Acceso usuarios
Reports an error in "Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures" by Cheryl R. Kaiser, Brenda Major, Ines Jurcevic, Tessa L. Dover, Laura M. Brady and Jenessa R. Shapiro (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2013[Mar], Vol 104[3], 504-519). In the article, a raw data merging error in one racial discrimination claim condition from Experiment 6 inadvertently resulted in data analyses on an inaccurate data set. When the error was discovered by the authors and corrected, all analyses reported in Experiment 6 for claim validity, seriousness of the claim, and support for the claimant were inaccurate and none were statistically significant. The conclusions should be altered to indicate that participants with management experience who reflected on their own workplace diversity policies did not show the predicted effects. The literature review, remaining five studies, and remaining conclusions in the article are unaffected by this error. Experiment 6 should also report that 26.4% (not 26.4.7%) of participants had a graduate degree and eight participants (not 8%) did not provide educational data. Experiment 5 should have referred to the claim validity measure as a six-item measure ( .92) rather than a five-item measure; analyses on claim validity are accurate in text. Table 2’s note should have said standard errors, not standard deviations. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2012-31077-001.) This research tests the hypothesis that the presence (vs. absence) of organizational diversity structures causes high-status group members (Whites, men) to perceive organizations with diversity structures as procedurally fairer environments for underrepresented groups (racial minorities, women), even when it is clear that underrepresented groups have been unfairly disadvantaged within these organizations. Furthermore, this illusory sense of fairness derived from the mere presence of diversity structures causes high-status group members to legitimize the status quo by becoming less sensitive to discrimination targeted at underrepresented groups and reacting more harshly toward underrepresented group members who claim discrimination. Six experiments support these hypotheses in designs using 4 types of diversity structures (diversity policies, diversity training, diversity awards, idiosyncratically generated diversity structures from participants' own organizations) among 2 high-status groups in tests involving several types of discrimination (discriminatory promotion practices, adverse impact in hiring, wage discrimination). Implications of these experiments for organizational diversity and employment discrimination law are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
