14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Subtle Discrimination in the Workplace: A Vicious Cycle

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Due to rising pressure to appear egalitarian, subtle discrimination pervades today's workplace. Although its ambiguous nature may make it seem innocuous on the surface, an abundance of empirical evidence suggests subtle discrimination undermines employee and organizational functioning, perhaps even more so than its overt counterpart. In the following article, we argue for a multidimensional and continuous, rather than categorical, framework for discrimination. In doing so, we propose that there exist several related but distinct continuums on which instances of discrimination vary, including subtlety, formality, and intentionality. Next, we argue for organizational scholarship to migrate toward a more developmental, dynamic perspective of subtle discrimination in order to build a more comprehensive understanding of its antecedents, underlying mechanisms, and outcomes. We further contend that everyone plays a part in the process of subtle discrimination at work and, as a result, bears some responsibility in addressing and remediating it. We conclude with a brief overview of research on subtle discrimination in the workplace from each of four stakeholder perspectives—targets, perpetrators, bystanders, and allies—and review promising strategies that can be implemented by each of these stakeholders to remediate subtle discrimination in the workplace.

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Self-disclosure and liking: a meta-analytic review.

              Self-disclosure plays a central role in the development and maintenance of relationships. One way that researchers have explored these processes is by studying the links between self-disclosure and liking. Using meta-analytic procedures, the present work sought to clarify and review this literature by evaluating the evidence for 3 distinct disclosure-liking effects. Significant disclosure-liking relations were found for each effect: (a) People who engage in intimate disclosures tend to be liked more than people who disclose at lower levels, (b) people disclose more to those whom they initially like, and (c) people like others as a result of having disclosed to them. In addition, the relation between disclosure and liking was moderated by a number of variables, including study paradigm, type of disclosure, and gender of the discloser. Taken together, these results suggest that various disclosure-liking effects can be integrated and viewed as operating together within a dynamic interpersonal system. Implications for theory development are discussed, and avenues for future research are suggested.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                applab
                Industrial and Organizational Psychology
                Ind. Organ. Psychol.
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                1754-9426
                1754-9434
                March 2017
                January 2017
                : 10
                : 01
                : 51-76
                Article
                10.1017/iop.2016.91
                b159cd03-fee5-4731-9300-3ab82e127a6f
                © 2017
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article