Encouraging self-blinding in hiring

Author:

Fath Sean,Larrick Richard P.,Soll Jack B.

Abstract

One strategy for minimizing bias in hiring is blinding—purposefully limiting the information used when screening applicants to that which is directly relevant to the job and does not elicit bias based on race, gender, age, or other irrelevant characteristics. Blinding policies remain rare, however. An alternative to blinding policies is self-blinding, in which people performing hiring-related evaluations blind themselves to biasing information about applicants. Using a mock-hiring task, we tested ways to encourage self-blinding that take into consideration three variables likely to affect whether people self-blind: default effects on choices, people’s inability to assess their susceptibility to bias, and people’s tendency not to recognize the full range of information that can elicit that bias. Participants with hiring experience chose to receive or be blind to various pieces of information about applicants, some of which were potentially biasing. They selected potentially biasing information less often when asked to specify the applicant information they wanted to receive than when asked to specify the information they did not want to receive, when prescribing selections for other people than when making the selections for themselves, and when the information was obviously biasing than when it was less obviously so. On the basis of these findings, we propose a multipronged strategy that human resources leaders could use to enable and encourage hiring managers to self-blind when screening job applicants.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Behavioral Neuroscience,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Human-Computer Interaction,Development

Reference37 articles.

1. Gender differences and bias in open source: pull request acceptance of women versus men

2. Mental contamination and mental correction: Unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations.

3. Preferences for, and Familiarity With, Blinding Among HR Practitioners

4. Ajunwa I. (2019). The paradox of automation as anti-bias intervention. Cardozo Law Review, 41(5), 16711742. http://cardozolawreview.com/the-paradox-of-automation-as-anti-bias-intervention/

5. Hiring by Algorithm

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3