Selection procedure and responses to affirmative action: The case of favorable treatment.

Abstract

Although it has been recognized that a large number of issues linked to the social policy of affirmative action are of a social psychological nature, research investigating such issues has not considered the social psychological importance of implementation procedures. Social policy analysts have differentiated implementation procedures on the degree to which they include relevant achievement criteria.In the present research this differentiation is couched within the theoretical framework of procedural justice and is utilized to critique the work of Austin et al. (1977). These researchers investigated the responses of individuals favorably treated in an affirmative action like situation and conclude that affirmative action is evaluated as "absolutely" unfair by these individuals. Based on the critique, a 2 (qualifications) • 2 (history of discrimination) • 2 (procedure) role play experiment was conducted. The results of the experiment unambiguously support the hypothesis that implementation procedure will greatly affect a variety of individual responses such as general affect, evaluations of procedural fairness, evaluations of outcome fairness, and evaluations of a relevant subunit of the involved institution. * This article is based in part on a dissertation submitted to the Department of Psychology at the University of North Carolina in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. Special thanks are extended to the members of the dissertation committee, Drs.

Message effects on the perceptions of the fairness of gender-based affirmative action: A cognitive response theory-based analysis

“…Differentiating between alternate forms of affirmative action is important, since fairness perceptions of affirmative action depend on the policy's relative emphasis on gender and qualifications (Nacoste, 1985). Seligman (1975) has provided a four-category scheme for distinguishing among affirmative action policies.…”

Some reflections on Smith and Crosby's “affirmative action: Setting the record straight”

“…Claims that affirmative action increases self-doubt and decreases self-esteem among beneficiaries find some support in the research literature (e.g., Nacoste, 1985Nacoste, , 1989Turner et al, 1991). In addition, those who believe they were selected for a position solely on the basis of their sex (for example) have been observed in some research to show less persistence and choose less challenging tasks than those who believe they were selected for a position solely on the basis of merit (evidence discussed in Major, in press).…”

“…Some of the research requires participants to imagine (e.g., through role playing; Nacoste, 1985) how they would react to being chosen for a benefit or being denied one. Comparisons of results in such research with results of research employing experimental methods where pa~'ticipants actually experience benefits or costs (e.g., Nacoste, 1989) or are led to believe they will as a result of the presence or absence of affirmative action programs might be instructive.…”

A model of school managerial control : the systematic analysis of managerial behaviors, processes, and indicators

“…The implementation procedures of an incentive system, therefore, evoke significant qualitative variables independent of the content or meaning of rewards and punishments (Nacoste, 1985). Since individual teachers ascribe subjective meanings to rewards, an incentive system which focuses on individuals is likely to have unreliable measures and cause alienation and favoritism (Blase, 1988;Mitchell & Peters, 1988).…”

“…Moreover, these phenomenological influences extend even to implementation procedures (Nacoste, 1985); that is, 226 structural procedures which themselves influence a variety of individual responses.…”