Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and Choices

Individuals’ decisions to promote or limit diversity in the workplace are ambivalent and may be influenced by their cognitive focus. Drawing from construal level theory, we test across five studies whether individuals are more supportive of diversity when diversity is thought of more abstractly vers...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Claudia Toma, Ashli B. Carter, Katherine W. Phillips
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-04-01
Series:Behavioral Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/15/5/585
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849327413378416640
author Claudia Toma
Ashli B. Carter
Katherine W. Phillips
author_facet Claudia Toma
Ashli B. Carter
Katherine W. Phillips
author_sort Claudia Toma
collection DOAJ
description Individuals’ decisions to promote or limit diversity in the workplace are ambivalent and may be influenced by their cognitive focus. Drawing from construal level theory, we test across five studies whether individuals are more supportive of diversity when diversity is thought of more abstractly versus concretely. Furthermore, we examined the salience of diversity pros and cons as the underlying mechanisms, as well as the role of egalitarian beliefs as a boundary condition for this discrepancy. We tested these hypotheses in five studies, which varied in samples, cognitive focus manipulation, and measures. Dutch and American individuals indicated more positive attitudes toward diversity (Studies 1 and 2) and made more choices that enhanced diversity (Studies 2 and 5) when they considered diversity abstractly (for most companies and teams) rather than concretely (for their own company and teams). Furthermore, the discrepancy in diversity attitudes by construal level was more pronounced among individuals with egalitarian beliefs (Study 3) and was driven by the heightened salience of diversity pros at more abstract versus concrete levels of construal (Study 4). This research contributes to further understanding the ambivalent view of diversity and provides concrete recommendations for diversity management in organizations.
format Article
id doaj-art-b16633c76bf242a7aef26a2d04df07f4
institution Kabale University
issn 2076-328X
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Behavioral Sciences
spelling doaj-art-b16633c76bf242a7aef26a2d04df07f42025-08-20T03:47:53ZengMDPI AGBehavioral Sciences2076-328X2025-04-0115558510.3390/bs15050585Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and ChoicesClaudia Toma0Ashli B. Carter1Katherine W. Phillips2Solvay Brussels School of Economics and Management, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1050 Bruxelles, BelgiumColumbia Business School, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USAColumbia Business School, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USAIndividuals’ decisions to promote or limit diversity in the workplace are ambivalent and may be influenced by their cognitive focus. Drawing from construal level theory, we test across five studies whether individuals are more supportive of diversity when diversity is thought of more abstractly versus concretely. Furthermore, we examined the salience of diversity pros and cons as the underlying mechanisms, as well as the role of egalitarian beliefs as a boundary condition for this discrepancy. We tested these hypotheses in five studies, which varied in samples, cognitive focus manipulation, and measures. Dutch and American individuals indicated more positive attitudes toward diversity (Studies 1 and 2) and made more choices that enhanced diversity (Studies 2 and 5) when they considered diversity abstractly (for most companies and teams) rather than concretely (for their own company and teams). Furthermore, the discrepancy in diversity attitudes by construal level was more pronounced among individuals with egalitarian beliefs (Study 3) and was driven by the heightened salience of diversity pros at more abstract versus concrete levels of construal (Study 4). This research contributes to further understanding the ambivalent view of diversity and provides concrete recommendations for diversity management in organizations.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/15/5/585workplace diversitydiversity attitudesconstrual levelsocial dominance orientation
spellingShingle Claudia Toma
Ashli B. Carter
Katherine W. Phillips
Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and Choices
Behavioral Sciences
workplace diversity
diversity attitudes
construal level
social dominance orientation
title Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and Choices
title_full Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and Choices
title_fullStr Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and Choices
title_full_unstemmed Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and Choices
title_short Diversity? Great for Most Just Less So for Me: How Cognitive Abstraction Affects Diversity Attitudes and Choices
title_sort diversity great for most just less so for me how cognitive abstraction affects diversity attitudes and choices
topic workplace diversity
diversity attitudes
construal level
social dominance orientation
url https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/15/5/585
work_keys_str_mv AT claudiatoma diversitygreatformostjustlesssoformehowcognitiveabstractionaffectsdiversityattitudesandchoices
AT ashlibcarter diversitygreatformostjustlesssoformehowcognitiveabstractionaffectsdiversityattitudesandchoices
AT katherinewphillips diversitygreatformostjustlesssoformehowcognitiveabstractionaffectsdiversityattitudesandchoices