New York, N.Y. – December 3, 2008 – In an article in the December issue of the journal Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Frank J. Landy questions research that is said to demonstrate that stereotypes about social groups bias personnel decisions. He argues that this research is based on faulty methods of studying the question. However, in one of 13 commentaries on Landy's article in the same issue, Madeline Heilman and Alice Eagly take issue with Landy's conclusions.
Landy reviewed experimental research on discrimination and stereotyping, including research that purports to assess automatic, or implicit, associations made about social groups. While conceding that stereotypes might play a role in the evaluation of one stranger by another, Landy argues that this research is so distant from most real work decisions (e.g. promotion, pay increase, or termination), where decision makers have experience with and information about the target of the decision, that it is largely useless for understanding employment discrimination . He focuses on "stranger to stranger" experiments in which college students play the role of managers making decisions about hypothetical employees. Landy maintains that findings from such research cannot be generalized to the broader issues related to promotions, wage changes, or lay offs.
In contrast, Heilman and Eagly argue that experiments with college students provide only part of the research evidence concerning biased personnel decisions. They point out that research on discrimination and stereotyping occurs in natural as well as laboratory settings. They also present evidence challenging Landy's assertion that knowing someone nullifies the effects of stereotypes on decision making. Similarly, they dispute his assertion that rapidly changing work conditions negate the findings of existing research.
Heilman and Eagly maintain that understanding of sex and race discrimination gains from a wide variety of research methods, including laboratory experiments. They also argue that a comprehensive, validated theory about the conditions that promote or restrain discrimination allows generalization to the workplace regardless of time and place.
Researchers may disagree about whether social science research has produced adequate evidence that stereotypes produce biased personnel decisions. However, they agree that organizations must take responsibility for reducing discrimination when it occurs.
These articles are published in the December 2008 issue of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Media wishing to receive a PDF of this article may contact journalnews@bos.blackwellpublishing.net.
Frank J. Landy is affiliated with Baruch College and Landy Litigation Support Group and can be reached for questions at Frank.Landy@Landylsg.com. Madeline Heilman is affiliated with New York University and can be reached for questions at madeline.heilman@nyu.edu.
Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice is an official scholarly journal of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. The format of the journal focuses on interactive exchanges on topics of importance to science and practice in the field of industrial-organizational psychology.
Wiley-Blackwell was formed in February 2007 as a result of the acquisition of Blackwell Publishing Ltd. by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., and its merger with Wiley's Scientific, Technical, and Medical business. Together, the companies have created a global publishing business with deep strength in every major academic and professional field. Wiley-Blackwell publishes approximately 1,400 scholarly peer-reviewed journals and an extensive collection of books with global appeal. For more information on Wiley-Blackwell, please visit www.wiley-blackwell.com or http://interscience.wiley.com.
Journal
Industrial and Organizational Psychology