MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601572818 · doi:10.1108/jstp-03-2016-0056

Ethnic stereotyping in service provision

2017· article· en· W2601572818 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Service Theory and Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupService (business)PsychologyService providerSocial psychologyMarketingPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the expectations and evaluations of services provided by members of an ethnic minority using the lens of ethnic stereotypes. The authors also examine how ethnic service providers (ESPs) are evaluated by customers from the majority group vs the same ethnic group as the provider. Design/methodology/approach In Study 1, the authors measure the stereotypes about skills, abilities, and typical professions associated with different ethnic groups (i.e. Chinese, South Asians and white). The authors then measure the effect of these stereotypes on the performance expectations from ESPs in different professional services. In Study 2, the authors manipulate the service domain (stereotypical vs counter-stereotypical) and the level of service performance (good: above average performance vs mediocre: below average) of a Chinese ESP, and subsequently measure the evaluation of the ESP by the same ethnic group (Chinese) vs majority group (white) participants. Findings Performance expectations from ESPs closely match the stereotypes associated with the ethnic group. But the performance of an ESP (especially mediocre-level service) is evaluated differently by the same ethnic group vs majority group customers, depending upon the domain of service. A Chinese ESP providing mediocre service in a stereotypical domain (martial arts instructor) is evaluated more critically by same ethnic group (Chinese) participants as compared to white participants. In contrast, a Chinese ESP providing mediocre service in a counter-stereotypical domain (fitness instructor) is evaluated more favourably by same ethnic group (Chinese) participants as compared to white participants. There is no such difference when performance is good. Research limitations/implications It is a common practice to employ ESPs to serve same ethnic group customers. While this strategy can be effective in a counter-stereotypical domain even if the ESP provides mediocre service, the findings suggest that this strategy can backfire when the performance is mediocre in a stereotypical service domain. Practical implications The results demonstrate the need for emphasizing outcome ( vis-à-vis interaction) quality where ESPs are employed to serve same ethnic group customers in a stereotypical service setting. However, when an ESP is offering a counter-stereotypical service, the emphasis needs to be more on the interpersonal processes ( vis-à-vis outcome). Firms can gain by taking this into account in their hiring and training practices. Originality/value Prior research has primarily used cultural distance to examine inter-cultural service encounters. The authors show that ethnic stereotypes pertaining to the skills and abilities of an ESP can affect evaluations beyond the role of cultural distance alone.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.009
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it