5. Institutional Bias Flashcards
(20 cards)
How do identity-related threats present themselves in our institutions.
Multiple identities tied to multiple social groups: certain identities can become salient depending on context which can then affect performance.
- Underrepresentation – e.g. recognizing that you are the minority (racial/ethnic group) in a room
- Devaluation: negative stereotyping, low expectations – e.g. afterwork/informal meetings where most business dealings occur represent a gender bias. Women tend to not go as they have other commitments but because they miss out on these business dealings > less opportunity to be promoted.
- Emphasis on domains fitting higher status, dominant group (vs the disadvantaged group)
State of Organisational Diversity
- Most popular diversity initiatives do not make companies more racially or gender diverse (Kalev, Dobin, & Kelly, 2006; Dobbin, 2009; Dobbin & Kalev, 2013)
- Analysis of 30 years of data from over 700 U.S. organisations
- “There is no evidence that diversity training makes companies less likely to discriminate against minorities and women.” (Roberson, Kulik & Tan, 2013)
- Review of research literature on diversity training effectiveness.
- Organisations with ads that explicitly value diversity are no more likely to hire minorities with “unwhitened” resumes than organisations without these statements (Kang, DeCelles, Tilcsik, & Jun, 2016)
- Sometimes diversity initiative backfire (Bingham & Sheerer, 2001; Dobbin & Kalev, 2018)
Purpose of Diversity initiatives
- Judges defer to diversity initiatives in deciding civil rights cases, using their mere presence as evidence of nondiscrimination, without establishing efficacy (Edelman, Krieger et al. (2011); Krieger, Best, & Edelman, 2015)
- Conclusion of analysis of 1000 federal civil rights legal decisions in US over 35 year period
- Diversity initiatives serve as a legitimising cue by conveying that organisations are procedurally fair
Impact of diversity award: Kaiser et al. (2003)
- have diversity award = higher perceived procedural justice; discrimination claims viewed as less valid
- rarely test effectiveness of diversity training > simply satisfaction of training
- initiatives benefit perception if company not necessarily the target groups it is meant to help
Concealed sexual identity
Baretto et al., 2006 - employees who decided to not reveal sexual identity → negative predictor of self-confidence and ability to do their job → mediated by negative self-directed emotions (shame, guilt etc.)
Colourblindness approach
- failure to acknowledge cultural, racial and ethnic diversity
- treating all as one
- conceal/suppress aspects of their identity, about mismatch of stereotypical gender roles
Multiculturalism approach
- recognition that people have different cultural, racial, and ethnic identities
- celebrating diversity
- Diverse workforces tend to perform better financially
ISSUES:
- can form factions if identity/cultural groups large enough
Impact of ideology on perceived discrimination (Gundemir & Galinsky, 2018)
- Valuing colorblindness or multiculturalism = devalue the other approach (neg. relationship)
- endorse colorblindness → more discrimination you percieve, less fair, has to do with Ps race
- endorse multiculturalism → no relationship
Glass ceiling and gender in institutions
- limit to access to senior leadership positions
Gender diversity; Brady et al. (2015)
Diversity condition (gender differences recognized and celebrated) vs control condition
- Like with the example of celebrating diversity awards – procedural justice and discrimination is perceived to be improved in the diversity condition.
Impacts of Diversity Initiatives
-One-size-fits-all diversity programs often miss actual group needs and can obscure real discrimination.
They can foster ingroup bias, false victimhood in high-status groups, and authenticity threats or anxiety in weakly identified minorities.
Without evidence-based design, initiatives may have no effect—or even backfire—by hiding inequality and increasing stress.
Too often, they serve more to shield organizations legally than to drive genuine inclusion
New approaches to diversity initiatives
- Greater awareness among organisations and legal decision makers that the mere presence of diversity initiatives is sufficient
- Need for greater awareness that diversity initiatives may have effects other than those intended
- Evidence based approach to selecting and evaluating diversity initiatives
- Evidence-based outcomes need to be measured and examined
- Behavioural scientists can partner with or be integrated within organisations
Actual diversity in organisations (Gundemir, 2019)
psychological ownership - boosts commitment, boosts aspiration to leadership positions
organisational approach to diversity (Ellemers et al., 2018)
take research-based approach to diversity initiatives specific to institution
Impression formation (Harris, 2022)
-Grouping into social category> stereotype activation happens spontaneously
- More motivation, information, cognitive resources > make trait inferences leading to individuality
- However, stereotype activation may not be inevitable. People can make trait inferences without having to socially categorise first.
Okonofua et al. (2022)
Context in the company may promote particular types of stereotypical thoughts or cognitions. So:
- Instead of focusing on the person (debiasing the behaviour), focus on the context
– get people to think about their ideal selves or goals within the organisation.
- Less instances of discrimination when thinking about goal within the organisation / why they have their job.
- Teacher professions
- Reduces recividism rates
- Boosts creativity : making ads about stereotypical storylines completely counters their role in the job, which is to be creative.
What is the undergraduate BME awarding gap
HEFCE funded initiative to reduce the Undergraduate BME attainment gap.
- Gap highlights value added
UCL: What factors contribute to the BME attainment gap in UCL’s BSc Psychology programmes?
Person-level:
Feeling isolated, low sense of belonging
Situation-level:
Majority‐dominated environment despite overall diversity
Lack of collaborative space
Racial bias from staff & peers
Complex, impersonal support structures
Person × Situation:
“Standing out” makes students feel conspicuous
Competitive culture discourages peer help
Lecturers sometimes confirm negative stereotypes
Feedback often fails to guide improvement and is constrained by staff workload
What core solutions can help close the BME attainment gap at UCL?
Build Community (non-alcoholic):
Regular social/academic mixers, peer-mentoring circles
Empower BME Student Reps:
Visible, active roles in curriculum feedback and event planning
Foster Well-Rounded Development:
Workshops on study skills, resilience, identity affirmation
Redesign Learning Spaces:
Smaller seminar groups with clear, focused tasks
Dedicated collaborative zones
How does adjusting group size and seminar focus support BME students?
Smaller Groups:
Increases chance for each student to participate
Reduces anonymity, builds peer bonds
Clear Seminar Focus:
Structured tasks minimize ambiguity
Ensures feedback is targeted and actionable
Outcome:
Enhances belonging and clarity, directly countering isolation and feedback gaps
