Derek R. Avery

Systematic Subjectivity: How Subtle Biases Infect the Scholarship Review Process:

In light of renewed debate regarding publication rigor and ethics, this commentary raises questions about the subjectivity of the peer review process. We argue that the same biases organizational scientists consider as topics of our research—such as confirmation bias, negative bias, anchoring and adjustment, overconfidence bias, and social dynamics—may infect the scholarship process. In addition to these general phenomena, we examine subtle biases that may be unique to or exacerbated within diversity management scholarship. We describe the theoretical basis of such biases and offer preliminary evidence of their nuanced manifestations before outlining suggestions for their reduction.

Blaming the building: How venue quality influences consumer bias against stigmatized leaders.

Because stigmatized individuals are viewed as incongruent with commonly held implicit leadership theories, they are often deemed less fit to lead than their nonstigmatized counterparts (Eagly & Karau, 2002). This suggests consumers might use such views to discredit not only stigmatized leaders, but also the companies they represent. However, cognition based on social categories (1 potential form of stigma) may be more likely when there are readily available alternative factors to account for ones decisions via casuistry. Across 2 complementary studies (field and experiment), we find that customers react negatively to stigmatized leaders only when the physical state of the company venue provides an ostensible defense to mask their biased behavior. When facilities are of lower quality, consumers appear to use a leaders stigma to infer lower product quality, coinciding in less patronage for companies with stigmatized as opposed to nonstigmatized leaders. Thus, consumers penalize companies with stigmatized leaders only when doing so can easily be attributed to an alternative factor (e.g., a lower quality venue) not involving the leaders stigma. (PsycINFO Database Record

Fake It to Make It? Emotional Labor Reduces the Racial Disparity in Service Performance Judgments:

Service providers who are Black tend to be evaluated less favorably than those who are White, hindering opportunities for advancement. We propose that the Black-White racial disparity in service performance evaluations is due to occupational-racial stereotype incongruence for interpersonal warmth and that more emotional labor is necessary from Blacks to reduce this incongruence. A pilot study manipulating employee race and occupation confirmed warmth and person-occupation fit judgments are lower for an otherwise equal Black than White service provider. We then demonstrate the racial disparity in service performance is due to interpersonal warmth differences in an experimental study with participants evaluating videos of retail clerks (Study 1) and a multisource field study of grocery clerks with supervisor-rated judgments (Study 2). Furthermore, White service providers are rated highly regardless of emotional labor, but performing more emotional labor (i.e., amplifying positive expressions) is necessary for Black providers to increase warmth judgments and reduce the racial disparity. In other words, Black providers are held to a higher standard where they must “fake it to make it” in service roles. We discuss implications for stereotype fit and expectation states theory, emotional labor, and service management.

Bargaining while Black: The role of race in salary negotiations.

The influence of race in negotiations has remained relatively underexplored. Across three studies, we theorize and find that Black job seekers are expected to negotiate less than their White counterparts and are penalized in negotiations with lower salary outcomes when this expectation is violated; especially when they negotiate with an evaluator who is more racially biased (i.e., higher in social dominance orientation). Specifically, on the basis of the prescriptive stereotype held by those higher in racial bias—that Black (as compared to White) negotiators deserve lower salaries—we predicted that Black negotiators who behave in counterstereotypical ways encounter greater resistance and more unfavorable outcomes from more biased evaluators. We tested this argument in a stepwise fashion: In Study 1, we found that more biased evaluators expect Black job seekers to negotiate less as compared to White job seekers. When Black negotiators violate those expectations, evaluators award them lower starting salaries (Study 2), which appears to occur because evaluators become more resistant to making concessions to Black than to White job seekers (Study 3). Collectively, our findings demonstrate that racially biased perceptual distortions can be used to justify the provision of smaller monetary awards for Black job seekers in negotiations.

Examining the Effects of Sex, Relative Human Capital, and Sex Composition on Voluntary Turnover

Prior work has demonstrated the presence of sex differences in employee turnover, but much remains unknown about how these differences are manifested. The present study examined the influence of re...

Investigating why and for whom management ethnic representativeness influences interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace.

Preliminary research suggests that employees use the demographic makeup of their organization to make sense of diversity-related incidents at work. The authors build on this work by examining the impact of management ethnic representativeness—the degree to which the ethnic composition of managers in an organization mirrors or is misaligned with the ethnic composition of employees in that organization. To do so, they integrate signaling theory and a sense-making perspective into a relational demography framework to investigate why and for whom management ethnic representativeness may have an impact on interpersonal mistreatment at work. Specifically, in three complementary studies, the authors examine the relationship between management ethnic representativeness and interpersonal mistreatment. First, they analyze the relationship between management ethnic representativeness and perceptions of harassment, bullying, and abuse the next year, as moderated by individuals’ ethnic similarity to others in their organizations in a sample of 60,602 employees of Britain’s National Health Service. Second, a constructive replication investigates perceived behavioral integrity as an explanatory mechanism that can account for the effects of representativeness using data from a nationally representative survey of working adults in the United States. Third and finally, online survey data collected at two time points replicated these patterns and further integrated the effects of representativeness and dissimilarity when they are measured using both objective and subjective strategies. Results support the authors’ proposed moderated mediation model in which management ethnic representation is negatively related to interpersonal mistreatment through the mediator of perceived behavioral integrity, with effects being stronger for ethnically dissimilar employees.