When Performance Trumps Gender Bias¶
Bohnet, I., van Geen, A., & Bazerman, M. (2016). When Performance Trumps Gender Bias: Joint versus Separate Evaluation. Management Science, 62(5), 1225-1234.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Joint vs. Separate Evaluation
- Hiring: sequential evaluation of candidates produces stereotype-laden rankings on performance proxies, while side-by-side evaluation reduces stereotype bias because the performance attribute becomes more evaluable than the demographic prior.
This sourceShows that joint (side-by-side) evaluation makes the performance attribute evaluable and reduces stereotype bias relative to separate sequential evaluation.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
Bohnet, van Geen and Bazerman report that evaluators are "more likely to base their decisions on individual performance in joint than in separate evaluation" and "on group stereotypes in separate than in joint evaluation", making joint evaluation the profit-maximizing procedure. That contrast between one-at-a-time and side-by-side assessment, and the shift away from stereotype-driven judgment, is what the sentence attributes to them. The work speaks of how likely evaluators are to base decisions on performance, not of the evaluability mechanism the sentence gives, and names no performance proxies.
“Evaluators are more likely to base their decisions on individual performance in joint than in separate evaluation and on group stereotypes in separate than in joint evaluation, making joint evaluation the profit-maximizing evaluation procedure.”
- Hiring: sequential evaluation of candidates produces stereotype-laden rankings on performance proxies, while side-by-side evaluation reduces stereotype bias because the performance attribute becomes more evaluable than the demographic prior.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:3259328f5735 · see in the full table