Affirmative action's contradictory consequences

Journal of Social Issues

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 105-109

  Heilman, Madeline E ^a,b,c,d  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Indust Org Psychology Program

^c Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals

^d Yale's Sch of Org and Management

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001256883     PISSN: 00224537     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1996.tb01852.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bremilow, P. (1992, May 25). Spiral of silence. Forbes, pp. 76-77.
2. Garcia, L. T., Erskine, N., Hawn, K., & Casmay, S. R. (1981). The effect of affirmative action on attributions about minority group members. Journal of Personality, 49, 427-437.
3. Heilman, M. E. (1994). Affirmative action: Some unintended consequences for working women. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 125-169). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
4. Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., & Lucas, J. A. (1992). Presumed incompetent? Stigmatization and affirmative action efforts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 536-544.
5. Heilman, M. E., Block, C., & Stathatos, P. (in press). The affirmative action stigma of incompetence: Effects of performance information. Academy of Management Journal.
6. Heilman, M. E., Lucas, J. A., & Kaplow, S. R. (1990). Self-derogating consequences of preferential selection: The moderating role of initial self-confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 46, 202-216.
7. Heilman, M. E., McCullough, W. F., & Gilbert, D. (1996). The other side of affirmative action: Reactions of non-beneficiaries to sex-based preferential selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 346-357.
8. Heilman, M. E., Rivero, J. C., & Brett, J. F. (1991). Skirting the competence issue: Effects of sex-based preferential selection on task choices of women and men. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 99-105.
9. Heilman, M. E., Simon, M. C., & Repper, D. P. (1987). Intentionally favored, unintentionally harmed?: The impact of gender-based preferential selection on self-perceptions and self-evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 62-68.
10. Henry, W. A., III (1991, Sept. 30). What price preference? Time, pp. 30-31.
11. Jacobson, M. B., & Koch, W. (1977). Women as leaders: Performance evaluation as a function of method of leader selection. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 20, 149-157.
12. Kleugel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1982). White's beliefs about black's opportunity. American Sociological Review, 47, 518-532.
13. Kravitz, D., & Platania, J. (1993). Attitudes and beliefs about affirmative action: Effects of target and of respondent sex and ethnicity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 928-938.
14. Major, B., Feinstein, J., & Crocker, J. (1994). Attributional ambiguity of affirmative action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 15, 113-141.
15. Nacoste, R. W. (1985). Selection procedure and responses to affirmative action: The case of favorable treatment. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 225-242.
16. Nacoste, R. W. (1987). But do they care about fairness? The dynamics of preferential treatment and minority interest. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 8, 117-191.
17. Nacoste, R. W. (1990). Sources of stigma: Analyzing the psychology of affirmative action. Law and Policy, 12, 175-195.
18. Turner, M. E., Pratkanis, A. R., & Hardaway, T. J. (1991). Sex differences in reactions to preferential selection: Towards a model of preferential selection as help. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 797-814.