Demographic diversity, perceived workplace discrimination and workers' well-being: context matters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The main objective of this article is to contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge on the determinants of perceived workplace discrimination and its consequences on workers' well-being in Canada. Design/methodology/approach The authors used a representative sample of 7,706 workers aged 18 to 65 based on data from the 2016 General Social Survey of Canadians at Work and Home to conduct logistic regression models. Findings Women and visible minorities are at greater risk of perceiving that they have experienced workplace discrimination, but immigrants' perceived workplace discrimination risk is no different from that of non-immigrants. This risk is higher in public administration than in other industries and varies between provinces. Perceived workplace discrimination increases stress and is associated with a lower level of self-reported mental health. Practical implications Since perceived discrimination has a detrimental effect on workers' well-being, organizations should pay special attention to their employees’ perceptions. Relying only on official complaints of discrimination can lead organizations to underestimate this issue because many employees are not inclined to file an official complaint, even if they believe they have been discriminated against. Originality/value The authors findings are original because they suggest that visible socio-demographic characteristics (gender and visible minority) affect perceived workplace discrimination, which is not the case for invisible socio-demographic characteristics (immigrant). They point out that the province of residence is an element of the context to be considered and they indicate that workers in the public sector are more likely to perceive discrimination than those in other industries. These empirical contributions highlight that, despite anti-discrimination laws and government efforts to promote equity, diversity and inclusion, perceived workplace discrimination persists in Canada, particularly among women and visible minorities and it has tangible impacts on the workers' well-being.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".