Findings

Colorful Performance

Kevin Lewis

March 31, 2022

Demographic change and assimilation in the early 21st-century United States
Richard Alba & Christopher Maggio
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 24 March 2022

Abstract:
Assimilation has not gotten its due in recent decades, overshadowed by discussions about race and racism. Using evidence from the 2000 Census and the 2015 to 2019 American Community Survey, we show, however, that contemporary social change and its implications for a society stratified along ethnoracial lines cannot be understood without taking the assimilation of many Americans with non-White or Hispanic family origins into account. We begin by necessity with a reconsideration of the concept, arguing that assimilation involves the decline in influence of ethnoracial origins on social status and on relationships with others; it does not require the erasure of all markers of those origins. We highlight that demographic dynamics are playing a critical role in promoting assimilation: Ethnoracial shifts across birth cohorts are generating opportunities for minority mobility, and increasing mixing in families is engendering a growing group of young Americans from mixed minority–White family backgrounds. These mixed Americans, we argue, offer the clearest window into assimilation processes, which are not limited to them, however. The empirical evidence presented shows effects on both social status and relations across group boundaries: 1) the top tier of the workforce, the best-paid quartile of occupations, is growing much more ethnoracially diverse over time, and mixed minority–White Americans are important to this diversity because their probabilities of entering this tier are more similar to those of White people than are those of unmixed minorities; and 2) intermarriage remains robust, enhanced by high rates of marriage to White people by mixed minority–White individuals. 


Dog Whistles and Work Hours: The Political Activation of Labor Market Discrimination
Adam Goldstein & Tod Hamilton
Sociological Science, March 2022

Abstract:
Many commentators have suggested that Donald Trump’s 2016 election emboldened discrimination against racial minorities. We focus on changes in weekly work hours among hourly paid employees during the five months following the 2016 election (relative to 12 months prior). Using two-wave panel data from the Current Population Survey, we find that black workers suffered temporary work hours and earnings losses relative to white workers in areas where Trump received greater electoral support. There were no within-person declines among non-Hispanic whites in high-Trump-support areas or among any groups in lower-Trump-support areas. These patterns are not driven by seasonality, industrial composition, or pre-election trends, suggesting that Trump’s victory exacerbated racial disparities where he received strong electoral support. The findings reveal how political events can catalyze surges of discriminatory behavior in labor markets over the short to medium term, and they provide new evidence about the effects of Trump’s early presidency on U.S. race relations. 


In-group Favoritism and Peer Effects in Wrongful Acquittals: NBA Referees as Judges
Naci Mocan & Eric Osborne-Christenson
NBER Working Paper, March 2022

Abstract:
We provide the first analysis of racial in-group bias in Type-I and Type-II errors. Using player-referee matched data from NBA games we show that there is no overall racial bias or in-group bias in foul calls made by referees. Similarly, there is no racial bias or in-group bias in Type-I errors (incorrect foul calls). On the other hand, there is significant in-group favoritism in Type-II errors. These are wrongful acquittals where the referee did not blow the whistle although a foul was committed. We also analyze peer effects and find that black referees’ proclivity to make Type-II errors in favor of black players exists as long black referees have at least one black peer referee on the court, and that the bias disappears only if black referees have two white peers. In case of white referees, in-group favoritism in Type-II errors emerges if white referees have two black peers with them on the court. We provide evidence showing that the results are not attributable to skill differences between referees. We also show that a higher Type-I error rate during the season lowers referees’ probability to be selected to officiate a game in the playoffs, whereas variations in the rate of Type-II errors have no impact on the likelihood of a playoff assignment. These results indicate that in-group favoritism takes place in a domain which is not costly (making Type-II errors), and that bias is eliminated when it is costly to the decisionmaker. 


The surprising underperformance of East Asians in US law and business schools: The liability of low assertiveness and the ameliorative potential of online classrooms
Jackson Lu, Richard Nisbett & Michael Morris
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 21 March 2022

Abstract:
In the United States, Asians are commonly assumed to excel across all educational stages. We challenge this assumption by revealing the underperformance of ethnic East Asians in US law schools and business schools, two prevalent professional schools that are consequential gateways to societal influence. Whereas most educational and governmental statistics lump all Asians together, we distinguish culturally between East Asians (e.g., ethnic Chinese) and South Asians (e.g., ethnic Indians), the two largest Asian groups in the United States. We propose that East Asians—but not South Asians—underperform academically because their low verbal assertiveness is culturally incongruent with the assertive class participation prized by US law schools and business schools. Across six large studies (n = 19,194), East Asians had lower grades than South Asians and Whites despite performing well on admission tests (e.g., Law School Admission Test, Graduate Management Admissions Test). East Asians’ underperformance was not explained by academic motivation but by lower assertiveness (whether assessed by self-ratings, peer ratings, or class participation scores)—after controlling for factors such as birth country and English proficiency. Consistent with the assertiveness mechanism, East Asians’ underperformance was more pronounced in social courses emphasizing class participation (e.g., leadership, strategy) than in quantitative courses (e.g., accounting, finance). Notably, we found that East Asians’ underperformance was mitigated in online classes conducted via Zoom, a communication medium characterized by lower social presence than in-person classes. By revealing a “Bamboo Ceiling” in the classroom, this research highlights the importance of fostering an inclusive classroom for students from diverse cultural backgrounds. 


Regulatory Spillover and Workplace Racial Inequality
Letian Zhang
Administrative Science Quarterly, forthcoming

Abstract:
This article suggests that regulations targeting the U.S. public sector may influence racial inequality in the private sector. Since the 1990s, nine states have banned affirmative action practice in public universities and state governments. I theorize that although these bans have no legal jurisdiction over private-sector firms, they could influence such firms normatively. After such a ban, executives who have been skeptical of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) policies may feel more normative license to reduce commitment to EEO practices. Using a difference-in-differences estimation on 11,311 firms from 1985 to 2015, I find that the bans are indeed associated with slower racial progress in private-sector firms: after a state adopts the affirmative action ban, growth in the proportion of Black managers in establishments with corporate headquarters in that state slows by more than 50 percent, and this slowdown is mostly concentrated in firms with politically conservative CEOs. These findings suggest a mechanism for the persistence of racial inequality and show that regulations can influence actors well beyond legal jurisdictions. 


Under the Radar: Visibility and the Effects of Discrimination Lawsuits in Small and Large Firms
Carly Knight, Frank Dobbin & Alexandra Kalev
American Sociological Review, April 2022, Pages 175-201

Abstract:
Research on how discrimination lawsuits affect corporate diversity has yielded mixed results. Qualitative studies highlight the limited efficacy of lawsuits in the typical workplace, finding that litigation frequently elicits resistance and even retribution from employers. But quantitative studies find that lawsuits can increase workforce diversity. This article develops an account of managerial resistance and firm visibility to reconcile these divergent findings. First, we synthesize job autonomy and group conflict theories to account for resistance that occurs when dominant groups perceive non-dominant groups to be attempting to usurp managerial authority, in this case through litigation. Second, we integrate insights from organizational institutionalism, which suggests that highly visible firms seek to demonstrate compliance with legal and societal norms. Drawing on this theory, we predict that only large, visible firms will see increases in diversity following lawsuits, and, by the same token, that the most visible workplaces of those large firms, their headquarters, will see the greatest changes. We test our hypotheses with data on litigation and workforce composition from a diverse set of 632 firms that were sued by the EEOC between 1997 and 2006. This study shows that understanding the consequences of lawsuits across firms, and across organizations within them, is key to tackling workplace discrimination. 


The Policy-People Gap: Decision Makers Choose Policies That Favor Different Applicants Than They Select When Making Individual Decisions
David Munguia Gomez & Emma Levine
Academy of Management Journal, forthcoming

Abstract:
This work documents a contemporary organizational problem – a gap between selection policies and individual selection decisions – and suggests one intervention to address it. In college admissions and workplace hiring contexts, we find that decision makers are more likely to favor disadvantaged applicants over applicants with objectively higher achievements when choosing between selection policies than choosing between individual applicants. We document this policy-people gap among admissions officers, working professionals, and lay people, using both within-subject and between-subject designs, and across a range of stimuli. We find that the gap is driven in part by shifting standards of fairness across the two types of decisions. When choosing between individuals, compared to choosing between policies, decision makers are more likely to prioritize what is fair to individuals (a microjustice standard of fairness) over what is fair in the aggregate (a macrojustice standard of fairness). As a result, an intervention that has decision makers prioritize the same standard of fairness across the decisions mitigates the policy-people gap. This research helps us understand why decision makers’ choices so frequently violate espoused organizational policies and suggests one way to increase the representation of disadvantaged groups in organizations. 


A scalable empathic-mindset intervention reduces group disparities in school suspensions
Jason Okonofua et al.
Science Advances, March 2022

Abstract:
Suspensions remove students from the learning environment at high rates throughout the United States. Policy and theory highlight social groups that face disproportionately high suspension rates—racial-minoritized students, students with a prior suspension, and students with disabilities. We used an active placebo-controlled, longitudinal field experiment (Nteachers = 66, Nstudents = 5822) to test a scalable “empathic-mindset” intervention, a 45- to 70-min online exercise to refocus middle school teachers on understanding and valuing the perspectives of students and on sustaining positive relationships even when students misbehave. In preregistered analyses, this exercise reduced suspension rates especially for Black and Hispanic students, cutting the racial disparity over the school year from 10.6 to 5.9 percentage points, a 45% reduction. Significant reductions were also observed for other groups of concern. Moreover, reductions persisted through the next year when students interacted with different teachers, suggesting that empathic treatment with even one teacher in a critical period can improve students’ trajectories through school. 


Integrating mindfulness and connection practices into preservice teacher education results in durable automatic race bias reductions
Matthew Hirshberg et al.
Journal of School Psychology, April 2022, Pages 50-64

Abstract:
Automatic race bias, which is the tendency to associate positive attributes more quickly with White as compared to Black faces, reflects enculturation processes linked to inequitable teaching behaviors. In sample of undergraduate preservice teachers (N = 88), we examined whether a novel mindfulness and connection practice intervention without anti-bias content incorporated into undergraduate teacher education would result in reduced automatic race bias favoring White faces. Random assignment to the intervention predicted significantly reduced race preference for White child faces immediately after the intervention. These significant reductions persisted at the 6-month follow-up, which are the most durable reductions in automatic race bias reported to date in adults. Data from semi-structured interviews indicated that the intervention enhanced self-awareness and self-regulation while reducing automatic responding among preservice teachers. These qualities are instrumental to adaptive teaching and putative mechanisms for reducing automatic race bias. The potential value of integrating mindfulness and connection practices into undergraduate preservice teacher education is discussed. 


The good and bad of a reputation: Race and punishment in K-12 schools
Amanda Perez & Jason Okonofua
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, forthcoming

Abstract:
Large racial disparities plague discipline in schools across the United States which contributes to racial disparities in life outcomes such as education attainment and incarceration. The present research investigates the role a student's reputation – as shared from one teacher to another one – plays in the discipline context. Teachers (N = 192) read about two incidents of misbehavior and reported the severity of discipline the student should receive and the likelihood that they would label the student as a “troublemaker.” They were randomly assigned to read about a Black or White student and to hear from a fellow teacher that the student had a good or bad reputation. Analyses revealed a three-way interaction such that a good reputation buffers against an escalation in discipline severity for a White, but not Black, student. A White student with a bad, as compared to good reputation, received a meaningful escalation in discipline, was more likely to be labeled a troublemaker, and was deemed more likely to get suspended in the future. Meanwhile, reputation was somewhat inconsequential for a Black student. The current research advances theory on the implication of racial bias in context and informs policy for how information is shared among teachers. 


When seeking help, women and racial/ethnic minorities benefit from explicitly stating their identity
Erika Kirgios et al.
Nature Human Behaviour, March 2022, Pages 383–391

Abstract:

Receiving help can make or break a career, but women and racial/ethnic minorities do not always receive the support they seek. Across two audit experiments — one with politicians and another with students — as well as an online experiment (total n = 5,145), we test whether women and racial/ethnic minorities benefit from explicitly mentioning their demographic identity in requests for help, for example, by including statements like “As a Black woman…” in their communications. We propose that when a help seeker highlights their marginalized identity, it may activate prospective helpers’ motivations to avoid prejudiced reactions and increase their willingness to provide support. Here we show that when women and racial/ethnic minorities explicitly mentioned their demographic identity in help-seeking emails, politicians and students responded 24.4% (7.42 percentage points) and 79.6% (2.73 percentage points) more often, respectively. These findings suggest that deliberately mentioning identity in requests for help can improve outcomes for women and racial/ethnic minorities. 


Guidance or Gatekeeping: An Audit Examination of Racial Discrimination in Leading STEM High Schools
Jayley Janssen et al.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, forthcoming

Abstract:
Racial discrimination remains a mechanism by which ethnic–racial minorities are restricted from power. We examined whether racial discrimination restricts ethnic–racial minority access to high-achieving STEM schools. We conducted an audit correspondence experiment to investigate racial discrimination in guidance counselor responsiveness to 976 emails from fictitious Asian, Black, Latina, and White mothers inquiring about school enrollment. Moderation analyses revealed that guidance counselors restricted access from Asian mothers at schools characterized as rural, lower socioeconomic status, and higher STEM prestige — evidence of gatekeeping points to the restriction of Asian students from advanced STEM opportunities. Results are situated within educational audit experiments to objectively document how racism from multiple facets of the education system intersect to inhibit ethnic–racial minority youth.


Insight

from the

Archives

A weekly newsletter with free essays from past issues of National Affairs and The Public Interest that shed light on the week's pressing issues.

advertisement

Sign-in to your National Affairs subscriber account.


Already a subscriber? Activate your account.


subscribe

Unlimited access to intelligent essays on the nation’s affairs.

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to National Affairs.