Temporal Distance and Discrimination: An Audit Study in Academia
Abstract
Through a field experiment set in academia (with a sample of 6,548 professors), we found that decisions about distant-future events were more likely to generate discrimination against women and minorities (relative to Caucasian males) than were decisions about near-future events. In our study, faculty members received e-mails from fictional prospective doctoral students seeking to schedule a meeting either that day or in 1 week; students' names signaled their race (Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, Indian, or Chinese) and gender. When the requests were to meet in 1 week, Caucasian males were granted access to faculty members 26% more often than were women and minorities; also, compared with women and minorities, Caucasian males received more and faster responses. However, these patterns were essentially eliminated when prospective students requested a meeting that same day. Our identification of a temporal discrimination effect is consistent with the predictions of construal-level theory and implies that subtle contextual shifts can alter patterns of race- and gender-based discrimination.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Research on racialized bias in virtual reference demonstrates that under-serving patrons of color extends to online environments.
“Furthermore, the work of Shachaf, Oltmann, & Horowitz (2008) and Shachaf & Horowitz (2006) on racialized bias in virtual reference demonstrates that under-serving patrons of color extends to online environments, showing that the disembodied and abstracted nature of online service delivery is not a corrective for racialized bias (Milkman, Akinola, & Chugh, 2012).”
From In Pursuit of Antiracist Social Justice: Denaturalizing Whiteness in the Academic Library (2015) · cites this paper as Milkman, Akinola, & Chugh, 2012
Cites
Construal-level theory of psychological distance.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0018963 · Cited by 6,618 · see citing works
Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior
Loewenstein, G. (1996) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 · Cited by 2,610 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Thus, decisions about the near future may be driven by emotions (e.g., guilt), and decisions about the distant future may be driven more by cognitions (e.g., stereotype-based calculations of the probability of a minority student’s success in academia; Loewenstein, 1996; Shiv & Fedorikhin, 1999).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Coffman, K. B., Coffman, L. C., & Ericson, K. M. M. (2017) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2016.2503 · Cited by 287 · see citing works
The science of sharing and the sharing of science
Milkman, K. L., & Berger, J. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1317511111 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Self-citationIn Pursuit of Antiracist Social Justice: Denaturalizing Whiteness in the Academic Library
Brook, F., Ellenwood, D., & Lazzaro, A. E. (2015) · Library Trends · doi:10.1353/lib.2015.0048 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Automating Automaticity: How the Context of Human Choice Affects the Extent of Algorithmic Bias
Agan, A., Davenport, D., Ludwig, J., & Mullainathan, S. (2023) · doi:10.3386/w30981 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
- Authors
- Milkman, K. L., Akinola, M., & Chugh, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Columbia University (US)
- New York University (US)
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-05-21
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 710-717
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2159495932
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 29.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Association for Psychological Science
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- temporal distance, discrimination, construal level theory, racial discrimination, gender discrimination, time perspective, decision-making
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Ethnicity, Faculty, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Psychological Tests, Random Allocation, Sex Factors, Time Factors, Universities, Racism, Sexism, Social Discrimination
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