Balancing Fairness and Efficiency: The Impact of Identity-Blind and Identity-Conscious Accountability on Applicant Screening |
| |
| Authors: | William T. Self Gregory Mitchell Barbara A. Mellers Philip E. Tetlock J. Angus D. Hildreth |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Henry W. Bloch School of Management, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri, United States of America.; 2. School of Law, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.; 3. Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.; 4. Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, California, United States of America.; Georgetown University Medical Center, UNITED STATES, |
| |
| Abstract: | 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. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
