Page 74 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

3. RELATIONAL DEMOGRAPHY
45
members experienced lower levels of affect toward the groups, and hetero­
geneous groups displayed less effective norms, attributable to similarity-
attraction processes. Over time, however, and as per social identity theory,
contact among workgroup members facilitated recategorization among
group members, yielding greater group cohesiveness and more coopera­
tive norms. In other words, as a function of shared and firsthand experience,
group members had increasingly individuated information upon which to
base their perceptions of each other rather than general and often negative
stereotypes. Dissimilar group members reported improved perceptions of
and identification with their workgroups over time, and workgroups ex­
hibited more effective norms.
The Tokenism Hypothesis

The theory of tokenism considers the role of those who are such a small
minority in groups (15% or less of the total group) that they are seen as
symbols of a certain category, rather than as individuals (Kanter, 1977;
Young & James, 2001). Because these individuals are highly visible, given
the characteristics that differentiate them from other members, negative
outcomes are typically predicted. Kanter (1977) suggested that three fac­
tors associated with tokenism could have an impact on an individual's
performance at work.
First, increased visibility can create unfair or unequal performance pres­
sure for the "token" individual, causing this person to either overachieve
to meet expectations or to underachieve to alleviate other members' con­
cerns about competition (Spangler, Gordon, & Pipkin, 1978; Young & James,
2001). Second, workgroup members will likely create boundaries based on
an exaggeration of the differences between themselves and the token in­
dividual. This idea is consistent with the ingroup/outgroup distinctions
that are described in social identity theory. These boundaries can lead to
feelings of detachment and segregation for minority individuals, along
with perceptions of exclusionary treatment. Finally, the workgroup may
have certain beliefs and/or stereotypes that fit the characteristics of major­
ity members, and therefore token individuals may often find themselves
having to conform to the rest of the group, rather than challenging group
norms or expectations (Spangler et al., 1978; Young & James, 2001).
Most studies using the tokenism hypothesis have examined the role of
gender dissimilarity and its effects on minority members. For example,
Young and James (2001) investigated the work experiences of male flight
attendants, who represent token individuals in a female-dominated oc­
cupation. They found that token status led to increased role ambiguity,
lower self-esteem, and perceptions of poor job fit. In turn, these negative