IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v158y2020icp11-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Let’s choose one of each: Using the partition dependence effect to increase diversity in organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Feng, Zhiyu
  • Liu, Yukun
  • Wang, Zhen
  • Savani, Krishna

Abstract

When employers make hiring decisions, they often pass over highly qualified candidates belonging to minority groups. This research identified a choice-architecture intervention to nudge people to select more diverse candidates. Partitioning job candidates by gender (Study 1), nationality (Study 2), or university (Study 3) led people to choose more diverse candidates on the partitioned dimension, without lowering the average competence of the selected candidates (Studies 5A and 5B). Even experienced human resource professionals exhibited this effect (Study 3). Merely informing people that the candidates belong to different categories did not increase diversity (Study 4). The effect of partitioning was stronger among people who had weaker stereotypes about the relevant category (Study 6). When choosing a single candidate, people were more likely to choose candidates who were not partitioned together than candidates who were partitioned together (Study 7). Overall, we identify a nudge that can increase diversity in hiring.

Suggested Citation

  • Feng, Zhiyu & Liu, Yukun & Wang, Zhen & Savani, Krishna, 2020. "Let’s choose one of each: Using the partition dependence effect to increase diversity in organizations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-26.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:158:y:2020:i:c:p:11-26
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.01.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597818306873
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.01.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2001. "Naive Diversification Strategies in Defined Contribution Saving Plans," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 79-98, March.
    2. Craig R. Fox & David Bardolet & Daniel Lieb, 2005. "Partition Dependence in Decision Analysis, Resource Allocation, and Consumer Choice," Springer Books, in: Rami Zwick & Amnon Rapoport (ed.), Experimental Business Research, chapter 0, pages 229-251, Springer.
    3. Eric Johnson & Suzanne Shu & Benedict Dellaert & Craig Fox & Daniel Goldstein & Gerald Häubl & Richard Larrick & John Payne & Ellen Peters & David Schkade & Brian Wansink & Elke Weber, 2012. "Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 487-504, June.
    4. Bettman, James R & Kakkar, Pradeep, 1977. "Effects of Information Presentation Format on Consumer Information Acquisition Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 3(4), pages 233-240, March.
    5. Kristina Dahlin & L. Weingart & P. Hinds, 2005. "Team diversity and information use," Post-Print hal-00480406, HAL.
    6. Craig R. Fox & Robert T. Clemen, 2005. "Subjective Probability Assessment in Decision Analysis: Partition Dependence and Bias Toward the Ignorance Prior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(9), pages 1417-1432, September.
    7. Dalal, Reeshad S. & Bonaccio, Silvia & Highhouse, Scott & Ilgen, Daniel R. & Mohammed, Susan & Slaughter, Jerel E., 2010. "What If Industrial–Organizational Psychology Decided to Take Workplace Decisions Seriously?," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(4), pages 386-405, December.
    8. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 991-1013, September.
    9. Bettman, James R & Zins, Michel A, 1979. "Information Format and Choice Task Effects in Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 6(2), pages 141-153, Se.
    10. Ratner, Rebecca K & Kahn, Barbara E, 2002. "The Impact of Private versus Public Consumption on Variety-Seeking Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(2), pages 246-257, September.
    11. Landy, Frank J., 2008. "Stereotypes, Bias, and Personnel Decisions: Strange and Stranger," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(4), pages 379-392, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chenmu Xing & Katherine Williams & Jamie Hom & Meghana Kandlur & Praise Owoyemi & Joanna Paul & Ray Alexander & Elizabeth Shackney & Hilary Barth, 2020. "Partition dependence in financial aid distribution to income categories," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Nader T. Tavassoli & Matteo Visentin, 2022. "To buy or how much to buy? Partition dependence in purchase-quantity decisions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 177-188, June.
    3. Daniel J. Benjamin, 2018. "Errors in Probabilistic Reasoning and Judgment Biases," NBER Working Papers 25200, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Brigitte C. Madrian, 2014. "Applying Insights from Behavioral Economics to Policy Design," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 663-688, August.
    5. Patrick Lloyd-Smith & Ewa Zawojska & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2020. "Moving beyond the Contingent Valuation versus Choice Experiment Debate: Presentation Effects in Stated Preference," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(1), pages 1-24.
    6. Liangyan Wang & Xun Deng & Haipeng (Allan) Chen, 2024. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet? The impact of hierarchical labeling on consumers’ choices in tiered pricing plans," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 259-273, June.
    7. Eric Johnson & Suzanne Shu & Benedict Dellaert & Craig Fox & Daniel Goldstein & Gerald Häubl & Richard Larrick & John Payne & Ellen Peters & David Schkade & Brian Wansink & Elke Weber, 2012. "Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 487-504, June.
    8. Lior Fink & Daniele Papismedov, 2023. "On the Same Page? What Users Benefit from a Desktop View on Mobile Devices," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 423-441, June.
    9. Cervi, Cleber & Brei, Vinicius Andrade, 2022. "Choice deferral: The interaction effects of visual boundaries and consumer knowledge," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    10. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    11. Sarah K. Jacobi & Benjamin F. Hobbs, 2007. "Quantifying and Mitigating the Splitting Bias and Other Value Tree-Induced Weighting Biases," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 194-210, December.
    12. Zuschke, Nick, 2020. "An analysis of process-tracing research on consumer decision-making," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 305-320.
    13. Schaerer, Michael & du Plessis, Christilene & Nguyen, My Hoang Bao & van Aert, Robbie C.M. & Tiokhin, Leo & Lakens, Daniël & Giulia Clemente, Elena & Pfeiffer, Thomas & Dreber, Anna & Johannesson, Mag, 2023. "On the trajectory of discrimination: A meta-analysis and forecasting survey capturing 44 years of field experiments on gender and hiring decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    14. Zhang, Jiao & Hsee, Christopher K. & Xiao, Zhixing, 2006. "The majority rule in individual decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 102-111, January.
    15. Simon Kloker & Tim Straub & Christof Weinhardt, 2019. "Moderators for Partition Dependence in Prediction Markets," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 723-756, August.
    16. Marttunen, Mika & Belton, Valerie & Lienert, Judit, 2018. "Are objectives hierarchy related biases observed in practice? A meta-analysis of environmental and energy applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 178-194.
    17. Mujcic, Redzo & Frijters, Paul, 2013. "Still Not Allowed on the Bus: It Matters If You're Black or White!," IZA Discussion Papers 7300, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Anthony Edo & Nicolas Jacquemet & Constantine Yannelis, 2019. "Language skills and homophilous hiring discrimination: Evidence from gender and racially differentiated applications," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 349-376, March.
    19. Bertrand, Jérémie & Burietz, Aurore, 2023. "(Loan) price and (loan officer) prejudice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 26-42.
    20. Miguel Godinho de Matos & Pedro Ferreira, 2020. "The Effect of Binge-Watching on the Subscription of Video on Demand: Results from Randomized Experiments," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1337-1360, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:158:y:2020:i:c:p:11-26. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.