Reactions Toward Anonymized Reviews in Selection

Abstract

Race, gender, and age biases are prevalent when decision-making processes in the workplace are subjective and lack job-relevant criteria. Decision-maker reactions can influence decision quality, willingness to support, confidence in, and preference to use selection tools. The anonymized review (AR) is a hiring process that minimizes bias in selection by redacting identifying information (e.g., name, age, gender) from applicant materials (e.g., applications, resumes, etc.). This study was a two-part investigation that examined decision-maker reactions toward ARs. Justification for using ARs was expected to positively influence decision-maker reactions toward ARs. Additionally, diversity attitudes were expected to have a moderating effect on the relationship between justification and decision-maker reactions. Results from Study 1 showed insignificant main effects for ARs and justification. Study 1 results also showed that individuals with low diversity attitudes will react negatively to ARs when justification is not provided. Lastly, qualitative responses from Study 2 revealed perceptions of accuracy and practicality toward ARs as significant themes. Practical implications of the study are discussed and recommendations provided.