Skip to main content Accessibility help

Stereotypes, Bias, and Personnel Decisions: Strange and Stranger

  • Frank J. Landy (a1)


Research on stereotyping as related to workplace evaluations and decisions has been going on for more than 30 years. Recently, implicit association theory has emerged as a less conscious manifestation of stereotyping mechanisms. In this article, I review the relevance of research on both stereotyping and one of the more popular tests of implicit associations, the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Claims have been made that both stereotyping research and, more recently, IAT research provide theoretical and empirical support for the argument that protected demographic groups (e.g., ethnic minorities, women) are the victims of biased personnel decisions and evaluations. My review of the literature suggests that both stereotyping and IAT research study designs are sufficiently far removed from real work settings as to render them largely useless for drawing inferences about most, but not all, forms of employment discrimination.


Corresponding author

E-mail:, Address: Landy Litigation Support Group, 195 Hudson Street, Apartment 2D, New York, NY 10013


Hide All
Bielby, W. T. (2000). Minimizing workplace gender and racial bias. Contemporary Sociology, 29(1), 120129.
Bing, M. N., Stewart, S. M., Davison, H. K., Green, P. D., McIntyre, M. D., & James, L. R. (2007). An integrative typology of personality assessment for aggression: Implications for predicting counterproductive workplace behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 722744.
Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. (2006a). Arbitrary metrics in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 2741.
Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. (2006b). Arbitrary metrics redux. American Psychologist, 61, 6271.
Bowen, C., Swim, J. K., & Jacobs, R. R. (2000). Evaluating gender biases on actual job performance of real people: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 21942215.
Brendl, C. M., Markman, A. B., & Messner, C. (2001). How do indirect measures of evaluation work? Evaluating the inference of prejudice in the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 760773.
Copus, D. (2005). A lawyer’s view: Avoiding junk science. In Landy, F. J. (Ed.), Employment discrimination litigation: Behavioral, quantitative, and legal perspectives (pp. 450462). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dasgupta, N. (2004). Implicit in-group favoritism, out-group favoritism, and their behavioral manifestations. Social Justice Research, 17, 143169.
Davison, H. K., & Burke, M. J. (2000). Sex discrimination in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 225248.
DeHouwer, J. (2001). A structural and process analysis of the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37, 443451.
Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125145.
Eagly, A. H., & Koenig, A. M. (2008). Gender prejudice: On the risks of occupying incongruent roles. In Borgida, E. & Fiske, S. T. (Eds.), Beyond common sense: Psychological science in the courtroom (pp. 6382). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297327.
Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In Zanna, M. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 174). New York: Academic Press.
Frost, B. C., Ko, C. E., & James, L. R. (2007). Implicit and explicit personality: A test of a channeling hypothesis for aggressive behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 12991319.
Goldberg, P. (1968). Are women prejudiced against women? Transaction, 5, 316322.
Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M., Rudman, L., Farnham, S., Nosek, B. A., & Mellot, D. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 325.
Greenwald, A. G., & Krieger, L. H. (2006). Implicit bias: Scientific foundations. California Law Review, 94, 945967.
Greenwald, A. G., McGehee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 14641480.
Heilman, M. E., & Haynes, M. C. (2008). Subjectivity in the appraisal process: A facilitator of gender bias in work settings. In Borgida, E. & Fiske, S. T. (Eds.), Beyond common sense: Psychological science in the courtroom (pp. 127155). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Kunda, Z., & Sinclair, L. (1999). Motivated reasoning with stereotypes: Activation, application and inhibition. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 1222.
Kunda, Z., & Thagard, P. (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103, 284308.
Landy, F. J. (2008). The tenuous bridge between research and reality: The importance of research design in inferences regarding work behavior. In Borgida, E. & Fiske, S. T. (Eds.), Beyond common sense: Psychological science in the courtroom (pp. 341352). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Landy, F. J. (2008). Commentary. In Borgida, E. & Fiske, S. T. (Eds.). Psychological science in the court: Beyond common knowledge. London: Blackwell Publishers.
Landy, F. J. (in press). Bias in performance ratings: Then and now. In Outtz, J. L. (Ed.), Adverse impact. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
LeBreton, J. M., Barksdale, C. D., Robin, J., & James, L. R. (2007). Measurement issues associated with conditional reasoning tests: Indirect measurement and test faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 116.
Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 777785.
McConnell, A. R., & Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations between the Implicit Association Test, explicit racial attitudes, and discriminatory behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 435442.
McFarland, S. G., & Crouch, Z. (2002). A cognitive skill confound on the implicit association test. Social Cognition, 22, 673684.
Mitchell, G., & Tetlock, P. E. (2006). Antidiscrimination law and the perils of mind reading. Ohio State Law Journal, 67, 10231122.
Murphy, K. R. (2006). A critique of emotional intelligence: What are the problems and how can they be fixed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (2005). Psychological testing: Principles and applications (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Murphy, K. R., Herr, B. M., Lockhart, M. C., & Maguire, E. (1986). Evaluating the performance of paper people. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 654661.
Ray v. Miller Meester Advertising, Inc., No. C3-02-1605 (Minn, July 29, 2004).
Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. (1973). The influence of sex-role stereotypes on evaluations of male and female supervisory behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 4448.
Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2004). Underlying processes in the Implicit Association Test: Dissociating salience from associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 139165.
Rudman, L. A., Glick, P., & Phelan, J. E. (2008). From the laboratory to the bench: Gender stereotyping research in the courtroom. In Borgida, E. & Fiske, S. T. (Eds.), Beyond common sense: Psychological science in the courtroom (pp. 83102). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Sackett, P. R., & Dubois, C. L. Z. (1991). Rater-ratee race effects on performance evaluation—challenging meta-analytic conclusions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 873877.
Tetlock, P. E., & Mitchell, G. (in press). Unconscious prejudice and accountability systems: What must organizations do to check implicit bias? In Staw, B. & Brief, A. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior.
Ziegert, J. C., & Hanges, P. J. (2005). Employment discrimination: The role of implicit attitudes, motivation, and a climate for racial bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 553562.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Stereotypes, Bias, and Personnel Decisions: Strange and Stranger

  • Frank J. Landy (a1)


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.