Research has documented pervasive adverse consequences of preferential selection for women's self-evaluations of ability and performance. However, virtually no research has examined the effects of selection processes on actual performance. It was theorized that the effects of preferential and meritorious selection on performance are moderated by task conceptualization. Females were told that they were assigned to a position because of either merit (they purportedly passed a qualifying test) or preference (they were female) and that task performance required either effort or inherent capability. Preferentially selected women performed better when they believed the task required capability rather than effort; meritoriously selected individuals displayed the opposite pattern. In addition, preferentially selected subjects evaluated specific components of their performance effectiveness more poorly than meritoriously selected subjects. Self-evaluations of overall performance were unaffected by the manipulations. Results are interpreted using research on self-handicapping and recipient reactions to aid.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Arkin, R. NM. , & Baumgardner, A. H. (1985). Self-handicapping. In J. H. Harvey & G. Weary (Eds.), Attribution: Basic issues and applications (pp. 169-202). New York: Academic Press.
2.
Chacko, T. I. (1982). Women and equal employment opportunity: Some unintended effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 119-123.
3.
Crocker, J. , & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review,%, 608-630.
4.
Crosby, F. , & Blanchard, F. (1989). Affirmative action and the question of standards In F. A. Blanchard & F. J. Crosby (Eds.), Affirmative action in perspectiveNew YorkSpringer-Verlag.
5.
Erez, M. (1990). Perlbrmunce quality and work motivation. In U. Kleilnbeck, H. Q(past, H. Thierry, & H. Hacker (Eds.), Work motivationHillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Farquhar, P. H. (1975). A fractional hypercube decomposition theorem for multiattribute utility functions. Operations Research, 23, 941-967.
7.
Frankel, A. , & Snyder, M. L. (1978). Poor performance following unsolvable problems: Learned helplessness or egotism? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1415-1423.
8.
Garland, H. (1982). Goal levels and task performance: A compelling replication of some compelling results. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 245-248.
9.
Heilman, M. E. , Lucas, J. A., & Kaplow, S. R. (1990). Self-derogating consequences of sex-based preferential selection: The moderating role of initial self-confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 46, 202-216.
10.
Heilman, M. E. , Riveroj. C., & Brett, J. F. (1991). Skirting the competency issue: Effects of sex-based preferential selection on task choices of women and men. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 99-105.
11.
Heilman, M. E. , Simon, M. C., & Repper, D. P. (1987). Intentionally favored, unintentionally harmed? Impact of sex-based preferential selection on self-perceptions and self-evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 62-68.
12.
Higgins, R. L. (1990). Self-handicapping: Historical roots and contemporary approaches. In R. L. Higgins, C. R. Snyder, & S. Berglas (Eds.), Selfhandicapping: The paradox that isn't. New York: Plenum
13.
Holloway, R. A. (1989). What is affirmative action? In F. A. Blanchard & F. J. Crosby (Eds.), Affirmative action in perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.
14.
Jones, E. E. , & Berglas, S. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 200-206.
15.
Leary, M. R. (1986). The impact of interactional impediments on social anxiety and self-presentation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 122-135.
16.
Locke, E. A. (1966). The relationship of intentions to level of performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 50, 50-66.
17.
Locke, E. , & Latham, G. (1990). Athey of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
18.
Major, B. , & Crocker, J. (in press). Social stigma: The consequences of attributional ambiguity. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition and stereotyping: Interactive process in group perception. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
19.
Major, B. , Feinstein, J., & Crocker, J. (in press). The attributional ambiguity of affirmative action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology
20.
Mayerson, N. , & Rhodewalt, F. (1988). The role of self-protective attributions in the experience of pain. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 6, 203-218.
21.
Nacoste, R. W. (1985). Selection procedure and responses to affirmative action. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 225-241.
22.
Nacoste, R. W. (1987). But do they care about fairness? The dynamics of preferential treatment and minority interest Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 8, 177-191.
23.
Nacoste, R. W. (1989). Affirmative action and self evaluations. In F. A. Blanchard & F. J. Crosby (Eds.), Affirmative action in perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.
24.
Nadler, A. , & Fisher, J. D. (1986). The role of threat to self-esteem and perceived control in recipient reaction to help: Theory development and empirical validation. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 81-122). New York: Academic Press.
25.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 328-346.
26.
Pettigrew, T. F. , & Martin, J. (1987). Shaping the organizational context for Black American inclusion. Journal of Social Issues, 43, 41-78.
27.
Rhodewalt, F. (1990). Self-handicappers. In R. L. Higgins, C. R. Snyder, & S. Burglas (Eds.), Self handicapping: The paradox that isn't. New York: Plenum.
28.
Schneider, D. , Hastorf, A., & Ellsworth, P. (1979). Person perception. Reading, MA. Addison-Wesley.
29.
Self, E. A. (1990). Situational influences on self-handicapping. In R. L. Higgins, C. R. Snyder, & S. Berglas (Eds.), Self-handicapping: The paradox that isn't (pp. 37-68). New York: Plenum.
30.
Snyder, C R. (1990). Self-handicapping processes and sequelae. In R. L. Higgins, C. R Snyder, & L. S. Berglas (Eds.), Selfhandicapping: The paradox that isn't. New York: Plenum.
31.
Snyder, M. L. , Smoller, B., Strenta, A., & Frankel, A. (1981). A comparison of egotism, negativity, and learned helplessness as explanations for poor performance after unsolvable problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 24-30.
32.
Steele, C. (1991, April). Minds wasted, minds saved. Crisis and hope in the schooling of Black Americans. Paper presented at the meeting of the Western Psychological Association, San Francisco.
33.
Taylor, D. A. (1989). Affirmative action and presidential executive orders. In F. A. Blanchard & F. J. Crosby (Eds.), Affirmative action in perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.
34.
Turner, M. E. , & Pratkanis, A. R. (in press). Recipient reactions to preferential selection. Basic and Applied Social Psychology
35.
Turner, M. E. , Pratkanis, A. R., & Hardaway, T. (1991). Gender differences in responses to preferential selection: Towards a model of preferential selection as help. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 797-820.
36.
Wood, R. , & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 407-415.
37.
Zweigenhaft, R. L. , & Domhoff, G. W. (1991). Blacks in the White establishment? New Haven, CI: Yale University Press.
