...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of organizational behavior >What makes affirmative action-based hiring decisions seem (un)fair? A test of an ideological explanation for fairness judgments
【24h】

What makes affirmative action-based hiring decisions seem (un)fair? A test of an ideological explanation for fairness judgments

机译:是什么使基于行动的平权招聘决定显得不公平?对公正性判断的意识形态解释的检验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Studies show that Whites tend to show the lowest level of support for affirmative action (AA) policies. Opponents of AA often argue that this is because it violates principles of meritocracy. However, self-interest (based on social identification with those adversely affected) could also explain their opposition. In three studies, we varied whether an Asian or White male is adversely affected by AA to test another explanation; namely, that Whites' fairness judgments are based on both the adversely affected person's race and the fairness evaluator's ideological beliefs. Although we found some support for the meritocratic explanation, this was not sufficient to explain why Whites view AA as (un)fair. Instead, we found strong support for our prediction that Whites who are opposed to equality perceive more unfairness when a White (vs. Asian) was harmed by AA, whereas Whites who endorse egalitarian ideologies perceive the opposite. This finding suggests that neither self-interest nor meritocratic explanations can fully account for Whites' opposition to AA.
机译:研究表明,白人对平权行动(AA)政策的支持程度最低。机管局的反对者经常争辩说,这是因为它违反了精英制原则。但是,出于自身利益(基于与受到不利影响者的社会认同),也可以解释他们的反对。在三项研究中,我们改变了亚洲男性或白人男性是否受到机管局的不利影响,以检验另一种解释。即,白人的公正性判断是基于受不利影响的人的种族和公正性评估者的思想信念。尽管我们发现有人支持君主制的解释,但这不足以解释为什么白人认为机管局是(不)公平的。取而代之的是,我们得到了强烈的支持,即当白人(与亚洲人相比)受到机管局的伤害时,反对平等的白人会感到更加不公平,而赞成平等意识形态的白人则持相反的看法。这一发现表明,出于个人利益和精英管理的解释都不能完全解释白人对机管局的反对。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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