Perceptions of Affirmative Action Based on Socioeconomic Status: A Comparison with Traditional Affirmative Action

Joy A. Kovacs, Donald M. Truxillo, Talya N. Bauer, Todd Bodner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Past research has examined reactions to traditional, gender- and ethnicity-based affirmative action programs. However, research has not examined reactions to affirmative action based on socioeconomic status (SES), even though such programs are promoted by the U.S. government (e.g., Work Opportunity Tax Credit) and thus act as a de facto supplement to traditional affirmative action. Based in theories of self-interest, Study 1 compared reactions of men and women to a traditional affirmative action program and a hypothetical, SES-based affirmative action program in terms of general perceptions of such programs and organizational attractiveness. While women had more positive reactions to traditional affirmative action, men had more positive reactions to SES-based affirmative action. Study 2 took a different approach, examining the reactions of potential job applicants to four hypothetical job ads which included different types of diversity statements. We found that job ads that mentioned any type of specific diversity statement - either based on race and gender or based on SES - were perceived as less fair than job ads that did not include specific diversity statements. Results of the studies are discussed in terms of self-interest theories of affirmative action and considerations of SES-based programs as a supplement to traditional affirmative action.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)35-57
Number of pages23
JournalEmployee Responsibilities and Rights Journal
Volume26
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2014

Keywords

  • Affirmative action
  • Ethnicity
  • Fairness
  • Gender
  • Poverty
  • Self-interest
  • Socioeconomic status

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Perceptions of Affirmative Action Based on Socioeconomic Status: A Comparison with Traditional Affirmative Action'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this