The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Shaping the Organizational Context for Black American Inclusion
Abstract
Recent gains in black occupational status, importantly aided by such programs as affirmative action, have created new interracial job situations throughout American society. This paper reviews the problems that arise at the recruitment, entry, and promotional stages for black Americans. The problems arise from two interrelated sources: the structure of the situations themselves and the operation of antiblack prejudice in both its traditional and modern forms. A social psychological analysis is advanced that emphasizes the biases introduced by the “triple jeopardy” these new workers often endure: (1) negative racial stereotypes, (2) the solo role—when the worker is the only black in the work group, and (3) the token role—when new black workers are viewed by white co‐workers as incompetent simply because they received their jobs through affirmative action. The barriers to black inclusion created by this triple jeopardy are discussed at several levels: biased and stressful recruitment practices; assumed dissimilarity and exaggerated expectations on entry; and later polarized, biased evaluations of performance. These processes often deny the new black employee needed realistic feedback and informal social support. The results, then, can involve not only biased evaluations but actual decrements in black job performance. The analysis is illustrated by several suggested micro‐remedies. But these micro‐remedies alone are unlikely to be sufficient unless administered in the larger context of structural, macro‐remedies. Two illustrative macro‐remedies are advanced, both of which aim to prevent solo situations and enlarge the black pool of qualified workers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
Bem, D. J. (1972) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60024-6 · Cited by 5,241
Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life: Skewed Sex Ratios and Responses to Token Women
Kanter, R. M. (1977) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/226425 · Cited by 3,154
Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs.
Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.5.961 · Cited by 805
Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value.
Worchel, S., Lee, J., & Adewole, A. (1975) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.5.906 · Cited by 271
Cited by
Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma.
Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.96.4.608 · Cited by 3,426
Relative Deprivation: A Theoretical and Meta-Analytic Review
Smith, H. J., Pettigrew, T. F., Pippin, G. M., & Bialosiewicz, S. (2012) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868311430825 · Cited by 1,255
Self-citationDiversified Mentoring Relationships in Organizations: A Power Perspective
Ragins, B. R. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9707154067 · Cited by 724
Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.544 · Cited by 537
Minimizing Workplace Gender and Racial Bias
Bielby, W. T. (2000) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2654937 · Cited by 311
Metadata
- Authors
- Pettigrew, T. F., & Martin, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Social Issues
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1987-04
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 41-78
- ISSN
- 0022-4537 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-4560
- OpenAlex
- W2142211443
- Cited by
- 338
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 35.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Shaping the Organizational Context for Black American Inclusion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1987.tb02330.x
- The paper
- Pettigrew, T. F., & Martin, J. (1987). Shaping the Organizational Context for Black American Inclusion. Journal of Social Issues. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1987.tb02330.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.