Meeting Two

Affinity Bias. Having a preference or personal connection for an individual who may be similar to you. Perceiving people who are similar more positively than those who are different.

Confirmation Bias. Looking for information that confirms your assumption about someone. Involves selective attention to information that supports your stance or belief. Dismissing opinions, no matter how valid. Confirms pre-existing perceptions or stereotypes without using actual or objective information.

Halo Effect. Where a positive impression based on one aspect of performance  creates an overall positive perception. An individual is rated highly in all areas because of one thing they do really well.

Horn Effect. An individual is denied progression because of one thing they do not do well. One negative trait overshadows other traits, behaviors, or beliefs.

Spillover Effect. pertains to a manager or evaluator judging the current performance by using past performance as a reference point.

Projection. A feature in human thinking where one thinks that others have the same priorities, attitudes or beliefs as oneself, even if this is unlikely to be the case.

Recency Effect when the individual’s most recent behavior becomes the primary focus of the review. Note this can go both ways. A poor performer does something terrific and the past performance is forgotten and vice versa with an exceptional performer.

Anchoring Bias. the tendency to rely too heavily or “anchor” on one trait or piece of information when making decisions. Usually the first piece of information.

Distance Bias. Favoring those who are closer in proximity by location, time zone or relationship. 

Gender Bias: Stereotypes about gender roles can influence how perception an employee’s communication style, leadership skills, or work ethic.

  With credit to: Dr. Nabil Mitha, Dr. Dominic Mudiayi, Dr. Jennifer Ringrose, Dr. Farah Shariff and Dr Lindsay Bridgland 

  Action: Try one or more bias reduction strategies. We will dedicate time in the meeting to discuss how the strategies worked for you.  

          This bias reduction strategy list is not exhaustive, nor is it meant that every strategy will be employed with every decision or step in the search.   Some may “speak” to you more than others. 

          The following strategies are meant to be applied in the minutes before and during application review and the interview process.

            1. Use the evaluation checklist

  -Refer to the evaluation checklist and make notes as you work through the applications

           2. Counter stereotype exemplars 

             - Focus on individuals you admire and respect who are in the same demographic as the candidate. 

           3. Consider the opposite 

             - After an initial review of an applicant’s CV or a candidate's responses in the interview, re-review the information, actively looking for                            evidence for the opposite conclusion. Then make a final decision. 

           4. Question your decision 

             - Ask yourself if you would make the same decision if the candidate was of a different race, gender, ethnicity, or ability. If so, why? If you                     would not make the same decision, why not? 

           5. Remember and work against affinity bias 

            - The unconscious tendency to show preference for those who are like us. This bias can show up in hiring as we search for candidate that                  “fit” the culture of the department.) 

           6. Consider positionality and intersectionality 

             - Refer to the Academic Wheel of Privilege (above) and consider how your lived experiences were impacted by your positionality and                            intersectionality and how your lived experiences may differ from the candidate’s.  

          Positionality refers to how differences in social position and power shape identities and access in society.  

          Intersectionality the interconnectedness of social identities such as race, class, and gender that result in unique combinations of either power/privilege or marginalization /                              disadvantage

Collins, P.H. (2001). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the  Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge. 

Duarte, M.E. (2017). Network Sovereignty: Building the Internet Across Indian Country.  Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Lai et al., (2014): J Exp Psychol Gen, 2014 Aug;143(4):1765-85. doi: 10.1037/a0036260

Misawa, M. (2010). Queer Race Pedagogy for Educators in Higher Education: Dealing  with Power Dynamics and Positionality of LGBTQ Students of Color. International  Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3 (1), 26-35. Retrieved from  http://libjournal.uncg.edu/ijcp/article/view/68. 

Mahmoud E. et al. Bridging Neurodiversity and Open Scholarship: How Shared Values Can Guide Best Practices for Research Integrity, Social Justice, and Principled Education. Accessed on February 15, 2024. Available at: https://osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/k7a9p

https://www.thisishowyoucan.com/post/__wheel_of_power_and_privilege

https://indigenousinitiatives.ctlt.ubc.ca/classroom-climate/positionality-and-intersectionality/