I think the the study does demonstrate bigotry, which I deplore. However, the result surprised me, since I know so many organizations that are bending over backwards to seek qualified black employees. Maybe the resume recipients didn’t expect people with these particular names to be qualified.
My hypothesis is that these names are perceived (rightly or wrongly) as not just black, but ghetto black. I think the study really demonstrates a high degre of bigotry against ghetto blacks. Furthermore, I think ghetto blacks get so much bad publicity that bigotry against them is only to be expected. Do you agree?
An interesting theory. I could see that it might be true in many cases. I’d like to see a similar study done with, say, Chinese sounding names. Assuming that Chinese are stereotypically “smart” or “better educated”, how would Billy Leong and Nancy Chow fair against Tae-he Kim and Keiko Tanaka? It would be interesting to see if it were the ethnic sounding first names that were the issue rather than the race.
Why does it make a difference? Is it more understandable to be biased against “ghetto” blacks than regular old black blacks? What in the world is a “ghetto” black anyway? Is it a poor black? An urban black?
The OP’s link doesn’t mention whether the “white sounding names” resumes were created equal in other ways. Isn’t it possible that the “white resumes” were made better (i.e. better work histories, more qualifications)?
december: Count me among those who are not sure what your point is here. I mean, while it might be interesting to speculate as to the motives for discrimination, the fact that it exists is what is most relevant here.
Are we supposed to worry any less if Blacks aren’t called back not because of any racist belief against Blacks but instead because of stereotyping that these folks are likely to be less educated and qualified?
The point is that the objective qualifications were the same and yet this bias occurred. While speculation on why this bias occurred may be of interest, it does little to change the basic facts.
x-ray vision: What you are asking I suppose is whether the professors who did the study (hailing from two extremely prestigious schools) were either foolish or purposely biased the study. If you are doing such a study, don’t you think that the first thing that you would make sure of is that you controlled for the most obvious factor affecting call-back rates?
Biggirl, I am thinking about your question. Do you mean, “Why does it make a difference morally?” If my hypotheses is true, it could make a difference in how a job-seeker might choose to portray herself.
I take your point about the difficulty of defining “ghetto dweller.” However, lack of precise definition isn’t a bar to bigotry. Bigots aren’t generally deterred by crude definitions.
BTW have you seen August Wilson’s play, “King Hedley II”? The protagonist is portrayed as sympathetic and appealing, but not as someone you would want to employ.
If I was doing the study? Yes, I would. However, I’ve seen many studies (even done by proffessors from prestigious schools ) that were less than perfect. I’m not going to assume that the resumes were created equal without an explanation as to how the resumes were obtained.
I was under the impression that the resumes were created - not culled from a list of already existing applicants. Just change the names, mail them a few days apart, and presto. Identical resumes.
Gee, I wonder where these sterotypes come from? Does anyone think that employers (who want to make money) really care what the color of your skin is, or do they want someone who will work hard (or smart) and make them money.
Let me tell you, I work for a large corporation in an inner city with hundreds of employees. We have many blacks and many whites working there. I don’t care how rosy a view of the world you’d like to have, you don’t have to work there very long before it is very obvious the differences between the white and black workers. The black workers are much, much lazier. They walk so slow you’d think they had no purpose in being there. They don’t speak correct English even to clients. " I don’t know where that be." You can hear them swaring while talking to each other (It’s supposed to ba a proffessional atmosphere). All in all, they just don’t get the job done as well as well as the whites. Still wondering why Tyrone “don’t be getttin’ called” for an interview?
Black people (or, at least the ones in my neck of the woods) have a colloquialism-- “That’s so ghetto”-- That is used to denote actions that are stereotypically undesirable. Sort of like the “you know you’re a redneck if. . .” jokes.
The problem with the OP as I see it is that it seems it is saying that these human resource type people can predict if a person going to act “ghetto” by their name.
There is no such thing as a “ghetto” name. There are people who happen to be black who act in ways undesirable to the general population. This is not unique to “blackness” in any way. Bias is bias and trying to lump a group of people into the undesirable camp because of their name is one of the more reprehensible types of racism.
x-ray vision, the resumes were created by the researchers and then sent out. The only difference between the resumes was the name at the top.
december, I don’t think your question is 100% without merit, but I’m feeling Biggirl when she asks what a “ghetto” black is. Mainly, for this reason: not all the names they used in the study–at least in my eyes–are “ghetto”. They are names very prevalent in the black community, irrespective of class. Names like Tyrone, Keisha, Aisha, and Ebony (the study cited these names as the ones which were discriminated against). These are not “ghetto” names in the least. For all the names I just listed, I know middle class, well-educated people who have them. So if you discriminate against these names, you are not eliminating “ghetto” black people. You are eliminating “regular” black people.
I can think of a whole bunch of black names that I don’t associate with the “ghetto”. Many of them aren’t even Arabic or African; they are so-called “regular” names that are simply favored in the black community. This is why the findings of this study are so troubling.
I think what December is getting at is that employers are hesitant (rightly or wrongly) to hire people who are “outside the mainstream”, even though they may want or need to have more minorities on their staff. No doubt that blacks are targets of many forms of racism, but ghetto or urban blacks are often seen as challenging the social order. Very similar to the hippies in the 60s. Hey, Mr IBM guy won’t hire me because I have long hair and wear sandals. I think a lot of whites see the urban black culture as a challenge to a more traditional, mainstream culture, and therefore add an extra dose of prejudice. And whites associate these so-called black sounding names not so much with blacks, but with poor, urban blacks who might have a tendancy to “rock the boat”. I’m not justifying it, I’m just trying to understand. And for those who say what difference does it make-- well, you’ll have better success attacking a problem if you understand it’s cause.
It does sound like a horrible prejudice. Have there been any associated studies to show the naming-habits of wealthier black people compared with poorer (=ghetto??) ones? Do “middle class” black people tend to use similar names to their white counterparts? Do lower class white people tend to give their children more Jerry Springer names than richer, more educated ones?
Can this sort of stuff be quantified?
If a relationship between rich-poor and traditional name:newly-invented name can be determined, that might explain - though not excuse - the prejudice. Employers would therefore be discriminating against people from more deprived backgrounds.
If so, then a study needs to be carried out to determine whether people from more deprived backgrounds have worse work ethics than those from richer backgrounds. If so, you could have some empathy for the employers’ prejudice, but not their social conscience.
While it may be true that black-sounding names are spread equally among the socio-economic classes, I think the point is that many white people believe thay are indicative of poor, urban black people. Perception becomes reality.
[quote]
x-ray vision, the resumes were created by the researchers and then sent out. The only difference between the resumes was the name at the top. [/quote/
So you’re saying that rational thought ALWAYS drives employment decisions? Wow. I always thought it was irrational to keep blacks from playing major league baseball all those years, but maybe I was wrong.
For someone who cares so much about “correct English”, you would think you would care a little bit more about how your own comes across on a public message board.
By your logic, because everyone I know with “x” in their name is a fool, it would be okay to discriminate against people named “x ray vision”. Because, you know, generalizations ALWAYS work, especially when we draw them from limited experiences. Still wondering indeed…