What do you think are some other explanations for the finding that applicants with Hispanic names but no accent received the most favorable evaluations?
I would love to see this study replicated with a whole host of different factors – gender, race, age, appearance, etc. I wonder how interviewer knowledge of employment law might impact these results. Would those who are more knowledgeable of the law be less likely to show a modern racism bias that influences favorability and hiring preferences? Or is the discrimination inevitable and we must find other ways to overcome these social problems?
I would like to see this study replicated today with a Middle Eastern sounding applicant. There are studies that show that the Middle Eastern people might be the population most discriminated upon in the US. I would imagine this effect would be much stronger with a Middle Eastern or Muslim looking/sounding person.
Modern ethnicity bias seems to be a substantial issue in selection interviews. What can be done to decrease the likelihood that this type of bias will result in disparate treatment? Certainly, this finding seems to underscore the importance of having multiple selection measures. Do you think increasing the structure of the interview would increase, decrease, or have a negligible effect on the likelihood of biased results?
Might another explination for the interaction be that people with ethnic names and no accent be viewed more positively because they are exceeding the negative expectation of acting stereotypically ( having an accent)?
I agree with Shane, in that most terrorism acts are associated with middle eastern cultures and vice versa. So there is likely to be more discrimination against them. Should interviewers be tested on their discrimination/racist tendencies?
This coupled with the Barrick et al. (2010) article about the power of the initial evaluation in interviews makes interviews of any kind less valid it seems to me.
What do you think are some other explanations for the finding that applicants with Hispanic names but no accent received the most favorable evaluations?
ReplyDeleteI would love to see this study replicated with a whole host of different factors – gender, race, age, appearance, etc. I wonder how interviewer knowledge of employment law might impact these results. Would those who are more knowledgeable of the law be less likely to show a modern racism bias that influences favorability and hiring preferences? Or is the discrimination inevitable and we must find other ways to overcome these social problems?
ReplyDeleteI would like to see this study replicated today with a Middle Eastern sounding applicant. There are studies that show that the Middle Eastern people might be the population most discriminated upon in the US. I would imagine this effect would be much stronger with a Middle Eastern or Muslim looking/sounding person.
ReplyDeleteModern ethnicity bias seems to be a substantial issue in selection interviews. What can be done to decrease the likelihood that this type of bias will result in disparate treatment? Certainly, this finding seems to underscore the importance of having multiple selection measures. Do you think increasing the structure of the interview would increase, decrease, or have a negligible effect on the likelihood of biased results?
ReplyDeleteMight another explination for the interaction be that people with ethnic names and no accent be viewed more positively because they are exceeding the negative expectation of acting stereotypically ( having an accent)?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shane, in that most terrorism acts are associated with middle eastern cultures and vice versa. So there is likely to be more discrimination against them. Should interviewers be tested on their discrimination/racist tendencies?
ReplyDeleteThis coupled with the Barrick et al. (2010) article about the power of the initial evaluation in interviews makes interviews of any kind less valid it seems to me.
ReplyDelete