Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: An Experimental Study of Diversity Management Techniques

Stanford University, Stanford CA

Investigators

Abstract

The goal of this project is to help public policy in reducing the social problems that are associated with ethnic diversity. Considerable evidence reveals that ethnic diversity undermines the ability of groups, communities, and societies to act collectively and cooperatively. However, surprisingly little is known about the strategies that might support interethnic cooperation. This research uses experimental methods to evaluate two strategies for reducing intergroup biases and promoting cooperation: a self-categorization (SC) strategy that advocates the construction of unifying superordinate identities to minimize the salience of in-group differences (e.g., based on team, nation), and a self-verification (SV) strategy that proposes the construction of intergroup beliefs that acknowledge the tremendous value of diversity. Both the SC and SV approaches have been shown empirically and experimentally to be plausible diversity management strategies. But there are three limitations to existing research. The first is that, with few exceptions, virtually all experiments that identify positive effects from SC or SV rely on convenience samples consisting of American students, making it unclear how these strategies would fare in populations with deeper and more intense divisions. Second, most research on SV is qualitative or based on survey research, and does not convincingly control for factors that might affect both SV and group productivity. In other words, there is uncertainty as to whether SV has a causal impact on group productivity. And third, no studies compare directly the relative efficacies of the SC and SV approaches in a well-controlled setting, making it unclear which strategy to prefer in real-world settings. To make a scientific advance, this research uses a field experiment in group productivity and cooperation to test the individual, relative, and combined efficacies of the SC and SV approaches to diversity. In the experiment, an ethnically diverse sample of participants is recruited to participate in a problem-solving competition for a large cash prize. Participants are divided into groups of three for the competition, and groups are randomly selected to receive an SC prime, an SV prime, both SC and SV primes, or neither (pure control). Under these different treatments, participants attempt a series of incentivized puzzles and cooperative tasks designed by behavioral economists and social psychologists to study various aspects of group productivity and cooperation. Outcomes are then compared across the two cross-cutting treatments to evaluate the individual, relative, and combined efficacies of the SC and SV strategies. This research has practical implications in a world of increasing economic and cultural integration, where groups and societies are not only getting more diverse, but also fearful of its potential for generating social conflict. This is the reason the experiment will be conducted in Nairobi, Kenya where diversity appears to be undermining a half-century of impressive economic development, with imminent violence that would have been a threat to American interests in the region. Many public and private organizations, in Kenya and elsewhere, have tried to minimize the costs of diversity by becoming "colorblind" and creating strong organizational norms to encourage equal treatment of all individuals regardless of background. Nation-states have similarly resorted to appeals to a collective, national identity as a strategy for alleviating intense interethnic cleavages domestically. Yet it is not clear how effective or even desirable such convergence to homogeneity is. This research explores this tension between the costs and benefits of diversity, and attempts to inform our approaches to ethnically and culturally fractionalized groups, organizations, communities, and societies.