For some, diversity initiatives may encourage pro-White hiring decisions

In recent years, pro-diversity initiatives in workplaces have become increasingly common. However, these efforts don't necessarily translate into increased equality, write the authors of a new paper in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. One proposed explanation for this is that pro-diversity messages may sometimes backfire, at least among certain groups.

In this latest work from the US, Zeinab A. Hachem and Tessa L. Dover at Portland State University found that pro-diversity messaging could indeed have this effect, making White conservatives more in favour of hiring White employees.

For the first of three online studies, 872 White adults, who had indicated their direction and strength of political affiliation, were told that they would be taking on the role of a manager at a technology company in Silicon Valley. Along with background information about the company, they were given details of four prospective candidates to evaluate for a job as a regional sales manager. Their task was to rate each candidate's suitability for the job, and rank them.

One of the candidates, which the team believed would be perceived as Latina — because of the name 'Marijajose H.' — was objectively the best qualified and most impressive. Then came two candidates with slightly different strengths, but who were objectively equally well-suited to the role. One of these candidates was given a name that the team felt would be perceived as belonging to a White man (Connor D.) and the other a Black man ('Darnell B.'). A final candidate was objectively the poorest choice.

The background information about the technology company came in two versions. In one, participants read that the company culture 'emphasised collaboration and teamwork among a talented and diverse workforce'. In the other, neutral, condition, there was no mention of diversity; instead the workforce was described as 'talented and unique'.

The team found that only when the word 'diverse' was used, participants who reported being more politically conservative were more likely to rate the middle-ranking White candidate more favourably than the middle-ranking Black candidate, and to rank the White candidate over the Black candidate. Also, only in the diversity condition, when these participants were told that the White candidate had been chosen for the job, they felt more strongly that this was a 'fair' choice.  

In the neutral condition, political conservatism was not associated with a hiring bias, the team notes. This suggests that the White conservatives were not generally more pro-White in their decision-making — rather, they became this way when they were given an indication that the hiring organisation supported diversity and inclusion. The researchers suggest that they might have perceived this as being harmful to the success of their own racial group, and this affected their judgements. "These findings highlight how diversity cues can ironically promote — rather than curtail — inequality, particularly among conservatives," the team writes.

The second experiment had the same design, but this time, there were two groups of participants: White or 'another race or ethnicity'. The team found that the results for the White participants were similar to those in the first study, with higher levels of conservatism being largely associated with more pro-White judgements only in the diversity condition.

For the non-White participants, there were hints of preferences for the White candidate among more conservative participants, but the results were less clear cut for this group. Partly for this reason, the team ran a third version of the experiment, with a fresh group of 1,890 participants. In this study, there were four groups: White, Black or African American, Latino or Hispanic, and Asian or Asian American. In this final study, the team also collected more nuanced information about the participants' political ideology.

Once again, the team's analysis showed that, only in the diversity condition, the more conservative White participants made more pro-White judgements. The researchers also found a stronger link between these biased judgements and identity-based, 'symbolic' aspects of their conservatism — feeling that they are part of this group — rather than endorsement of typical US conservative policies.

The results also revealed that while there were some differences in the responses of people in the four groups, the biggest differences were between the White and Black participants. The more conservative Black participants made more pro-White judgements in the neutral condition, compared with the diversity condition. As for the White conservatives, mention of diversity seemed to prompt a shift to support for their own ethnic group — but, the team writes, the Black participants interpreted the diversity cues "as a reminder of egalitarianism rather than a politicised cue that prompted backlash."

Since this research focused on participants living in the US, further work will be needed to explore whether the findings translate elsewhere. Even so, they do suggest that organisations should be aware that while pro-diversity messages may have the desired effect on more liberal managers, for more conservative White managers, efforts might backfire. It may be that other strategies are also required, the team argues — such as adding diversity-related information to promotion criteria. "At the very least," they write, "organisations must go beyond just espousing pro-diversity values and actually investigate the impact diversity initiatives have on hiring, retention, and promotion of diverse employees."

Read the paper in full:
Hachem, Z. A., & Dover, T. L. (2024). The presence of diversity initiatives leads to increased pro-White hiring decisions among conservatives. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 153(8), 2100–2126. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001614

Want the latest in psychological research, straight to your inbox?
Sign up to Research Digest's free weekly newsletter.