Effects of Category-Based Expectancy Violation on Evaluations and Motivated Reasoning

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Currently, there is widespread debate about whether persons with equal qualifications have equal educational and job opportunities. This research is part of a larger program of studies designed to understand how information about a job candidate's credentials in combination with information about their race or gender affect perceptions of the job candidate's qualifications. If credentials are relatively equivalent, then the chances of obtaining opportunities should be the same for persons of different racial and gender backgrounds. According to this perspective, qualifications alone determine the likelihood of opportunities. However, some evidence suggests that decision makers may use race and gender information to guide their decisions regarding a job candidate's qualifications. From this view, it is important to consider how prior expectations about particular types of persons as well as particular types of opportunities (e.g., jobs) may affect judgments about qualifications. For example, prior expectations may include stereotypes about who is best suited for a particular type of job or who is best suited for entry into medical school. These prior expectations may in turn influence decisions about job candidates' qualifications. This research is designed to systematically examine how prior expectancies in combination with person information (e.g., credentials, race, gender) influence decision makers' affective reactions toward, evaluations and judgments of, and reasoning processes about persons. By examining these variables, the current research will provide insight into the factors that affect decision makers' perceptions about who is best qualified for access to valuable opportunities.