Abstract
AbstractThis study contributes to the diversity literature by probing whether diversity papers are cited as frequently as nondiversity papers in management and industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology journals. Based on the stigma‐by‐association theory, I argue that as a result of their association with minority groups, diversity papers may be devalued and thus “othered” by scholars. Using a citation analysis of 46,930 papers published in 29 peer‐reviewed management and I/O psychology journals, I present empirical evidence in Study 1 that diversity papers were cited significantly less frequently than nondiversity papers. The authors' gender and institutional prestige, journal tier and domain, and year of publication were not moderators. In Study 2, I used a scenario experiment to demonstrate the stigma‐by‐association effect. The authors' gender demonstrated a significant moderating effect in this experiment.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
