BackgroundResearch on ethnic and socioeconomic treatment differences following in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) largely draws on register data. Due to the correlational nature of such data, it cannot be concluded whether detected differences reflect treatment bias/discrimination – whereby otherwise identical patients are treated differently solely due to sociodemographic factors. To be able to establish discrimination, experimental research is needed.ObjectiveThe primary aim of this experimental study was to examine whether simulated IHCA patients receive different treatment recommendations based on ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES), holding all other factors (e.g., health status) constant. Another aim was to examine health care professionals’ (HCP) stereotypical beliefs about these groups.MethodsHCP (N = 235) working in acute care made anonymous treatment recommendations while reading IHCA clinical vignettes wherein the patient's ethnicity (Swedish vs. Middle Eastern) and SES had been manipulated. Afterwards they estimated to what extent hospital staff associate these patient groups with certain traits (stereotypes).ResultsNo significant differences in treatment recommendations for Swedish versus Middle Eastern or high versus low SES patients were found. Reported stereotypes about Middle Eastern patients were uniformly negative. SES-related stereotypes, however, were mixed. High SES patients were believed to be more competent (e.g., respected), but less warm (e.g., friendly) than low SES patients.ConclusionsSwedish HCP do not seem to discriminate against patients with Middle Eastern or low SES backgrounds when recommending treatment for simulated IHCA cases, despite the existence of negative stereotypes about these groups. Implications for health care equality and quality are discussed.

Pain is self-immersive, leading to a narrow, egocentric focus on the self in the here and now. Preliminary evidence suggests that distancing oneself from the pain can reduce experimentally induced pain. The primary aim of this experimental study was to examine whether a hitherto unexplored, simple self-distancing strategy – “third-person self-talk” – has an analgesic effect on physiological and psychological pain variables. Participants (N = 292) were randomly assigned to one of four conditions (third-person self-talk, first-person self-talk, and two control conditions). Pain was induced with a cold pressor apparatus and pain tolerance, pain intensity, negative affect and blood pressure were measured for each group. While in pain, participants engaged in strategic self-talk aided by cue-cards. Data were analyzed with univariate planned comparisons. Few significant differences emerged for the third-person self-talk versus the other conditions. It is concluded that third-person self-talk does not seem to have a meaningful effect on physiological and psychological pain variables, although a small effect size could not be ruled out. Practical implications are discussed.

Whether people think less abstractly when they experience physical pain has been examined in previous research. However, the reverse causal possibility—that abstraction reduces sensitivity to painful stimuli—does not appear to have been empirically tested. The aim of this study was to investigate whether abstraction reduces sensitivity to painful stimuli. Using the cold pressor method, university students (N = 205) were exposed to experimental pain. Participants were randomly assigned to an abstract mindset, concrete mindset, cognitive distraction (control task), or no task (control) condition. As a manipulation of abstraction, participants focused on why they felt pain (abstract condition) versus how they felt pain (concrete condition). Pain endurance and pain intensity were evaluated. The abstract mindset condition did not show significantly lower pain sensitivity compared with the other experimental conditions. We found no evidence suggesting that abstract thinking would reduce pain sensitivity. The effectiveness of other techniques that induce abstraction, such as third-person (versus first-person) self-talk should be examined in future research. Since experimentally induced pain in healthy participants differs from clinical pain, whether abstract thinking may reduce pain sensitivity in chronic pain patients should also be examined.

Background: Studies investigating sex disparities related to treatment and outcome of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) have produced divergent findings and have typically been unable to adjust for outstanding confounding variables.

Objectives: The aim was to examine sex differences in treatment and survival following IHCA, using a comprehensive set of control variables including e.g., age, comorbidity, and patient-level socioeconomic status. Methods: This retrospective study was based on data from the Swedish Register of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Statistics Sweden. In the primary analyses, logistic regression models and ordinary least square regressions were estimated.

Results: The study included 24,217 patients and the majority (70.4%) were men. In the unadjusted analyses, women had a lower chance of survival after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) attempt, at hospital discharge (with good neurological function) and at 30 days (p<0.01). In the adjusted regression models, female sex was associated with a higher chance of survival after the CPR attempt (B = 1.09, p<0.01) and at 30-days (B = 1.09, p<0.05). In contrast, there was no significant association between sex and survival to discharge with good neurological outcome. Except for treatment duration (B=-0.07, p<0.01), no significant associations between sex and treatment were identified.

Conclusions: No signs of treatment disparities or discrimination related to sex were identified. However, women had a better chance of surviving IHCA compared to men. The finding that women went from having a survival disadvantage (unadjusted analysis) to a survival advantage (adjusted analysis) attests to the importance of including a comprehensive set of control variables, when examining sex differences.

Although young adults are not at great risk of becoming severely ill with COVID-19, their willingness to get vaccinated affects the whole community. Vaccine hesitancy has increased during recent years, and more research is needed on its situational determinants. This paper reports a preregistered experiment (N = 654) that examined whether communicating descriptive social norms – information about what most people do – is an effective way of influencing young people’s intentions and reducing their hesitancy to take the COVID-19 vaccine. We found weak support for our main hypothesis that conveying strong (compared to weak) norms leads to reduced hesitancy and stronger intentions. Furthermore, norms did not produce significantly different effects compared to standard vaccine information from the authorities. Moreover, no support was found for the hypothesis that young people are more strongly influenced by norms when the norm reference group consists of other young individuals rather than people in general. These findings suggest that the practical usefulness of signaling descriptive norms is rather limited, and may not be more effective than standard appeals in the quest of encouraging young adults to trust and accept a new vaccine.

Purpose Many organisations monitor statistics on the background of job applicants to inform diversity management, a practice known as equality monitoring (EM). The study examines perceptions of EM and employers that use it. Additionally, it aims to assess potentially salient group differences in attitudes towards EM, focussing on perceived history of employment discrimination, ethnicity, sex, and a comparison between the UK and Sweden - two countries which differ extensively in EM prevalence. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional self-report survey assessed attitudes toward EM, attraction to employers using it, pro-equality and diversity attitudes, perceived history of employment discrimination and background characteristics (e.g. ethnicity and sex), and compared a UK and Sweden sample (N = 925). Findings The results reveal positive perceptions of EM overall. Although no differences were observed between UK ethnic majority and minority respondents, White British men rate employers using EM as less attractive with increasing levels of perceived past discrimination. Women have more positive perceptions than men. Finally, the UK sample rated EM more positively than the Sweden sample. Originality/value Despite EM being widespread, the study is the first to investigate detailed perceptions of it, making group and country comparisons. Results support the use of EM in HRM but highlight the need for clear communication to avoid confusion with positive discrimination, which is perceived negatively in some majority group members, and to allay fears of data misuse. Recommendations are made for future implementation.

Despite well-known problems associated with political prejudice, research that examines effects of political dissimilarity in organizational contexts is scarce. We present findings from a pre-registered experiment (N = 973, currently employed) which suggest that both Democrats and Republicans negatively stereotype and discriminate against job applicants with a political orientation that is dissimilar to their own. The effects were small for competence perceptions, moderate for hiring judgments, and large for warmth ratings and willingness to cooperate and socialize with the applicant. The effects of political orientation on hiring judgments and willingness to cooperate and socialize were mediated by stereotype content, particularly warmth. Furthermore, for all outcomes except competence judgments, Democrats discriminated and stereotyped applicants to a larger extent than Republicans did. These findings shed light on the consequences of applicants revealing their political orientation and have implications for the promotion of diversity in organizations. 

We investigate how social gender norms influence parental leave uptake intentions by conducting two separate survey experiments on prospective fathers (N = 877) and mothers (N = 882) in the UK. In a between-subjects design, we manipulate social gender norms by varying information on the average number of days that other fathers and mothers stay at home to take care of a child during the first year after childbirth. We find that when prospective parents (both genders) are exposed to the low staying-home-with-children norm, they plan less parental leave uptake compared to the control (no norm) group. When exposed to the high staying-home-with-children norm, men (but not women) plan more parental leave uptake compared to the control group. We discuss policy implications and suggest directions for future studies.

Prior research suggests that job search activities of underrepresented groups are sensitive to diversity cues in recruitment materials, but less is known about the impact of different types of cues. Despite widespread use, employment equality monitoring (EM), or data collection on legally protected characteristics (like gender or ethnic background), has received scant empirical attention. Two experiments used fictitious job advertisements to examine the effects of a strong equality/diversity/inclusion (EDI) value statement and descriptions of EM use by employers. In Study 1, we found that advertisements containing an EDI statement and a statement of EM together produced the highest ratings of organizational prestige, and, in minority respondents, stronger job-pursuit intentions. Study 2 examined various framing conditions of EM using a between-subjects design. The inclusion of any EDI information was positively received, but minority ethnicity respondents were less positive when an EM statement was provided without an explanation for why it is done. The practical implications are that both value statements and EM information together could help increase attraction among jobseekers from underrepresented groups, with potential to contribute to diversity branding. However, minority groups are still sceptical of employer EDI credibility and employers must do more than talk the talk.

Purpose – The purpose of the current study is to investigate occupational stereotypes among a professionalsample of recruiters and other employees on the two fundamental dimensions of warmth and competence.

Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted a survey to collect professionals' (mostly recruiters') ratings of preselected occupations. Participants were asked to rate warmth and competenceattributes. Factor and cluster analysis were employed to investigate the two-dimensional structure of thewarmth/competence space and how and whether occupations cluster as predicted by the stereotype contentmodel (SCM).

Findings – Almost all occupations showed a clear two-factorial structure, corresponding to the warmth/competence dimensions. A five-cluster solution was deemed appropriate as depicting how occupations disperseon these dimensions. Implications for stereotyping research, the design of hiring discrimination experiments,and HRM are discussed.

Originality/value – In contrast to previous related research, in which participants select the includedoccupations themselves, the authors included prespecified common occupations, which should be importantfor representativeness. In addition, previous research has been conducted in the United States, while theauthors conduct this study in a European context (Sweden). Finally, instead of studying students orparticipants with unspecified work experience, the authors focus on professionals (mostly recruiters).