REFLECTIONS ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION GOALS IN PSYCHOLOGY ADMISSIONS

Four goals of affirmative action in higher education are described as they relate to psychology admissions. Broadly conceived, these goals are compensating for past injustice, correcting present inequity, promoting intellectual diversity, and enhancing the presence of role models. It is argued that the four goats differ in their underlying assumptions about the purposes of affirmative action and that these differences can result in disparate admission decisions. Data from three experiments on decision making in graduate psychology admissions are presented to illustrate the analysis. In these studies, academic psychologists rated the admissibility of hypothetical graduate student applicants who varied on a number of characteristics (e g., ethnicity, social class, interest in minority research) pertinent to affirmative action. A consistent pattern of ethnic group differences in admissibility ratings was documented, illustrating that compensation for past injustice can be interpreted as a salient affirmative action goal in graduate admissions decisions. Implications of the analysis for clarifying admissions decisions guided by affirmative action goals are discussed.     

Sterba on Affirmative Action,or, it Never was the bus,it was Us!

Professor Sterba argues for two interesting and provocative positions regarding affirmative action. First, affirmative action programs are still needed to ensure diversity in educational institutions of higher learning. Secondly, the proponents and opponents of affirmative action are not as far apart as they seem to think. To this end, he proposes a position that would give weight to race as a category for affirmative action that can withstand the challenges of affirmative action opponents while giving the needed support for affirmative action proponents. It is his contention that both sides can support arguments for diversity affirmative action. This paper raises concerns about the ability of arguments for racial diversity to resolve or bring together opponents and proponents of affirmative action. It is argued that the negative social climate, regarding the social and intellectual merits of black Americans, works against the acceptance of affirmative action programs. In sum, it is argued that Professor Sterba’s position continues to put the social onus of changing racial attitudes on blacks with little or no effort on the part of whites other than allowing blacks admittance to formerly segregated educational institutions to interact with white students.     

Affirmative action. Psychological data and the policy debates

The authors bring psychological research to bear on an examination of the policy of affirmative action. They argue that data from many studies reveal that affirmative action as a policy has more benefits than costs. Although the majority of pro-affirmative action arguments in the social sciences stress diversity, the authors' argument focuses on issues of merit. The merit-based argument, grounded in empirical studies, concludes that the policy of affirmative action conforms to the American ideal of fairness and is a necessary policy.     

Diversity-Sensitive Counseling Today: A Postmodern Clash of Values

This article is the second in an ongoing series devoted to a critical reassessment of the status of diversity-sensitive counseling. The current discussion focuses on the use of existing counseling theories and interventions in a diversity-sensitive counseling context, and potential limitations of affirmative action in the American Counseling Association's organizational structure and in counselor preparation programs. Inconsistencies are noted between the strategies now being used to achieve diversity and the philosophical foundations of the counseling profession. At issue are the conflicting values of various constituencies within the Association.     

Diversity experiences predict changes in attitudes toward affirmative action

The current study examined the role of diversity experiences in promoting changes in attitudes toward affirmative action (AA). Using longitudinal data from a survey of over 1000 college students at admission and in their fourth year, results demonstrated that participation in diversity-related campus activities related to positive changes in attitudes toward affirmative action. This result was consistent across samples of White, African American, and Asian American students. Positive changes in attitudes persisted despite statistical controls for established predictors of attitudes toward AA such as merit and prevalence of discrimination beliefs, and individual-level characteristics such as experiences of discrimination and political liberalism. I discuss the relevance of this finding to the AA literature and to changing attitudes toward AA.     

If Empowerment Is the Goal...: Affirmative Action and social Interaction

The goal of affirmative action policies is to empower formerly disenfranchised groups. But what if the procedures used to implement these policies activate a set of social psychological processes that prevent the occurrence of productive social interactions between target-group and non-target-group members? With that question in mind, a conceptual model is developed which focuses on the potential effects of affirmative action procedures on social interactions between members of policy target and nontarget groups. To conceptualize these potential effects of procedures, the concept of a policy schema is introduced. Special attention is paid to the conditions under which beliefs about procedures contained in policy schemas will influence patterns of interactions between target-group and non-target-group members. With that as background, a call is made for more complete analyses of the social psychology of affirmative action.     

Women's Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action: Putting Actions in Context1

Although women typically favor affirmative action, they do exhibit a range of reactions to affirmative action programs. To understand the diversity of reactions, the present study proposed an examination of various forms of affirmative action in the context of the discrimination problem such actions were designed to address. In Study 1, 60 female university students were presented with one of six scenarios describing a situation of discrimination against women, followed by a series of potential affirmative action response options which participants rated in terms of their level of endorsement. Analyses of variance showed that, despite the range of discrimination scenarios, some of which presented extreme cases of discrimination against women, respondents consistently endorsed nondiscrimination measures, and opposed affirmative action strategies involving preferential treatment. Study 2, which preselected 43 women who valued social equality, replicated this finding and found that these results were not due to women not perceiving the presence of collective discrimination. Study 3 examined the attitudes of women in a law and security police training stream (n = 19), whose vulnerability to employment discrimination, both as a group and personally, would be salient. The women in this study endorsed all forms of affirmative action, including explicit preferential treatment in the hiring of women police officers. The implications of these results for the consideration and implementation of affirmative action programs are discussed.     

Examining the principles in principled conservatism: the role of responsibility stereotypes as cues for deservingness in racial policy decisions

Why do educated conservatives oppose affirmative action? Those in the "principled conservatism" camp say opposition is based on principled judgments of fairness about the policies. Others, however, argue that opposition is based on racism. The present article offers an alternative perspective that may reconcile these contradictory points of view. In 2 studies, the authors show 2 major findings: (a) that conservatives oppose affirmative action more for Blacks than for other groups, in this case women, and (b) that the relationship between conservatism and affirmative action attitudes is mediated best by group-based stereotypes that offer deservingness information and not by other potential mediators like old-fashioned racism or the perceived threat that affirmative action poses to oneself. The authors conclude that educated conservatives are indeed principled in their opposition to affirmative action, but those principles are group based not policy based.     

1999 Division 35 Presidential Address: Leveling the Playing Field—Toward the Emancipation of Women

Women have made great strides in acquiring some of the goals of obtaining civil and legal rights. In this article I review progress, identify indicators of a backlash, and suggest strategies for continuing the movement. Examples of feminist scholarship that may add to a leveling of the playing field in all areas of life for women are included. Psychologists are encouraged to continue to contribute to the mobilization of resources in psychology to affect public policy. Recommendations to continue research in the areas such as affirmative action and other strategies to ameliorate prejudice and discrimination are suggested.     

Differentiating Diversities: Moral Diversity Is Not Like Other Kinds1

Diversity is widely celebrated in American society. But from a social psychological point of view, diversity ought to cause a number of problems, such as divisiveness and conflict. A resolution of this paradox is proposed: There are several kinds of diversity, with different profiles of costs and benefits. In particular, moral diversity is identified as being problematic and even self‐contradictory. Three studies of attitudes and desires for interaction among college students confirmed that moral diversity reduces desires for interaction more than does demographic diversity, and that both kinds of diversity are valued more in a classroom than in other social settings. These findings have important implications for discussions of diversity, multiculturalism, affirmative action, identity politics, and immigration policy.     

Searching for Common Ground between Supporters and Opponents of Affirmative Action

Supporters and opponents of affirmative action are often characterized as debating about a single, consensually understood type of affirmative action. However, supporters and opponents instead may have different types of policies in mind when thinking about affirmative action and may actually agree on specific manifestations of affirmative action policies more than is commonly believed. A survey conducted using a student sample and a sample from the broader Chicago-area community showed that affirmative action policies can be characterized into merit-violating versus merit-upholding manifestations. Supporters of affirmative action in general were more likely to think of affirmative action in its merit-upholding manifestations, whereas opponents were more likely to think of the merit-violating manifestations. However, both supporters and opponents showed more support for merit-upholding rather than merit-violating manifestations of affirmative action. The same pattern of results was upheld even when splitting the samples into those who endorsed negative racial attitudes versus those who did not, suggesting that even those who may be considered racist will endorse affirmative action policies that uphold merit values. The results are discussed in terms of the importance of clarifying the political discourse about what affirmative action is and what it is designed to do.     

Gender and Diversity in Organizations: Past,Present, and Future Directions

This introduction reviews some of the key issues that have been studied by researchers focused on gender and diversity in organizations. Issues such as discrimination, affirmative action, barriers to career advancement, and sexual harassment at work are discussed. Although the study of gender and diversity in organizations has expanded in the last decade, key areas of research are still underrepresented. Issues for future research in this area are discussed.     

The positive and negative framing of affirmative action: a group dominance perspective

Using a sample of 328 White, Latino, and Black Los Angeles County adults, the authors examined the tendency to employ various affirmative action "frames" (e.g., affirmative action as a "tie-breaking" device or as a quota-based policy). All three groups agreed about which frames cast affirmative action in a positive light and which cast it in a negative light. Although minorities had a tendency to frame affirmative action in terms that most people find morally acceptable, Whites had a tendency to frame affirmative action in terms most people find unacceptable. In addition, compared to minorities, Whites were less supportive of affirmative action regardless of how it was framed. LISREL modeling also was employed to test two competing models regarding predictors of the tendency to use frames that one personally finds to be relatively negative versus positive. Consistent with the expectations of social dominance theory and a motivated cognition perspective, the authors found that social dominance orientation (SDO) had significant net direct and indirect effects on one's framing of affirmative action.     

Predictors of African American and European American adolescents' endorsement of race-conscious social policies

To examine the predictors of adolescents' evaluations of affirmative action and school desegregation policies, African American and European American students (ns = 94 and 116, respectively; aged 14 to 17 years) attending a racially diverse high school in the Midwestern United States completed measures of (a) implicit racial attitudes, (b) knowledge about historical racism, and (c) perceptions of and attributions for racial disparities. The following day, adolescents learned about either a proposed affirmative action policy (n = 101) or a school desegregation policy (n = 109) and completed measures of their attitudes toward the policy. Results indicated racial differences in policy support and in the factors predicting policy support. Theoretical implications of the findings are discussed.     

What Factors Influence Judges’ Rulings About the Legality of Affirmative Action Plans?

Purpose

When implementing affirmative action programs involving race and gender, human resource practitioners must balance efforts to increase workforce diversity against the need to avoid illegal reverse discrimination. The tension between non-discrimination law and preferential treatment is explored. In reverse discrimination case law, affirmative action plans are evaluated by judges along two dimensions: remedial need and limiting harm. The legal literature specifies certain factors such as statistical imbalance, employee qualification, and duration of plan that are usually examined within these two dimensions.

Methodology

A content analysis of 80 federal court cases was conducted to quantitatively analyze the weight and importance of these factors within judicial rulings as well as contextual factors (e.g., judge’s political affiliation, beneficiary of program) that may influence the outcome of affirmative action lawsuits.

Results

It was found that remedial need can be demonstrated by large statistical disparities in the workforce, and was also more likely to be found by Democratic than Republican judges. Limiting harm is more likely to be supported by plans that are of limited duration and do not use reserved slots, or quotas.

Implications

The study provides empirically based recommendations for the design of legally defensible affirmative action plans that involve preferential treatment.     

The metaphysical club at the Johns Hopkins University (1879-1885)

Of the earliest American universities, The Johns Hopkins in Baltimore holds a unique position for psychology. At Hopkins, many of America's first psychologists received their graduate training. Of special interest is the Hopkins Metaphysical Club, organized in 1879 by Charles Sanders Peirce. It provided a forum for research and scholarship by faculty and students. Papers related to topics of the "new" psychology began to appear in 1883, about the time G. Stanley Hall was given a 3-year appointment at Hopkins. When Peirce departed Hopkins in 1885, Hall was free to develop psychology in his image and disbanded the club. Nevertheless, the Metaphysical Club played an important role in the emergence of American scientific psychology.     

The effects of affirmative action on male-female relationships among African Americans

This article focuses on the little-discussed issue of the impact of affirmative action on black male-female dynamics and interpersonal relationships. Three decades of civil rights campaigns, including often-controversial affirmative action policies, have produced several unanticipated consequences, one of the most crucial being the great disparity between African American males and females in social and economic advancement. While black women have achieved, black men have fallen behind, in part due to the subtle racism of affirmative action implementation. Using fantasy to search for new truths and better directions, the article presents a fictionalized account of the devastating effect of this disparity on African American women. Black women's reactions to the allegorical symbolism of the Twenty-Seventh Year Syndrome are dealt with in the article, and become the basis for reconsidering the message of the Chronicle and enlarging upon its meaning for black male-female relationships, and for the future of affirmative action and other programs of racial uplift.     

Selecting for Diversity

This paper examines the subject of selecting for diversity. It begins with a brief discussion on what diversity means in this context. An examination is then made of the reasons given by several authors as to why organizations should select for diversity. The paper particularly focuses on (i) gaining greater access to the available talent, and (ii) enhanced team working and effectiveness. Next, the paper discusses an area that is both contentious and controversial in terms of selecting for diversity: that of affirmative action. Here an examination is made of some of the background to affirmative action, the different models and views that people hold of it, and how this fits into a diversity framework.     

A comparative Perspective on Affirmative Action: Positieve Aktie in The Netherlands

The Netherlands has established a program for minority employment patterned after affirmative action in the United States. Thus, the Sutch experience allows a comparative perspective on American efforts, one made more instructive by the sharp differences in intergroup relations between the two nations. We report on our Dutch research on affirmative action among urban police involving almost 100 intensive individual interviews in yoked sets of three--the minority officer, her or his White co-workers, and their immediate supervisor. Based on this initial, rough comparison, we tentatively advance that contrasting national racial normative structures make critical differences in the reception of the policy. Such problems as solo role and stigma commonly reported in American research appear muted in our Dutch data. Thus, ironically, the American racist legacy that shapes the problems of affirmative action is the same legacy that requires affirmative-action policies in the first place.