What counts as discrimination? How principles of merit shape fairness of demographic decisions.

Abstract

Demographic attributes (e.g., age, disability, race) frequently affect people's decisions. We provide a novel perspective as to why such discrimination persists: Meritocratic principles lead people to perceive some demographic attributes as fair to use, rather than as discriminatory. Specifically, we theorize that meritocracy requires that controllable and relevant inputs determine outcomes; as a result, perceived controllability and relevance affect the degree to which demographic attributes are perceived as fair to use. Moreover, we suggest perceived relevance outweighs controllability, such that even uncontrollable attributes can be perceived as fair criteria if perceived to be outcome relevant. In two qualitative studies, we probed how people think about demographic attributes used in selection (Studies 1a-b). We find that people refer to controllability and relevance dimensions to justify their perceptions. Further, people largely associate uncontrollable, irrelevant attributes with discrimination (race, sex), neglecting attributes they perceive as controllable and/or relevant (disability, caregiving status). Next, three surveys (Studies 2a-c) support our theorizing that perceived relevance impacts fairness perceptions more strongly than perceived controllability. In three experiments (Studies 3a-c), we provide causal evidence that relevance and controllability shape perceived fairness, which in turn affects selection behaviors, including seeking information regarding demographic attributes during hiring. Finally, Study 4 demonstrates downstream consequences: Perceived controllability, relevance, and use of demographic attributes together impact employees' psychological safety and job satisfaction. Overall, we find that principles of merit lead people to believe that even some legally protected demographic attributes are fair to use, allowing discrimination to persist.

I ain’t no fortunate one: On the motivated denial of class privilege.

“…In present American contexts, meritocracy shapes the foundations of self-regard. Meritocracy requires that resources are allocated based on internal, relevant factors, and specifically not factors like group membership, parental status, or personal connections (Belmi, Phillips, Laurin, & Engstrom, 2020; Son Hing et al, 2011; Tomova Shakur & Phillips, 2020). Many Americans believe meritocracy both should be and is the rule by which social goods are distributed (Son Hing et al, 2011).…”

Heroization and ironic funneling effects.

“…These stereotypes can even legitimize paternalistic attitudes that limit women’s options and freedoms (including whether they should be hired for certain positions), because limiting options and freedoms are judged to be in their “best interest” (Glick & Fiske, 2001a, 2001b; Hideg & Ferris, 2016). Some demographic attributes are even judged as fair to incorporate into hiring decisions, because they are perceived to be relevant to some positions and occupations (Tomova Shakur & Phillips, 2022). So, certain groups may be discriminated against in hiring decisions, not despite beliefs that discrimination is unfair, but because people actually believe it is fair.…”

“…relevant to some positions and occupations (Tomova Shakur & Phillips, 2022). So, certain groups may be discriminated against in hiring decisions, not despite beliefs that discrimination is unfair, but because people actually believe it is fair.…”

Personality Discrimination and the Wrongness of Hiring Based on Extraversion

“…Legal scholars (such as Hoffman, 2021: 1519, emphasis added) also argue that "common sense dictates that it is unjust for workers to suffer adverse consequences solely because of traits they were born with or cannot modify." Laypeople too think controllability and relevance justify hiring practices (Shakur & Phillips, 2022). 3 In some cases, perhaps introversion is not considered bad in itself.…”

“…Instead, we will focus on what, surely, most readers will regard as a claim in greater need of support, i.e., that personality discrimination is in many ways akin to race and sex discrimination morally speaking. 6 A recent study (Shakur & Phillips, 2022) examined how people think about demographic attributes used in hiring. The study found that people rely on controllability and relevance dimensions to justify their perceptions of hiring practices; largely associating uncontrollable, irrelevant attributes, such as race and sex, with discrimination.…”