Effects of Applicant Pregnancy on Hiring Decisions and Interview Ratings
- 864 Downloads
The effects of pregnancy on hiring decisions during employment interviews are examined in a United States sample of 210 undergraduate business school students at a Midwestern university. A pregnant applicant was compared to a non-pregnant applicant with identical credentials and interview performance to explore any differences in interviewer ratings of qualifications and hiring by having participants view videotaped interviews. Results show that in spite of being viewed as equally qualified and well-suited for the job, the pregnant applicant received significantly lower hiring recommendation ratings. The pregnant applicant was also rated as more likely to need time off, miss work and quit compared to the non-pregnant applicant, indicating a concern about absenteeism regarding the pregnant applicant.
KeywordsEmployment interviews Pregnancy Hiring issues Discrimination
- Armour, S. (February, 2005). Pregnant workers report growing discrimination. USA Today. Retrieved April 10, 2006, from http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2005-02-16-pregnancy-bias-usat_x.htm.
- Cleveland, J. N., Stockdale, M., & Murphy, K. R. (2000). Women and Men in Organizations: Sex and Gender Issues at Work. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
- Corse, S. J. (1990). Pregnant managers and their subordinates: The effects of gender expectations on hierarchical relationships. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 26, 24–47.Google Scholar
- Dipboye, R. L. (1992). Selection Interviews: Process Perspectives. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co.Google Scholar
- Faul, F., & Erdfedler, E. (1992). GPOWER: A priori, post-hoc, and compromise power analyses for MS-DOS (computer programme). Bonn, FRG: Bonn University, Dep. of Psychology. (http:// www. Psychologie.uni-trier.de:8000/projects/gpower.html).
- Hammond, K. R. (1996). Human Judgment and Social Policy: Irreducible Uncertainty, Inevitable Error, Unavoidable Injustice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 269–298.Google Scholar
- Huvelle, N. F., Budoff, M., & Arnholz, D. (1984). To tell or not to tell: Disability disclosure and the job interview. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 78, 241–244.Google Scholar
- Kazama, S. M., & Hebl, M. R. (2003, April). Assessing pregnancy in hiring situations: The role of formal and interpersonal discrimination. Paper presented at 18th annual SIOP conference, Orlando, Fl.Google Scholar
- O’Connel, M. (December, 2001). New census bureau analysis indicates women making longer-term commitments to workplace. U.S. Census Bureau News. Retrieved April 3, 2006, from http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/fertility/000319.html.
- Pregnancy discrimination. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Retrieved April 10, 2006, from http://www.eeoc.gov/types/pregnancy.html.
- Slonaker, W. M., & Wendt, A. C. (1991). Pregnancy discrimination: An empirical analysis of a continuing problem. Labor Law Journal, 343–350 (June).Google Scholar
- The Pregnancy Discrimination Act 25 years later: Pregnancy discrimination persists. National Partnership for Women & Families. Retrieved April 10, 2006, from http://www.nationalpartnership.org/portals/p3/library/workplaceDiscrimination/Pregnancy25thAnnivFacts.pdf.
- Valian, V. (1998). Why so slow: The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
- Women at work: Look behind the numbers 40 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (July, 2004). National Partnership for Women & Families, 1–20.Google Scholar