The Prejudice Paradox (Or Discrimination Is Not Dead): Systematic Discrimination In Forced Choice Employment Decisions

This research examined discriminatory responding in a forced choice employment decision paradigm, using a justification-suppression perspective to interpret the findings. In this paradigm, participants play the role of employers and make employment choices between two excellent and similarly qualified individuals that differ only on one dimension. In the first three studies, participants chose between two individuals who were described as differing only in ethnicity (European vs. Middle Eastern), gender (Male vs. Female), religion (Christian vs. Muslim), age (Young vs. Old), height (Tall vs. Short), weight (Average Weight vs. Overweight), nationality (Canadian vs. Immigrant), or sexual orientation (Heterosexual vs. Homosexual). Patterns of systematic discrimination were observed, such that members of nonstigmatized groups were favoured over members of stigmatized groups, with the exception that female candidates were supported more than male candidates. These patterns held for both hiring and firing decisions, and regardless of job status, instructions from one’s boss to not be biased, and information regarding workplace diversity. In the fourth study, the stigmatized group categories were strategically selected based on the reported social acceptability of prejudice (acceptable targets: overweight, homosexual, Muslim, immigrant, Native; unacceptable targets: female, black, Jewish, old, disabled). Overall, participants were less likely to promote stigmatized than nonstigmatized employees, with the exceptions that Jewish and black employees were as likely to be promoted as their nonstigmatized counterparts, and female employees were promoted more frequently than male employees. Stigmatized individuals who belonged to social groups perceived as socially unacceptable targets of prejudice were selected for promotion more than stigmatized individuals who belonged to social groups perceived as socially acceptable targets of prejudice, however. This pattern held regardless of equality salience. The selection of stigmatized employees for promotion was predicted by the favourability of attitudes toward these groups, a weaker belief in the justifiability of discrimination, and negative feelings toward others elicited by the task. Using an innovative methodology, this research demonstrates that systematic discrimination is prevalent in forced choice decisions, and that manipulations used previously to attenuate discrimination were ineffective in this context. Theoretical and methodological implications are discussed

Weight Bias Among Clinical Psychology Trainees: Implications for Training

Weight bias is neglected in clinical training. This study examined the efficacy of a weight bias seminar taught to clinical psychology trainees. Trainees placed less importance on eating and exercise as causes of obesity, reported less dislike for higher body-weight people, and reported more positive treatment expectations when working with higher body-weight patients after the seminar

Teaching Clinical Psychology Trainees about Weight Bias

As an assistant professor who teaches clinical psychology trainees about social aspects of behavior, I devote one week to the topic of weight bias. In this class, I rely on the research literature to challenge common myths about “obesity,” demonstrate the pervasiveness and harm of weight bias, and offer recommendations to trainees to apply to their own professional and personal lives. I encourage trainees to shift focus from weight and weight loss to health and well-being and to engage in self-reflection on the role of weight bias in their interactions with others. Here, I describe my weight bias seminar and outline common questions and my responses to them (e.g., Do you actually believe that “obese” people can be healthy?). Weight bias is a neglected topic in most clinical psychology training programs. Weight bias must be addressed in clinical psychology programs to produce culturally competent graduates who are aware of diversity issues