Drawing the diversity line: Numerical thresholds of diversity vary by group status.

Abstract

This research estimates the points of relative group representation at which members of dominant and nondominant groups declare an organization to be diverse. Across 7 studies, members of dominant groups, relative to members of nondominant groups, reported that diversity was achieved at lower representations of the nondominant group within an organization. This was explained by the dominant group members' relative opposition to using the equal representation of groups as a standard against which to judge diversity. This mediation was also replicated with the antiegalitarian dimension of social dominance orientation, suggesting that the setting of diversity thresholds serves a hierarchy relevant function. Group differences in thresholds of diversity were strongest when people were evaluating whether an organization was sufficiently (vs. descriptively) diverse, when group status was perceived to be threatened, and when the nondominant group was also a numerical minority in the relevant context.

The Pandemic as a Portal: Reimagining Psychological Science as Truly Open and Inclusive

“…Each of the entities we just discussed-departments, journals, and societies-could set targets that would allow them to assess whether they are making meaningful progress within short, medium, and long-term time horizons. Such targets should be set using an inclusive process that incorporates input from people in currently marginalized positions, given that dominant group members can be limited by their positionality when conceptualizing appropriate targets (Danbold & Unzueta, 2020). A department could, for instance, center the voices of its nondominant group members to set a specific target of increasing the demographic diversity of its graduate students and faculty by X percent by a specific year.…”

Women’s perceived contributions to diversity: The impact of target race and contextual gender salience

“…Yet, social psychologists are just beginning to understand people's ideas about how to diversify a group. Previous work suggests that perceptions of diversity are subjective and influenced by perceiver motivations (Bauman, Trawalter, & Unzueta, 2014;Danbold & Unzueta, 2019;Unzueta & Binning, 2012), yet there are some points of consensus about what "diversity" means to people. For instance, Unzueta and Binning (2010) established that people of color tend to be more associated with diversity than White people are.…”

“…how decision-makers in organizations attempt to increase the diversity of their workforce. Furthermore, existing work has focused primarily on perceptions of racial diversity Danbold & Unzueta, 2019;Unzueta & Binning, 2010 without consideration of how other identities, such as gender, or how intersecting minority identities may impact individuals' perceived contributions to diversity. Thus, the present research speaks to the timely issue of organizational diversity and broadens existing literature by determining (a) how individuals' race and gender backgrounds conjointly impact their perceived contributions to organizational diversity, and (b) whether these perceptions shift based on contextual organizational factors.…”

A Model of Political Bias in Social Science Research

“…In the extreme, this may go beyond a demand for absolute equality among groups and overflow into a motivation to "turn the tables" (to compensate for past wrongs by placing formerly marginalized groups not on an equal footing, but on a superior one; e.g., Weinstein, 2018). For example, samples that skew politically left have recently been found to consider companies insufficiently racially diverse unless they have at least 25-32% black representation (Danbold & Unzueta, 2019). Because blacks only make up about 13% of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018) this is plausibly viewed as a turn the tables implicit endorsement of discrimination against other groups.…”