Overcoming negative reactions of nonbeneficiaries to employment equity: The effect of participation in policy formulation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2 experimental studies, we examined a way to overcome nonbeneficiaries' resistance to employment equity (EE) policies-participation in formulating the policy. We operationalized participation in terms of instrumental versus noninstrumental voice and proposed that nonbeneficiaries would be more likely to support an EE policy when allowed instrumental participation in the policy's development. Further, we proposed psychological ownership as the mediating mechanism underlying the effects of instrumental participation. Study 1 examined participation effects for a gender-based EE policy and Study 2 for a race-based EE policy. As predicted, we found that nonbeneficiaries (men in Study 1; Whites in Study 2) in the instrumental participation condition expressed greater behavioral intentions to promote the policy (Studies 1 and 2) and were more likely to engage in a behavior promoting the policy (Study 2). We also found support for psychological ownership as the underlying mediating mechanism in both studies. Contributions to theory and practice are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".