discovers that the inferences made from using a selection procedure are no longer valid, the guidelines suggest evaluating the procedure and doing additional research. But what happens to potential applicants/hires during that process? It seems this raises the problem of practicality vs. ethics. Practically, the organization would probably continue to use the predictor while the research is being conducted. Ethically, it seems unfair to use a selection procedure if evidence suggests the validity of the inferences is in question. What do legal guidelines suggest about this predicament?
ReplyDeleteThe SIOP guidelines addressed the concerns others have raised about unintended negative consequences of some selection tests as possible threats to legitimacy by basically stating that if the test has been shown to predict performance, then it is valid regardless of the unintended consequences. I have to wonder; however, shouldn't a test demonstrate that it is unrelated to race (discriminant validity)? Or are we saying that race and performance are correlated and if so, what have the last 50 years of civil rights regulation accomplished? Why not use cognitive ability tests to demonstrate that an applicant has adequate cognitive ability and then rely on a demonstration of job-related skill such as a work samples test? Heck, I think putting all applicants names in a hat who have demonstrated adequate cognitive ability and drawing out the number you have openings for and hiring them would be more fair than taking the top scorers on cognitive ability tests. I know I keep banging away the same old tune here, but really what are we doing?
ReplyDeleteI agree Shay. It seems more reasonable to determine what adequate cognitive ability is and then use that as a cutoff. I would say they are very few jobs where the person with the highest cognitive ability will be the best performer rather there is a range of how much cognitive ability is needed.
ReplyDeleteIf there are differences between groups in cognitive ability, how large are these differences? More specifically, not just are there significant differences between groups, rather what are the effect sizes? Unfortunately people see it as a black or white issue (is one class more intelligent than another) and don't really consider the magnitude of the effect.
I believe it is Bandura who is known for research on the importance of role modeling. The Wygant Case (v Jackson Board of Education in 1986), ruled that role modeling was not a compelling reason for affirmative action. What obligation do psychologists have to contribute to research and expert witness in this area of on-going debate in law?
ReplyDeleteJustice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Adarand v Pena (1995) case wrote –“We wish to dispel the notion that strict scrutiny is 'strict in theory but fatal in fact' … The unhappy persistence of both the practice and the lingering effects of racial discrimination against minority groups in this country is an unfortunate reality, and government is not disqualified from acting in response to it.” (p. 258 Gutman, 2nd Edition)
When states like Nebraska pass a law banning affirmative action in public institutions, are they in effect denying reality and disqualifying themselves from acting in response to the reality? What will be the longer term effects of this for employment in Nebraska?
@Shay & Amy. I don't think any of the readings have really advocated for using cognitive ability measures alone. Although, in practice that may be how cognitive ability tests are utilized. But I think the readings (or our discussions of them) have been saying to use cognitive ability test to be sure the candidates are at an adequate-above average range and then start adding other predictors. If the cognitive ability tests accurately measure cognitive ability and this is important to the job, then it should be used.
ReplyDeleteAnother example on the other side of the coin: If I am a basketball team owner and I want to select the right players for the team, I would start with a speed or a jumping test. I would expect these measures are also correlated with race (blacks outperforming their white counterparts). So it would discriminate against white people, but that does not mean as an owner I should be expected to hire white men who can't jump (movie reference there). This does not mean that I should not use this as a measure. Rather, you should be sure everyone can jump to a certain level (regardless of race) and then add other predictors such as shooting ability or ball handling skills. Factors less correlated with race. Assuming what we have read about cognitive ability tests as an accurate predictor of job performance is true; these measures are showing a real difference in the population.
The problem here is not how we are handling this issue now (because I think we are heading in the right direction). The consequences of having terrible race relations in this country until about 10-20 years ago are minorities who are at a competitive disadvantage because of lower SES, more urban living environment, and less opportunities for advancement or education. Each generation prior had a more difficult life which perpetuates this disadvantage.
I also agree with vicki in how do we address the social negative affects on using ADA accomadations and how organizations can eliminate this issue so that more people with disabilities feel comfortable to work.
ReplyDeleteOn another note...has increasing our international business and building U.S. companies overseas helped at all in providing a more supportive climate and culture within a U.S. company in enhancing positive views toward diversity thus lessening the effects of bias and discrimination amongst minorities?
I think it is unfortunate/disheartening that we need all this legislation to protect minorities and people with disabilities. Despite some of the negative research findings related to such legislation (as read about for today’s readings), do you think it is getting better? That is, has there been a reduction in stigma associated with people who benefit from these programs? Are employees who need reasonable accommodations feeling more comfortable requesting them?
ReplyDelete