Ameri Mason, Kurtzberg Terri R
Rutgers Business School - Newark and New Brunswick, Rutgers University, 100 Rockafeller Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA.
Disabil Health J. 2025 Jan;18(1):101717. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2024.101717. Epub 2024 Oct 9.
Companies are increasingly motivated to ensure that they are effective at hiring people with disabilities, but bias in the process remains a challenge. While Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) statements are generally crafted as external-facing signaling devices, little is known about their potential effect on the employees themselves with regard to internal decisions, such as hiring.
This study aims to explore whether various DEI statements may encourage more positive hiring decisions for job candidates with both visible and invisible disabilities.
An experiment with a 2 × 4 × 2 design was used (DEI Language: legal/traditional or heartfelt; Disability Type: none, visible, and two types of invisible disabilities; Candidate's Tone: warm or overconfident). Quantitative and qualitative items measured general reactions to the candidate as well as perceptions about his employability, degree of risk as a new hire, skills at negotiating for his salary, and integrity. Statistical tests include analyses of variance and z-tests for proportions.
Heartfelt statements improved ratings of candidates with disabilities in general, and more so for those with invisible disabilities. In addition, the two types of invisible disability were distinct from each other, with the mental health disability more stigmatized than the neurological one.
These results suggest that the DEI language that a company uses is an important signaling device not just for external constituents but also for internal employees. In addition, it is among the first to demonstrate differences in types of invisible disabilities, indicating that more nuance is needed to understand bias in this context.
