skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Justice and Inclusion Mutually Cause Each Other
Justice should increase inclusion because just treatment conveys acceptance and enables social exchanges that build cohesion. Inclusion should increase justice because people can use inclusion as a convenient fairness cue. Prior research touches on these causal associations but relies on a thin conception of inclusion and neglects within-person effects. We analyze whether justice causes inclusion at the within-person level. Five waves of data were gathered from 235 college students in 38 entrepreneurial teams. Teams were similar in size, work experience, deadlines, and goals. General cross-lagged panel models indicated that justice and inclusion had a reciprocal influence on each other. A robustness check with random-intercept cross-lagged models supported the results. In the long run, reversion to the mean occurred after an effect decayed, suggesting that virtuous or vicious cycles are unlikely. The results imply that maintaining overall justice at the peer-to-peer level may lead to inclusion.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1730262
PAR ID:
10335857
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Social Psychological and Personality Science
Volume:
13
Issue:
2
ISSN:
1948-5506
Page Range / eLocation ID:
512 to 521
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Oceanography)
    During the 2024 Ocean Sciences Meeting (OSM24), The Oceanography Society’s Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Committee hosted a town hall on “Scientific Societies’ Roles in Building Inclusive Communities.” The town hall aimed to assess ongoing efforts to improve belonging, accessibility, justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (BAJEDI) within ocean sciences, promote community building and discussions surrounding BAJEDI topics, and highlight the role of scientific societies in equity efforts. Here, we summarize the resultant communal discussions, which focused on effective models for increasing participation in ocean sciences, how to make ocean science careers more accessible, and strategies to build a more equitable community culture. Discussions highlighted several professional societies working to increase BAJEDI within the field and offered tangible action items to increase accessibility and equity at all career stages. An optional survey was distributed to OSM24 attendees to assess their lived experiences. Survey results highlighted that although knowledge of BAJEDI issues and training opportunities have increased, bullying and discrimination are still common. We recommend action items, including increased standardization and public accessibility of demographic data, to continue improving BAJEDI within ocean sciences. 
    more » « less
  2. ; (, Earth and Space Science)
    Abstract Science conferences have increasingly come under a spotlight for inclusion and representation of marginalized groups. Here, we report on our analysis of the representation of women in conference leadership with regard to internal structure and dynamics at the Chapman conference series, spanning a period from 2007 to 2019. Chapman conferences are small, focused meetings in the Earth and space sciences, under the umbrella of the American Geophysical Union (AGU). They follow a two‐leveled scientific leadership model, starting at conference inception by the organizing conveners and their selection of an invited science program committee. Our main findings were: (a) The average women proportion was less for the conveners (17%) than for the Science Program Committee (SPC) (24%), which is in line with the AGU demographics of attrition, assuming a different mix of career stages among conveners and SPC. At the individual conference level, the unfavorable case that convener or SPC teams were comprised only of men was nonetheless frequent. (b) On average, mixed convener teams, as opposed to all‐men convener teams, selected a higher women representation among the SPC members (18% vs. 28%). (c) There were fewer all‐men SPC teams when at least one woman was in the convener team (21% vs. 7%). In conclusion, while there was evidence that equitable representation can be achieved in the leadership, it still lagged in a consistent fashion for individual conferences. Targeted efforts for increased representation–especially at the convener level of the two‐leveled conference model–are recommended, as increased women representation at the convener level may improve women representation of the SPC. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction)
    Team member inclusion is vital in collaborative teams. In this work, we explore two strategies to increase the inclusion of human team members in a human-robot team: 1) giving a person in the group a specialized role (the 'robot liaison') and 2) having the robot verbally support human team members. In a human subjects experiment (N = 26 teams, 78 participants), groups of three participants completed two rounds of a collaborative task. In round one, two participants (ingroup) completed a task with a robot in one room, and one participant (outgroup) completed the same task with a robot in a different room. In round two, all three participants and one robot completed a second task in the same room, where one participant was designated as the robot liaison. During round two, the robot verbally supported each participant 6 times on average. Results show that participants with the robot liaison role had a lower perceived group inclusion than the other group members. Additionally, when outgroup members were the robot liaison, the group was less likely to incorporate their ideas into the group's final decision. In response to the robot's supportive utterances, outgroup members, and not ingroup members, showed an increase in the proportion of time they spent talking to the group. Our results suggest that specialized roles may hinder human team member inclusion, whereas supportive robot utterances show promise in encouraging contributions from individuals who feel excluded. 
    more » « less
  4. ; (, European Journal of Psychological Assessment)
    Abstract. The Circumplex Team Scan (CTS) assesses the degree to which a team’s interaction/communication norms reflect each segment (16th) of the interpersonal circle/circumplex. We developed and evaluated an abbreviated 16-item CTS-16 that uses one CTS item to measure each segment. Undergraduates ( n = 446) completing engineering course projects in 139 teams completed the CTS-16. CTS-16 items showed a good fit to confirmatory structural models (e.g., that expect greater positive covariation between items theoretically closer to the circumplex). Individuals’ ratings sufficiently reflected team-level norms to justify averaging team members’ ratings. However, individual items’ marginal reliabilities suggest using the CTS-16 to assess general circumplex-wide patterns rather than specific segments. CTS-16 ratings correlated with respondents’ and their teammates’ ratings of team climate (inclusion, justice, psychological safety). Teams with more extraverted (introverted) members were perceived as having more confident/engaged (timid/hesitant) cultures. Members predisposed to social alienation perceived their team’s culture as relatively disrespectful/unengaged, but their teammates did not corroborate those perceptions. The results overall support the validity and utility of the CTS-16 and of an interpersonal circumplex model of team culture more generally. 
    more » « less
  5. ; (, Frontiers in Education)
    When professors assign group work, they assume that peer ratings are a valid source of information, but few studies have evaluated rater consensus in such ratings. We analyzed peer ratings from project teams in a second-year university course to examine consensus. Our first goal was to examine whether members of a team generally agreed on the competence of each team member. Our second goal was to test if a target’s personality traits predicted how well they were rated. Our third goal was to evaluate whether the self-rating of each student correlated with their peer rating. Data were analyzed from 130 students distributed across 21 teams (mean team size = 6.2). The sample was diverse in gender and ethnicity. Social relations model analyses showed that on average 32% of variance in peer-ratings was due to “consensus,” meaning some targets consistently received higher skill ratings than other targets did. Another 20% of the variance was due to “assimilation,” meaning some raters consistently gave higher ratings than other raters did. Thus, peer ratings reflected consensus (target effects), but also assimilation (rater effects) and noise. Among the six HEXACO traits that we examined, only conscientiousness predicted higher peer ratings, suggesting it may be beneficial to assign one highly conscientious person to every team. Lastly, there was an average correlation of.35 between target effects and self-ratings, indicating moderate self-other agreement, which suggests that students were only weakly biased in their self-ratings. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email