Dialectical thinking and fairness-based perspectives of affirmative action

Ivona Hideg, D. Lance Ferris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Affirmative action (AA) policies are among the most effective means for enhancing diversity and equality in the workplace, yet are also often viewed with scorn by the wider public. Fairness-based explanations for this scorn suggest AA policies provide preferential treatment to minorities, violating procedural fairness principles of consistent treatment. In other words, to promote equality in the workplace, effective AA policies promote inequality when selecting employees, and the broader public perceives this to be procedurally unfair. Given this inconsistency underlies negative reactions to AA policies, we argue that better preparing individuals to deal with inconsistencies can mitigate negative reactions to AA policies. Integrating theories from the fairness and cognitive styles literature, we demonstrate across 4 studies how dialectical thinking-a cognitive style associated with accepting inconsistencies in one's environment-increases support for AA policies via procedural fairness perceptions. Specifically, we found support for our propositions across a variety of AA policy types (i.e., strong and weak preference policies) and when conceptualizing dialectical thinking either as an individual difference or as a state that can be primed-including being primed by the framing of the AA policy itself. We discuss theoretical contributions and insights for policy-making at government and organizational levels.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)782-801
Number of pages20
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
Volume102
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2017

Fingerprint

Workplace
Thinking
Policy Making
Individuality

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Hideg, Ivona ; Ferris, D. Lance. / Dialectical thinking and fairness-based perspectives of affirmative action. In: Journal of Applied Psychology. 2017 ; Vol. 102, No. 5. pp. 782-801.
@article{168c5d9bf5774d7db7315f9b9c43612f,
title = "Dialectical thinking and fairness-based perspectives of affirmative action",
abstract = "Affirmative action (AA) policies are among the most effective means for enhancing diversity and equality in the workplace, yet are also often viewed with scorn by the wider public. Fairness-based explanations for this scorn suggest AA policies provide preferential treatment to minorities, violating procedural fairness principles of consistent treatment. In other words, to promote equality in the workplace, effective AA policies promote inequality when selecting employees, and the broader public perceives this to be procedurally unfair. Given this inconsistency underlies negative reactions to AA policies, we argue that better preparing individuals to deal with inconsistencies can mitigate negative reactions to AA policies. Integrating theories from the fairness and cognitive styles literature, we demonstrate across 4 studies how dialectical thinking-a cognitive style associated with accepting inconsistencies in one's environment-increases support for AA policies via procedural fairness perceptions. Specifically, we found support for our propositions across a variety of AA policy types (i.e., strong and weak preference policies) and when conceptualizing dialectical thinking either as an individual difference or as a state that can be primed-including being primed by the framing of the AA policy itself. We discuss theoretical contributions and insights for policy-making at government and organizational levels.",
author = "Ivona Hideg and Ferris, {D. Lance}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1037/apl0000207",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "102",
pages = "782--801",
journal = "Journal of Applied Psychology",
issn = "0021-9010",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "5",

}

Dialectical thinking and fairness-based perspectives of affirmative action. / Hideg, Ivona; Ferris, D. Lance.

In: Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 102, No. 5, 05.2017, p. 782-801.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dialectical thinking and fairness-based perspectives of affirmative action

AU - Hideg, Ivona

AU - Ferris, D. Lance

PY - 2017/5

Y1 - 2017/5

N2 - Affirmative action (AA) policies are among the most effective means for enhancing diversity and equality in the workplace, yet are also often viewed with scorn by the wider public. Fairness-based explanations for this scorn suggest AA policies provide preferential treatment to minorities, violating procedural fairness principles of consistent treatment. In other words, to promote equality in the workplace, effective AA policies promote inequality when selecting employees, and the broader public perceives this to be procedurally unfair. Given this inconsistency underlies negative reactions to AA policies, we argue that better preparing individuals to deal with inconsistencies can mitigate negative reactions to AA policies. Integrating theories from the fairness and cognitive styles literature, we demonstrate across 4 studies how dialectical thinking-a cognitive style associated with accepting inconsistencies in one's environment-increases support for AA policies via procedural fairness perceptions. Specifically, we found support for our propositions across a variety of AA policy types (i.e., strong and weak preference policies) and when conceptualizing dialectical thinking either as an individual difference or as a state that can be primed-including being primed by the framing of the AA policy itself. We discuss theoretical contributions and insights for policy-making at government and organizational levels.

AB - Affirmative action (AA) policies are among the most effective means for enhancing diversity and equality in the workplace, yet are also often viewed with scorn by the wider public. Fairness-based explanations for this scorn suggest AA policies provide preferential treatment to minorities, violating procedural fairness principles of consistent treatment. In other words, to promote equality in the workplace, effective AA policies promote inequality when selecting employees, and the broader public perceives this to be procedurally unfair. Given this inconsistency underlies negative reactions to AA policies, we argue that better preparing individuals to deal with inconsistencies can mitigate negative reactions to AA policies. Integrating theories from the fairness and cognitive styles literature, we demonstrate across 4 studies how dialectical thinking-a cognitive style associated with accepting inconsistencies in one's environment-increases support for AA policies via procedural fairness perceptions. Specifically, we found support for our propositions across a variety of AA policy types (i.e., strong and weak preference policies) and when conceptualizing dialectical thinking either as an individual difference or as a state that can be primed-including being primed by the framing of the AA policy itself. We discuss theoretical contributions and insights for policy-making at government and organizational levels.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011371221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011371221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/apl0000207

DO - 10.1037/apl0000207

M3 - Article

C2 - 28150989

AN - SCOPUS:85011371221

VL - 102

SP - 782

EP - 801

JO - Journal of Applied Psychology

JF - Journal of Applied Psychology

SN - 0021-9010

IS - 5

ER -