首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>PLoS Clinical Trials >Balancing Fairness and Efficiency: The Impact of Identity-Blind and Identity-Conscious Accountability on Applicant Screening
【2h】

Balancing Fairness and Efficiency: The Impact of Identity-Blind and Identity-Conscious Accountability on Applicant Screening

机译:平衡公平与效率:身份盲和身份意识的问责制对申请人筛选的影响

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This study compared two forms of accountability that can be used to promote diversity and fairness in personnel selections: identity-conscious accountability (holding decision makers accountable for which groups are selected) versus identity-blind accountability (holding decision makers accountable for making fair selections). In a simulated application screening process, undergraduate participants (majority female) sorted applicants under conditions of identity-conscious accountability, identity-blind accountability, or no accountability for an applicant pool in which white males either did or did not have a human capital advantage. Under identity-conscious accountability, participants exhibited pro-female and pro-minority bias, particularly in the white-male-advantage applicant pool. Under identity-blind accountability, participants exhibited no biases and candidate qualifications dominated interview recommendations. Participants exhibited greater resentment toward management under identity-conscious accountability.
机译:这项研究比较了两种形式的问责制,可以用来促进人员选拔的多样性和公平性:意识认同的问责制(让决策者负责选择哪个小组)和身份盲目的问责制(让决策者负责做出公平的选择) 。在模拟的申请筛选过程中,本科生参与者(多数为女性)在身份认同型问责制,身份盲目的问责制或无问责制的条件下对申请人进行了分类,在这些条件下,白人男性确实具有或不具有人力资本优势。在具有身份意识的问责制下,参与者表现出赞成女性和少数族裔的偏见,尤其是在白人男性优势的申请人群体中。在身份盲法问责制下,参与者没有偏见,候选人资格主导了面试建议。参与者对身份认同的责任感表现出对管理的更大不满。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号