Page 239 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

SHORE AND GOLDBERG
208
(1998) found that individuals deem some features to be central to their per­
ceptions of the typical jobholder for young-typed jobs (e.g., "energetic,"
"efficient," and "able to handle multiple tasks"). Warr and Pennington
(1994) concluded that (a) nonmanagerial jobs defined as mainly for older
employees were perceived to make fewer demands on cognitive resources
than younger people's jobs, and (b) work for younger employees was seen
as calling for greater expenditure of energy and more rapid pacing. Cleve­
land and Berman (1987) and Cleveland and Landy (1987) found conver­
gence among managers and between students and managers on age stereo­
types of jobs.
Much of the empirical research on prototype matching has studied its
impact on selection. Perry (1994) found that a matching process operates
for applicant age and the age-type of jobs. Cleveland and Landy (1983)
showed that older and younger applicants were not evaluated significantly
differently for different age-typed jobs, but that age-typed behaviors influ­
enced perceived suitability for age-typed jobs. Perry, Kulik, and Bourhis
(1996) found that older applicants were evaluated more negatively for
young-typed jobs, but that younger and older applicants were evaluated
similarly for old-typed jobs.
Prototype-matching may play a role in other work decisions as well.
Goldberg, Finkelstein, Perry, and Konrad (2001) found that women whose
age matched the perceived industry age received more promotions than
did women whose age did not match the perceived industry age. However,
an opposite effect was found for men's promotions, whereby young men in
old-typed industries (e.g., government, aerospace, industrial/construction
equipment) received considerably more promotions than did any other
group of men. In summary, these studies provide mixed support for age
prototype job matching, suggesting that other contextual variables (e.g.,
workgroup composition, industry) may also influence matching processes.

A MODEL OF AGE DISCRIMINATION

A number of themes are apparent in the literature: (a) age is most meaning­
ful when considered in context, such that the employee's age is compared
with multiple social referents, (b) the age comparisons that take place in
organizations influence employment opportunities for individuals, and (c)
there are forces both inside and outside the organization that influence em­
ployment opportunities of older workers. In Fig. 9.1, we present our model
of age discrimination and discuss each of the elements in the model.
Many studies have suggested the role of social comparison processes
by individuals in evaluating their work experiences (i.e., people compare