Managing ‘difference’: understanding age diversity in practice

This article explores how human resource (HR) managers discuss, classify and justify age diversity as both a concept and practice within the UK. The findings from 33 in-depth interviews with HR managers reveal difficulty in translating age diversity as an abstract managerial concept into workfloor policy and practice. Whilst the managers sought to emphasise the role of culture in promoting diversity, there was a lack of evidence that this related to workfloor equality or activities that proactively challenge discrimination. Moreover, there was confusion over classifying older workers as ‘diverse’, and risking possible discriminatory practices which marginalised both the older workers and other employees. The conclusions discuss how the ambiguous concept of ‘difference’ which lies at the basis of understanding both diversity and discrimination caused tension when implementing older worker strategies, and how policy makers must provide clear measures concerning the intent, objectives and definitions surrounding age equality. It is argued that a move towards an action model of discrimination management may help to create a framework where diversity and discrimination can be mutually addressed

Communicating stereotype-relevant information: is factual information subject to the same communication biases as fictional information?

Factual information is more frequently read and discussed than fictional information. However, research on the role of communication in shaping stereotypes has focused almost exclusively on fictional narratives. In Experiments 1 and 2 a newspaper article containing information about heroin users was communicated along chains of 4 people. No stereotype-consistency bias was observed. Instead, a greater proportion of stereotype-inconsistent information was communicated than was stereotype-consistent or -neutral information. Three further experiments investigated explanations for the difference between the communication of fictional and factual information. Experiment 3 ruled out the possibility that participants' beliefs about the validity of the information could influence the way that it is communicated. Experiments 4 and 5 divided information into concrete (a specific event or fact) or abstract (opinion). A stereotype-consistency bias emerged only for abstract information. In summary, linguistic abstraction moderates whether stereotype-consistency biases emerge in the communication of stereotype-relevant factual information