Does Reliance on Merit Principles Lead to Discrimination?

Every day we make decisions that impact others. Who will be our date, who will get to buy our  beloved heirloom, or who will be our children’s nanny, our dog walker or personal accountant? Such decisions are often influenced by demographic characteristics that are protected by federal law against employment discrimination, including gender, age, or race. But these decisions can also be influenced by legally unprotected demographic characteristics—such as educational attainment or alma mater – that unfortunately may carry biases.

Although ample research shows that biases lead individuals to make discriminatory decisions, my colleague and I argue that there is another reason why discrimination may be hard to root out. Paradoxically, individuals use meritocratic principles to judge the fairness of a decision, consequently perpetuating discrimination.

Meritocratic Ideals

Especially in Western countries, individuals make decisions about fairness based on meritocratic ideals: a decision is justified when individuals are rewarded on the basis of their efforts, skills, and abilities. For instance, not hiring a dog walker because of their race seems unfair, because race has nothing to do with merit (one’s ability to do the job). However, not hiring a dog walker because they lack suitable experience with dogs is fair, because the decision is made on the basis of merit. Yet, in many situations, it remains unclear which specific demographic characteristics are perceived as merit-based and judged as fair to use.  

What Makes A Given Characteristic Merit-Based?

We found that two key factors determine whether people think a given characteristic reflects merit:

  • Controllability—the extent to which individuals have control over a given characteristic that they possess.  
  • Relevance—the extent to which the given characteristic is relevant to performance. For instance, despite its relative controllability, a dog walker’s education isn’t a justifiable reason for choosing a walker, unless the candidate’s training is specific to caring for dogs.

Across nine studies, we found that if a decision is based on these two factors, then it is viewed as fair. For example, in one study, 1,500 U.S. adults were asked to think about selection based on one of the following characteristics: race, gender, age, alma mater, caregiving responsibilities, disability, educational attainment, national origin, family origin, established network connections, physical attractiveness, political affiliation, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status. Participants read that selection based on the given characteristic involves treating someone unfavorably because they belong to a certain group or because they have a certain characteristic associated with the given demographic marker. Once they indicated how much they believe such selection is fair, they rated the extent to which the characteristic is controllable by a person and how relevant the characteristic is to most jobs.

Indeed, ratings of controllability and relevance positively related to perceptions of selection fairness. People thought that hiring someone on the basis of a demographic characteristic is fair when the characteristic is viewed as controllable and relevant (such as selection based on educational attainment). However, hiring someone on the basis of a demographic characteristic is unfair when the characteristic is viewed as uncontrollable and irrelevant, such as selection based on race or gender.

We also explored whether knowledge about whether the given characteristic is illegal to select on affects how these factors relate to fairness. We found that controllability and relevance still predicted fairness perceptions, regardless of whether the particular characteristic was protected by law. In other words, even if sexual orientation is a legally protected category, meaning that employers can be sued if they discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, people perceived such discrimination as fair if they believed sexual orientation was controllable and relevant. We found similar results in a follow-up study of individuals who often make hiring decisions at work, suggesting that even people who are experienced with making selection decisions rely on such meritocratic principles, ultimately perpetuating discrimination.

Are Relevance And Controllability Equally Important When People Make Decisions?

Yet, not all demographic characteristics are equally controllable and relevant. Some may be controllable and irrelevant, while others may be uncontrollable and relevant. For instance, one’s religious beliefs may be perceived as relatively controllable by the individual, but highly irrelevant for most jobs. One’s caregiving responsibilities in their private life (to take care of a child or a sick relative) may be perceived as relevant to some jobs (would they be able to work overtime?), yet such responsibilities are relatively uncontrollable. In the presence of such mismatch, we found that people rely more on relevance rather than controllability to determine if a decision is fair. Perhaps this is because hiring situations, in particular, may lead people to think more about the success of the business. Namely, doing good for the business (hiring someone who would work overtime) may take precedence over doing good for society (preventing discrimination against caregivers). As such, this mindset may help people justify their discriminatory decisions.

How Do Merit Principles Lead To Discrimination?

While relying on meritocracy seems like a fair judgment principle, it can perpetuate discrimination because perceptions of controllability and relevance make some demographic characteristics feel fair to select upon. Therefore, individuals may act in discriminatory ways without feeling discriminatory. For instance, in our studies, we found that characteristics such as age and disability were perceived as highly relevant characteristics despite their lack of controllability. Consequently, individuals perceived decisions against individuals of certain age or ability as fair. Such perceptions, however, remain a far cry from following legal standards.

This work shows that even when individuals use principles of meritocracy, they may make decisions that hurt others, despite thinking that they act in fair ways. Using these meritocratic principles may lead to rejecting individuals who should not be rejected, thus perpetuating discrimination.


For Further Reading

Jetten, J., Iyer, A., Branscombe, N. R., & Zhang, A. (2013). How the disadvantaged appraise group-based exclusion: The path from legitimacy to illegitimacy. European Review of Social Psychology24(1), 194-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2013.840977

Tomova Shakur, T. K., & Phillips, L. T. (2022). What counts as discrimination? How principles of merit shape fairness of demographic decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.  https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000383


Teodora K. Tomova Shakur is a PhD Candidate in Management at New York University. She investigates issues of nepotism, cronyism, and employee referrals and their implications for organizations and society at large. 

 

Why You Should (Not) Stop Thinking About Work While at Home


Do you have trouble not pondering about your workday, about interactions with clients and colleagues, the unfinished tasks you left behind, or the many meetings waiting for you tomorrow? Do you feel distracted by these thoughts and fear (or experience) that they impact how you interact with your spouse or children at home?

You are not alone! Indeed, many people report frequently getting stuck in work-related thoughts. Such “work creep” has gradually escalated in the modern world—and the spread of COVID-19 during the last two years, with many people having to work at home, has further complicated it. My research team explored this topic.

It’s Not As Simple As “Just Leave Your Work At The Office!”

We studied how individuals think about their workplaces when at home and how ruminating about work affects their family lives. It is easy to assume that thinking about work when at home can detract from family life. And sure enough, we found some of that. Being stuck in negative emotions due to ruminating—being angry or annoyed because of not being able to stop thinking about work—went with experiencing more conflict at home. People who continued to feel upset about work after they get home were more likely to be strained and felt they did not have enough time to spend with their family. Seems logical, doesn’t it? If we are mentally still at work, especially while being angry or worried about it, it’s not easy to be an attentive listener or a patient parent, who thrives in role play with their child—for the tenth time…

But The News Was Not All Bad!

Constructively thinking about work while at home—finding solutions for workplace problems—had the opposite effect! These individuals did not experience conflict, instead they even felt that their work role benefited the family role. They were happier, felt that their work role helped them be more fulfilled and more self-confident, and that they learned new skills and knowledge in their work role, therefore becoming better spouses and parents. Thus, there are even some positive benefits of continuing to think about work when at home.

How Can We Explain This Difference?

The difference between benefiting and interfering with family life may rest on a matter of perspective! Constructively thinking about work while at home broadens your horizon, it helps you zoom out of the specific problem to see the similarities between your work role and your family role—a first step in transferring your positive attitudes, emotions, and skills to the home domain. Conversely, focusing on feeling bad because of not being able to stop thinking about work narrows your horizon, and your ability to see experiences at work as a resource gets difficult (and it’s easier to see work as a burden).

What Now?

So, rather than attempting not to think about work while at home, try to do so in a constructive manner. Easier said than done, we know. Here are a few practical tips that can help you:

  • Write down the issue that you keep ruminating about. If you are pondering a conflict with a colleague or supervisor, you might want to write this colleague an email—without pressing “send.” Doing so helps you to understand what exactly bothers you and helps in finding (temporary) closure. That may be particularly helpful if you can’t immediately change the work situation. Go back to your notes on the next day to see whether they still bother you—if so, get in touch with your colleague or supervisor and attempt to solve the problem.
  • Achieving an emotionally satisfying feeling of closure is easier once you have completed the tasks. Depending on how long this would take, it might be worth getting the job done to then have your mind free to fully engage with your spouse and children. If this is not possible, take notes on the steps you need to do to get the job done—either in a notebook or write yourself an email. It’s better to invest these 5 to 10 minutes rather than being distracted the whole evening.
  • In our study, we also tested whether having more self-control helps in this process. Self-control did not help prevent the bad consequences of being stuck in negative emotions. But it helped people avoid getting stuck in negative emotions in the first place. Knowing this can be useful. If your self-control is low, which may be either a regular part of your personality or a temporary state of depleted willpower, you are more likely to get stuck in bad feelings from work. And even good self-control won’t help you once you find yourself stuck in feeling bad. If you cannot escape the bad mood, then perhaps it is best to be aware that you are at risk for saying or doing something you will regret.
  • Find a routine that helps you in transitioning from “being in work mode” to “being in family mode.” Some people prefer to be alone at first when getting home after a stressful day, to go for a run, or to simply switch clothes. What helps you?

In sum, thinking about work while at home brings your work home—and this can be positive or negative, depending on which aspects of work you focus.


For Further Reading

Junker, N. M., Baumeister, R. F., Straub, K., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2021). When forgetting what happened at work matters: The role of affective rumination, problem-solving pondering, and self-control in work-family conflict and enrichment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(11), 1750 – 1766. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000847
 

Nina M. Junker is an associate professor in work and organizational psychology at the University of Oslo, Norway. She primarily studies the work-family interface with a particular focus on transitioning from one role to another and its consequences for individuals’ well-being. 

 

If You’re Happy for Others and You Know It, You May Not Burn Out

“Where’s the fire, what’s the hurry about? You better cool it off before you burn it out. You’ve got so much to do and only so many hours in a day.”

If you’re like me, then you are now relating to the lyrics of Billy Joel’s “Vienna” more than you ever did. In fact, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, many working adults across the world have experienced prolonged working hours, constant protocol changes, and a shift to remote work—all of which can cultivate an overwhelming experience of burnout. Burnout consists of symptoms such as emotional exhaustion, depersonalized or detached responses to others, a decline in feelings of achievement at work, and a loss of satisfaction in one’s work.

While burnout is a problem for all working professionals, for helping professionals the disorganized, hectic, and traumatic working conditions during COVID-19 have fueled even higher levels of burnout. This is concern enough for the health and well-being of those experiencing it, yet, reducing burnout in helping professionals is also of importance for those whom they help. Research shows that students of teachers with higher levels of burnout report feeling less supported, become less motivated, and receive lower overall grades than students of teachers with lower levels of burnout. Similarly, healthcare providers experiencing burnout tend to deliver poorer quality care, which can impact medical errors, patient safety, and patients’ overall satisfaction with their provider. Thus, burnout appears to be a public health crisis in-and-of itself.

Are Empaths More Or Less Prone To Burnout?

What exactly is it that contributes to working professionals feeling burned out? Some have argued that sharing in the emotions of others, often referred to as a kind of empathy, can be stressful and effortful and therefore is a liability when it comes to burnout. Others have suggested that experiencing similar emotions towards a person one is helping should actually prevent burnout, as sharing in the emotions of another may be energizing and rewarding.

My colleagues and I set out to help disentangle this debate regarding the relationship between empathy and burnout across various groups of helping professionals.

We theorized that helpers who reported empathizing more with the negative emotions of others, such as distress, pain, and trauma, would report greater feelings of burnout but those who reported empathizing more with the positive emotions of others, such as joy and pride, would report less burnout.

We conducted online studies of 59 practicing clinicians, 76 medical students, and 77 teaching assistants. We measured these helping professionals’ empathy in three different ways. First, we asked about their tendency to share in other’s positive emotions, where they reported the extent to which they agreed with questions such as “It makes me happy to see others succeed.” Additionally, we asked about their tendency to share in others’ negative emotions using questions such as “Other people’s misfortunes often disturb me a great deal.” And, we queried them on how burned out they felt from working their specific helping job.

The Answer Is… It Depends

The more a helping professional reported sharing in the positive emotions of others, the less burnout they reported. These “positive empath” helpers reported feeling lower levels of emotional exhaustion and detached responses to those they cared for, and greater feeling of achievement and satisfaction from their work. In other words, the more a helping professional derives happiness, confidence, pride, or joy from the positive emotional experiences of those they are helping, the less likely they are to experience symptoms of burnout. Helpers’ tendencies to share in the negative emotions of others was actually unrelated to how much they experienced burnout. We believe this to be good news, as experiencing suffering with others, and wanting to alleviate it, is often a strong motivator for helping professionals to get into the field to begin with.

Can We Help Prevent Burnout In Helping Professions In The Future?

Interventions focused on increasing an individual’s tendency to share in the positive emotions of others could be effective in reducing burnout. At the very least, how much one tends to share in the positive emotions of others may be a “marker” or risk factor for individuals who are prone to, or safeguarded against, burnout.

Perhaps we could all use a little more “Vienna” in our life during pandemic times. As Billy Joel writes, an ability to slow down and take the time to experience life again, with a little more emphasis on sharing in the positive experiences of others, might do us all good.


For Further Reading

Andreychik, M. R. (2019). Feeling your joy helps me to bear feeling your pain: Examining associations between empathy for others’ positive versus negative emotions and burnout. Personality and Individual Differences, 137, 147–156. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.08.028

Ferri, P., Guerra, E., Marcheselli, L., Cunico, L., & Di Lorenzo, R. (2015). Empathy and burnout: An analytic cross-sectional study among nurses and nursing students. Acta Biomed for Health Professionals, 82(2), 104–115.

Awa, W. L., Plaumann, M., & Walter, U. (2010). Burnout prevention: A review of intervention programs. Patient Education and Counseling, 78(2), 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.04.008


Morgan Stosic is a PhD candidate at the University of Maine. Her research interests include the expression and perception of nonverbal behavior, with a focus on how individuals use nonverbal information to make first impression judgments of others.

 

Older and Younger Job Seekers on LinkedIn: Similar Techniques, Different Outcomes

In today’s recruitment practices, the use of social networking sites (SNS) like LinkedIn is omnipresent. In fact, SNS have become the main medium through which organizations advertise jobs, recruit, and screen future employees. Likewise, millions of job seekers use SNS to present their skills and make themselves attractive to organizations.

This practice may put some job seekers in a disadvantaged position. Navigating SNS and creating an attractive and professional-looking profile on LinkedIn requires specific skills and knowledge which may be a barrier for those individuals who have not grown up with the Internet or social media. Indeed, not having grown up with the Internet and encountering social media later in adulthood often goes along with a lower skill level when navigating and actively using SNS but also with more skepticism and uneasiness about online self-presentation in general. Therefore, older job seekers may be less proficient in creating and promoting their LinkedIn profiles than younger job seekers, which may in turn lower their chances of employment.

We analyzed how younger and older job seekers present themselves on LinkedIn and how successful their presentation styles were for receiving job offers through LinkedIn. Younger job seekers who participated in our study were in their late twenties, so-called digital natives who were “born into a wired world.” Social media are at the heart of the way members of this age group communicate, learn, work, play, and shop. Older job seekers who participated in our study were in their fifties. Thus, they were in their 40s when the major SNS like LinkedIn and Facebook were launched. Moreover, they were not exposed to computers or the Internet until late adolescence or young adulthood.

First, we analyzed our participants’ LinkedIn profiles in detail and compared them. We focused on those profile sections that recruiters pay most attention to, namely the “about” section, the skills and competencies section, the network connections, the recommendations, and the profile photo. Then, we analyzed how the way older and younger job seekers presented themselves in these sections was related to the number of job offers they had received.

The Good News

The comparison of profiles revealed many similarities and few differences between younger and older job seekers. For example, younger and older job seekers mentioned about the same number of professional qualities in the “about” sections, using about the same number of words. Moreover, they mentioned roughly the same number and type of soft and technical skills in the “skills” section and had a similar number of recommendations. And their profile photos were perceived as relatively professional.

The few differences that emerged were in favor of older job seekers’ profiles: Older job seekers had larger networks, meaning more connections, and more skill endorsements than younger job seekers. And they used profile pictures with more advantageous cutouts, showing more of the face in relation to the body.

In sum, these comparisons show that older job seekers are just as proficient or, in some respects, even more proficient in creating and promoting their profile on LinkedIn. This observation is encouraging because it refutes concern that older adults are less versed in using professional SNS.

The Bad News

However, looking at employment outcomes was less encouraging. Irrespective of profile qualities, older job seekers received significantly fewer job offers through LinkedIn than younger job seekers. That is, despite comparable—or in some respects better—online profiles, older job seekers did not receive comparable employment opportunities. Older job seekers were better connected and received more skill endorsements, showing that other professionals deemed it worthwhile to connect with them and give them credit for their competencies. Yet, older job seekers were still disadvantaged at recruitment.

Only one aspect helped counteract the age discrimination: When older job seekers used a profile photo in which they looked younger than they actually were. In other words, the younger the older job seekers were on their profile photo, they more likely they were to receive job offers through LinkedIn.

In sum, age discrimination persists at employment, including in the online realm. Furthermore, age discrimination is evident in the powerful impact of the job seeker’s photo. In spite of their strong qualities, older job seekers received fewer employment opportunities than younger job seekers, and only having a younger-looking photo helped compensate for the bias. Thus, older job seekers’ older looks on their profile photo played an important role in explaining the fact that they received fewer employment opportunities.

These findings have practical implications. While photos have been banned from classical resumes for good reasons, they have remarkably found a way back into the recruitment process through SNS. Our results imply that it is time to also ban them from SNS. The absence of profile photos may also help increase recruiters’ attention to the specific content of the profiles and hence to information that is more relevant for finding the right person for the job. Our finding that older job seekers are just as proficient in crafting their professional online personas as younger job seekers is particularly encouraging. It implies that the use of SNS is not per se an obstacle and hence does not create an unfair disadvantage for older age cohorts. Thus, banning profile photos from SNS may be an important step forward in transforming the use of SNS in online recruitment into an age-fair practice.


For Further Reading

Krings, F., Gioaba, I., Kaufmann, M., & Zebrowitz, L. (2021). Older and younger job seekers’ impression management on LinkedIn: Similar strategies, different outcomes.  Journal of Personnel Psychology, 20, 61-74. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000269

Kaufmann, M., Krings, F., Zebrowitz, L. & Sczesny, S. (2017). Age bias in selection decisions: The role of facial appearance and fitness impressions. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2065. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02065


Franciska Krings is a Full Professor of Organizational Behavior at the University of Lausanne. She studies how diversity affects the way people behave in organizations, particularly how stereotypes influence personnel decision making as well as how to combat such biases.

 

Advice for Finding a Summer Internship

Although next summer may feel far away, for students hoping to complete a summer internship in an industry setting, the fall is a key time for finding and applying for internships.

Where to begin: Finding positions

It can be hard to know where to begin when it comes to finding potential summer internships. Oftentimes, social and personality psychology departments may not be aware of what internships in industry are available for students, but looking online can be a good starting place. Check out websites of companies and organizations that be of interest and job-searching websites like LinkedIn, Glassdoor, or Indeed. Additionally, using one’s network can help identify potential options. There may be former graduate students affiliated with a department who have gone on to working full in industry after graduate. These people may be able to provide insight into whether their company has summer internships for graduate students. Social and personality psychology graduate students have a wide range of skills they’ve developed throughout graduate school that are applicable to many different fields outside of academia. Common fields for social and personality psychologists that offer internship experiences for students include user experience (UX) research, government work, and consulting. Many companies and organizations recruit for their summer internships throughout the fall, so it can serve interested students well to seek out positions during October and November.

The application process

Many internship programs have rolling applications (i.e., they evaluate applicants as they apply rather than all at once at the end of a time period). It still is important to look out for deadlines for applications, because these may vary by company. Perhaps the most essential component of an internship application involves submitting a resume. Notably, resumes are distinct from an academic CV. Whereas CVs tend to be several pages, resumes are typically only one page long. As a result, it is vital to be concise in describing one’s education, relevant work experiences, and skillset. The resume is a great way for an applicant to highlight how their experiences in graduate school and beyond qualify them for an industry internship even if they don’t have formal industry work experience yet. Applicants should read the job postings carefully and consider tailoring their resumes to showcase their most relevant skills and experiences for each internship application. Some internships may also require applicants to submit a cover letter or additional work samples, so applicants should review the requirements carefully.

After submitting an application, applicants who are considered to be strong candidates may be asked to interview for the position before a hiring decision can be made. Interviews can vary depending on the type of internship. Some positions may require multiple rounds of interviews where candidates demonstrate their qualitative or quantitative reasoning skills and/or share a sample presentation in addition to traditional interview questions. Again, it may be helpful to use one’s network or do some research online to learn more about the specific interview processes that are common in various industry settings. Learning more about what to expect in terms of interviews can help applicants feel more confident during the process.

Use SPSP as a resource!

While the process to finding an industry internship may seem overwhelming and ambiguous, there are many opportunities for social and personality psychology graduate students to dip their toes into non-academic jobs, and SPSP is here to help. For more information, check out SPSP’s Career Guidance page which contains more information about non-academic jobs more broadly including links to some informational videos about non-academic careers, links to several SPSP chats, the non-academic job market survey, and more!

SPSP also produced a webinar in 2019 designed to help attendees turn their CV into a resume. A recording of that discussion is available for SPSP members. 

The Tattoo Penalty

In recent years, tattoos have greatly increased in popularity in the United States and around the world as a form of self, cultural, or artistic expression, and to commemorate an impactful event or person. Despite the growing acceptance in society of tattoos, there may still be resistance to the presence of inked individuals in the workplace. As a result, employers may be hesitant to hire tattooed job applicants.

In three studies, we looked at how employment is affected by visible tattoos. We asked employees who had hiring and supervisory experience in companies to assume the role of a recruiter and to examine simulated LinkedIn profiles of fictitious job applicants for a sales manager position. We intentionally examined only Caucasian female applicants in their mid to late 20s due to the complexity of including other demographic groups that vary by sex, race, age, and so forth.

First, we compared equally qualified and attractive applicants with extreme tattoos, a mild tattoo, and no visible tattoo (done via Photoshopping). We found that job applicants with tattoos, especially extreme ones, were less likely to be hired than applicants without tattoos. Additionally, applicants with extreme tattoos or a mild one received lower salary offers than those without tattoos ($2267 and $2159 less annually, respectively). Even if the tattoo has no further effects on performance evaluations, promotions, or pay raises if the person is hired, the initial salary difference adds up over time. If a company gives a modest 2 percent annual raise, even a mild visible tattoo could cost the employee more than $23,000 over 10 years. Not a small price to pay for a mild tattoo!

Second, we wondered why tattooed job applicants suffer hiring discrimination. We speculated that tattooed applicants may be stereotyped by hiring managers as less competent. We discovered that applicants with tattoos were indeed perceived as less competent compared to applicants without tattoos and this negative stereotype was used to justify hiring discrimination and lower starting salary offers—even when tattooed applicants were as qualified as their non-tattooed counterparts.

Overcoming the Stereotype of Incompetence?

To find out if this was possible, we compared highly versus minimally qualified job applicants with or without visible tattoos. Our hope was that outstanding job qualifications could override perceptions of incompetence related to tattoos. Instead, we found that highly qualified applicants with extreme tattoos or a mild one were still less likely to be hired than those without tattoos. However, there were no differences in salary offers among the highly qualified tattooed and non-tattooed applicants. Thus, highly qualified tattooed applicants can overcome discrimination in starting salary, but not hiring.

Finally, we wanted to see if there is another way to neutralize discrimination because tattooed applicants still experienced hiring discrimination even when they were highly qualified. We believed that volunteer experience coupled with outstanding job qualifications could strengthen perceptions of competence among tattooed applicants. Volunteers are often believed to have motivation, intelligence, and leadership—all of which might signal competence. We compared highly qualified applicants with and without volunteer experience who either had extreme tattoos or no visible tattoo. But, unfortunately, volunteer experience did not mitigate discrimination related to hiring or starting salary offers.

Thus, stereotypes against visible tattoos may cause hiring managers to exclude this growing segment of the population, regardless of their qualifications. So, if you are considering body art, you may want to opt for less extreme tattoos in easily concealed locations. Furthermore, enhancing your job qualifications will aid in overcoming stereotypes of incompetence that punish those with visible tattoos.

And for those of you who do hiring at your business, you need to recognize biases you may hold against tattooed job applicants so you don’t overlook qualified applicants based solely on their appearance.   


For Further Reading

Henle, C. A., Shore, T. H., Murphy, K. R., & Marshall, A. D. (2021). Visible tattoos as a source of employment discrimination among female applicants for a supervisory position. Journal of Business and Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-021-09731-w

Timming, A. R. (2017). Body art as branded labour: At the intersection of employee selection and relationship marketing. Human Relations, 70, 1041–1063. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716681654.

Timming, A. R., Nickson, D., Re, D., & Perrett, D. (2017). What do you think of my ink? Assessing the effects of body art on employment chances. Human Resource Management, 56(1), 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21770.
 

Chris Henle is a Professor of Management at Colorado State University. Her research interests include employment discrimination and counterproductive work behaviors such as abusive supervision and workplace ostracism.

Ted Shore is a Professor of Management at California State University, San Marcos. His research interests include employment discrimination and workplace bias.

Where Do Impostor Feelings Come From?

More than 40 years ago, two psychologists coined the term impostor phenomenon. They used the term to describe the many bright, highly accomplished women they had encountered in their clinical practice, who, surprisingly, had trouble believing that they had really earned their success. These women regarded their academic or professional success as unearned and doubted their abilities; they thought they had gotten to where they were by some fluke or stroke of good luck; and they worried that others would discover their supposed incompetence.

In the years following, interest in the impostor phenomenon—also called impostor syndrome—swelled among laypeople and psychologists. Today, blog pieces about the impostor phenomenon are published everywhere, focusing on, for example, how one can cope with impostor feelings, or which celebrities have experienced these feelings and why. A particularly timely article offers advice on how to “beat” the impostor syndrome during remote work.

Consistent with early observations from clinical settings, researchers who study the impostor phenomenon today find that it is experienced more commonly and intensely by women than men. And, individuals just starting out in their professional life seem to be particularly vulnerable to impostor feelings as well. Our question was, why are these groups more likely to experience the impostor phenomenon?

Rather than looking to the person for an explanation, we took a different tack in an attempt to understand these group differences. We investigated how the professional contexts people find themselves in might amplify these well-established gender and career stage differences in impostor feelings.

We looked particularly at people’s perceptions of what their career values for success. We thought that careers that prize brilliance—that is, untutored intellectual ability—would represent a threatening environment for women—not because they aren’t brilliant, but because ambient cultural stereotypes associate brilliance with men, not women. Women may be aware that their career emphasizes something they are stereotyped to lack, which could in turn prompt doubt about their abilities. Similarly, brilliance-oriented careers may be threatening for junior individuals as well, who may feel more unsure about their competence and capabilities on the job.

Four Thousand Academics Speak Up

We focused our investigation on academia because we thought concerns about intellectual ability would be especially pronounced in this community. We asked over 4,000 graduate students, postdoctoral scholars, and professors across a range of fields to report their impostor feelings, by asking them to rate their agreement with statements such as, “Sometimes I’m afraid others will discover how much knowledge or ability I really lack” (borrowed from Clance and Imes’s prior work on this topic). Academics also told us the extent to which they believed that their field values brilliance for success by rating their agreement with statements like “Being a top scholar of [my discipline] requires a special aptitude that just can’t be taught.”

Guess Who Felt the Most Like an Imposter?

We are sure you guessed right: Women and early career academics (that is, graduate students and postdocs) reported stronger impostor feelings than men, and faculty members, respectively. Even more important, the magnitude of these differences depended on academics’ perceptions of their field. We found that gender differences in impostor feelings were exacerbated in fields that emphasized brilliance. Women, but not men, who perceived their field to value brilliance for success reported heightened impostor feelings. Interestingly, underrepresented minority (URM) women (that is, women who self-identified as Black or African American, Hispanic or Latina, American Indian or Alaska Native) reported the strongest impostor feelings in fields perceived to value brilliance, relative to URM men, and White and Asian women and men. This aligns with prior speculations that have pointed out the unique (and intensified) impostor experiences of women of color.

Similarly, differences in impostor feelings between early-career academics and faculty were magnified in fields viewed as brilliance-oriented. Not only did faculty report lower levels of impostor feelings overall, but their impostor feelings did not increase as the perceived brilliance orientation of their field increased—as it did for early-career academics.

It’s Not Just an Individual Person’s Problem

We think there are two important takeaways from these findings:

  • First, the impostor phenomenon isn’t just a problem for particularly neurotic or insecure individuals. Well-intentioned recommendations for how individuals can reduce their impostor feelings might be productively steered toward discussions of how fields and workplace environments can create atmospheres where everyone feels capable of succeeding.
  • Second, as many have emphasized before, race is gendered, and gender is racialized. People navigate every situation embodying multiple identities. In our research, this idea was reflected in the fact that URM women experienced the strongest impostor feelings in brilliance-focused fields. Without attention to these intersections in our study, we might have missed important distinctions in how URM versus non-URM women experience impostor feelings in brilliance-oriented fields.

For Further Reading

Muradoglu, M., Horne, Z., Hammond, M., Leslie, S. J., & Cimpian, A. (2020). Women—particularly underrepresented minority women—and early-career academics feel like impostors in fields that value brilliance. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000669

Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice,15(3), 241-247. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0086006

Feenstra, S., Begeny, C. T., Ryan, M. K., Rink, F. A., Stoker, J. I., & Jordan, J. (2020). Contextualizing the Impostor “Syndrome”. Frontiers in Psychology11, 3206.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.575024

Leslie, S. J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347(6219), 262–265. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1261375
 

Melis Muradoglu is a doctoral candidate at New York University who studies how children and adults think about success.

Andrei Cimpian is a Professor at New York University who studies (social) cognition and its development.

Reactions to Unsolicited Advice in the Workplace

Have you ever observed coworkers doing something imperfectly and thought about giving them a tip about how to do it better? Or have you blurted out advice during a meeting without waiting on someone else to ask for it first? When you offer unsolicited advice, you hope the recipient will take the information on board. But in our research, we discovered that all too often, unsolicited advice is discounted or ignored, and valuable information goes to waste, even when it comes from our friends and close contacts.

Of course, one way to avoid having your advice ignored is to offer it when someone asks for it. But studies show that people are reluctant to ask for advice: It can imply a dependence on the person giving the advice, a temporary hierarchy (lower status people tend to ask for advice from higher status people), or reveal to them or others who may be in the vicinity that you may not know something and need to ask for advice. These concerns can make it unlikely that people feel comfortable asking for advice.

Missteps in Trying to Give Advice

While there are situations where people do feel comfortable asking others for advice, if we want to ensure that people have timely information when they need to make decisions, understanding how people react to unsolicited advice is surely important knowledge to have.

Social psychologists have long been interested in attributions—how people think about the causes of others’ behavior. These attributions are central to how we make sense of others’ actions. And, these answers to the “why?” question are an important part of the puzzle to figuring out how people respond to unsolicited advice.

The first step in our research was to describe the many different attributions that people can have. We asked people to tell us about occasions when people gave them advice they asked for (solicited advice) and advice they did not ask for (unsolicited advice), and then to tell us why they felt the other person provided the advice. In the case of solicited advice, we can all probably figure out why people offered it—after all, we asked for it! Solicited advice often has a clear, observable trigger.

But unsolicited advice is trickier. It’s not always obvious why someone is giving us advice when we didn’t ask for it. Some of the attributions people made for unsolicited advice included:

  • The advice-giver is attempting to take control of the situation
  • The advice-giver is attempting to flaunt their knowledge in a particular area
  • The advice-giver wants to genuinely benefit the recipient
  • The advice-giver wants to hurt or hinder the confidence or performance of the recipient.

These attributions ranged from being self-serving (“I want to make myself look good”) to prosocial (“I want you to perform better on this task”), and as our research reveals, this distinction turns out to be critical for understanding how to navigate whether unsolicited advice will have positive impact. Unsolicited advice is more likely to be seen as self-serving, and this ruins its impact.

Here Are Some Tips

If you want your unsolicited advice to be used by the recipient in what they’re doing, then it’s best to frame it in a way that minimizes the likelihood they think you have a self-serving motive. You need to emphasize that you’re giving them advice to benefit them, not to benefit yourself. And there are many ways to do this. One way is to make sure people know you are available to be approached for advice (such as asking, “How are things going?” or other questions that convey a willingness to be supportive). Letting people know that you care about them can convey psychological safety and make people comfortable asking for advice, reducing the need to offer unsolicited advice in the first place.

Another strategy is to be self-deprecating when giving unsolicited advice. If you tell them about a time when you faced a similar situation and experienced a suboptimal outcome, you reduce the likelihood that you’re giving them unsolicited advice to make yourself look good.

You might also wonder whether it matters who the source of the advice is. And the answer is that unsolicited advice is often dismissed or discounted, even if the advice comes from someone we consider a close personal friend at work. This is an important tendency to keep in mind, because we often feel most comfortable with our close friends and may share unsolicited advice with them more frequently. But that does not make them immune to the tendency to perceive unsolicited advice as self-serving (and therefore not use it).

Using the strategies above can help you avoid these pervasive reactions to unsolicited advice.


For Further Reading

Bolino, M. C., & Grant, A. M. (2016). The bright side of being prosocial at work, and the dark side, too: A review and agenda for research on other-oriented motives, behavior, and impact in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 599–670.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2016.1153260

Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. S. (2006). Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 127–151. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.001

Deelstra, J. T., Peeters, M. C. W., Schaufeli, W. B., Stroebe, W., Zijlstra, F. R. H., & van Doornen, L. P. (2003). Receiving instrumental support at work: When help is not welcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 324–331. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.324

Landis, B., Fisher, C., & Menges, J. (2021). How employees react to unsolicited and solicited advice in the workplace: Implications for using advice, learning, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000876


Blaine Landis is an Assistant Professor of Organizational Behavior at University College London where he studies advice, personality, and social networks. He received his PhD from the University of Cambridge.

Colin M. Fisher is an Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior at University College London where he studies team leadership, helping, and improvisation. He received his PhD from Harvard University.

 

Why are Narcissists Promoted in their Jobs?

We can easily think of people with narcissistic characteristics, typified by overinflated and entitled self-views, who have found themselves in top leadership jobs. Although narcissistic individuals can be charismatic and formulate bold visions that may energize others in the short run, they are also self-focused, liable to disregarding ethical norms, low on empathy, hostile to criticism, and prone to ignoring expert advice. Given the potentially obstructive impact of narcissistic leaders, it is especially relevant to understand how they reach high-level positions.

Narcissistic individuals seek powerful positions and are attracted to hierarchies in their quest for status and influence. With their sociability, soaring confidence, and dominance, narcissistic individuals match the collective notion of an ideal leader, and so their presence in top jobs may not be surprising. Indeed, we know from previous research, including our own, that they are more likely to be chosen as leaders, especially in times of uncertainty. Additionally, narcissistic individuals’ bragging about their superior skills and persuasion savvy seem to help them in job interviews. However, these are not the only routes to high-level positions. Often employee promotions within organizations rely on the support and recommendations of supervisors. So, are narcissistic employees actually perceived as more promotable by their supervisors, and if so why?

We set out to find an answer. We proposed two alternative reasons why narcissistic employees might be seen as promotable material by their supervisors. First, because narcissistic individuals think they have exceptional leadership qualities and because they are motivated to exert influence over others, they may already act toward their other team members as if they have higher power and control, despite that their current position does not structurally give them any more power and authority than other team members. For example, narcissistic employees might dominate discussions during team meetings, instruct other co-workers about what to do, and make decisions for the team. Given that higher-level positions often require a certain amount of political skill and ability to influence others, supervisors of a narcissistic employee may see such behaviors as a positive signal of the employee’s potential to function successfully in a higher position.

Second, because narcissistic individuals are motivated to impress high status others and are especially concerned with showing off their superior skills in competitive performance contexts, they may engage in impression management tactics toward their supervisors by attempting to show themselves as competent. For example, a narcissistic employee may make a positive outcome for which they were responsible, such as a successful conclusion of a project, appear to be a bigger deal than it is and brag to the supervisor about their accomplishments. Such tactics can increase an employees’ performance evaluations, if that employee has adequate social skill to use them subtly. Narcissistic individuals are known to adjust their behavior strategically to suit the situation, and so they may be expected to use such self-promotion tactics effectively to convince the supervisor of their promotability.

In two studies, we sent separate questionnaires to both supervisors and their employees. We measured the employee’s narcissism, their sense of their own power in the team, and their self-promotion attempts toward their supervisor. We asked their supervisors to indicate whether they would recommend the employee for a promotion. We found that employees who scored higher on narcissism were perceived as more promotable by their supervisors. Narcissistic employees indicated that they saw themselves as having more power and influence in their team and that they also engaged in self-promotion attempts when interacting with their supervisor. However, acting as if one has power in the team, rather than attempts to appear competent, is what helped explain why narcissistic employees received higher promotability ratings.

Our findings, therefore, show that narcissistic individuals are fairly skillful at creating an image of someone who would be expected to function well in a higher-level position. By acting as if they already have more power and influence in the team, for example by directing their team members or being more outspoken in meetings, they prompt (if not dupe) their supervisors into thinking that this behavior is desired for someone in a higher role. As supervisor recommendations are important for deciding whether an employee gets promoted, narcissistic employees’ readiness to behave as if they already got the higher-level job seems to be what gives them a leg-up in their quest to the top.

A question arises: Do narcissistic employees perform better? They certainly think they do, and they receive higher salaries, but a review of more than 200 studies indicates that narcissistic employees do not score any higher on job performance. Actually, they perform worse when they work in a culture that emphasizes loyalty and cohesiveness among employees and when they have more authority. Narcissistic employees are also known to engage in more counterproductive work behavior such as time wasting, sabotage, theft, and interpersonal aggression. Apparent flair and a leader façade seem to pay off in modern organizational culture.


For Further Reading

Nevicka, B., & Sedikides, C. (2021). Employee narcissism and promotability prospects. Journal of Personality. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12619

Nevicka, B., De Hoogh, A. H., Van Vianen, A. E., & Ten Velden, F. S. (2013). Uncertainty enhances the preference for narcissistic leaders. European Journal of Social Psychology43(5), 370-380. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1943

Sedikides, C., & Campbell, W. K. (2017). Narcissistic force meets systemic resistance: The Energy Clash Model. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(3), 400-421. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617692105
 

Barbara Nevicka is assistant professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Her research examines the interpersonal and intrapersonal effects of narcissism, with a specific focus on leadership.

Constantine Sedikides is professor of Social and Personality Psychology at the University of Southampton, United Kingdom. His research is on self and identity, including narcissism.

 

Job Searching During a Pandemic: Insights from Graduate Students

The COVID-19 pandemic drastically disrupted the labor markets around the world over the course of the past year. While recent economic data suggests that the job market is slowly recovering (see Mutikani, 2021), the impact of COVID-19 on the availability of jobs remains a pressing issue. Many social and personality psychologists seeking either academic or non-academic work throughout the pandemic also have experienced this difficult market firsthand. The SPSPotlight co-editors reached out to several SPSP graduate student members who recently were on the job market to learn about their experiences.

A Change of Perspective

Beyond altering the number of jobs available, the COVID-19 pandemic also influenced many individuals’ broader perspective on applying to jobs. For some, it brought on a greater sense of anxiety about the future. For example, for Friedrich Götz, a PhD candidate at the University of Cambridge who recently accepted an offer to join the faculty at the University of British Columbia as an assistant professor this fall, the pandemic created a greater sense of urgency in searching for jobs. He shared, “[the pandemic] made me feel that the pyramid was getting even steeper (regardless of whether that is actually the case).” Similarly, Fred Duong, a PhD student at Northeastern University who will be a postdoc at the University of Toronto this fall, noted that the pandemic made him worry about his chances of obtaining a position after graduation. However, Fred also commented that while there may have been fewer faculty positions available this cycle, he felt there may have been a surge in postdoctoral positions which kept him busy while on the job market.

For others, the pandemic allowed for a re-evaluation of what mattered to them. Susannah Chandhok, a PhD student at the University of Michigan who will be a user experience (UX) researcher at Google following the completion of her studies, reflected that the pandemic encouraged her to take a closer look at her personal and professional values. She shared, “With the pandemic being unpredictable and isolating, I personally gravitated toward pursuing a non-academic job so I could have more daily (albeit right now virtual) interactions with other people, as well as more structure and community day-to-day.” She was also inspired by many people she met in the non-academic world while completing a summer internship with Google, and she wanted to pursue similar careers to them. Comparably, Joshua Jackson, a PhD student at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill who recently accepted a postdoctoral position at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, found that the pandemic led him to apply more narrowly than he initially expected. He remarked, “Moving during a pandemic seemed like a challenge, so I only wanted to move if it was for a position that made me really excited.”

The Idea of a Plan B

It is not uncommon to have a backup plan in mind when on the job market even in the absence of a pandemic. Fred Duong commented that he knew he would need to have a job by August 2021 when his stipend ends, so he kept other options in mind throughout the application process with obtaining an academic job as his “Plan 1A” and a non-academic job as his “Plan 1B.” Susannah Chandhok was similarly discerning her path between academic and non-academic jobs during her search. She commented that it was difficult keeping both the option to remain in academia and the option to pursue a career in industry open at the same time. However, she feels “optimistic that academics will come to appreciate that it's natural to explore multiple career options, especially when both the academic and non-academic job markets are competitive.” Finally, she believes that many people can flourish in either academic or non-academic careers, and sometimes it just comes down to timing or luck in choosing one path.

In contrast, Friedrich Götz felt passionate that remaining in academia was his "favorite choice" for the time being, so he chose to focus on devoting his energy and time only to the academic job market this cycle. In his words, “I was extraordinarily lucky and privileged in that when I was starting to seriously worry, I received offers” and that throughout the process he had “wonderful social support from mentors, colleagues, friends, family and my partner” to get him through the difficult moments."

Surprising Benefits

Although the pandemic has certainly posed challenges for those in the job market, it also offered unforeseen benefits. Fred Duong shared that while the transition to working from home full time was challenging at first, the ability to spend more time with his wife and son was a major benefit and helped him keep his sanity throughout the job application process. Similarly, Susannah Chandhok noted that being able to interview and immediately decompress by playing with her dog was a highlight of her experiences of applying and interviewing during the pandemic. The virtual interview process itself also had other benefits. Joshua Jackson commented that the pandemic afforded him extra time to put together application materials, which he felt was a blessing.

Friedrich Götz, as an applicant based in the United Kingdom, participated in virtual interviews with a nine-hour time difference and at times had to stay up until two in the morning to complete interviews. Despite these challenges, he felt the virtual interview process was positive. He shared, “During the cocktail hour, all of a sudden, I was in the living rooms of some of my gracious hosts, academic heroes (and now soon-to-be colleagues). It was an absurd situation, but there was a lot of camaraderie, kindness, and humaneness to the whole process that I never thought could be conveyed through Zoom.”

Words of Advice

Because the application and interview process can be different for each person, there is not a blanket statement of advice for navigating this particular unprecedented job market. However, the SPSP members who were interviewed spoke to what they found helpful during their own job search process.

For Joshua Jackson, he focused on letting go of rejections, only applying to places he absolutely wanted to be, and remembering what excited him most about his own research. Fred Duong thought deeply about knowing what he wanted and what he was willing to trade-off. He made a list of his values and goals and ranked them. Susannah Chandhok found it valuable to talk to people in non-academic jobs as she was choosing between pursuing academic and non-academic jobs. Finally, Friedrich Götz reflected that what helped him most during this time was going for long runs, eating good and healthy food, seeking out advice from friends and colleagues, and reminding himself that his value as a human being is not determined by his job status.

For more insight on this topic, see the #SPSPchat: Job Searching During a Challenging Economy.

Special thanks to Friedrich Götz, Fred Duong, Susannah Chandhok, and Joshua Jackson. Responses have been edited for clarity and grammar. Direct quotes were printed with permission.
 

Sources

Mutikani, L. (2021, March 05). U.S. labor market roars back; full recovery still years away. Retrieved April 12, 2021, from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy/u-s-labor-market-roars-back-full-recovery-still-years-away-idUSKBN2AX0CY