The aim of this assignment is to summarize the research that has been done on LGBT discrimination, particularly in the workplace and during the recruiting process. Then, the foundation for additional research on the subject will be established, basing itself on the gaps in the existing works and the critique of their research design. Afterward, a forthcoming study will be proposed, complete with a research question and a hypothesis.
Problem Statement
The research on LGBT discrimination is extensive due to the continued relevance of this issue. Although public opinion has been shifting to a neutral or positive one in many countries (Adamczyk & Liao, 2019), LGBT people still face discrimination in many aspects of their lives, such as work. The nature of such discrimination depends on the so-called “out” status of the LGBT individual. Both states of “in” and “out” carry their respective benefits and drawbacks on the mental health of LGBT people (Suppes, Toorn, & Begeny, 2021). Notably, those who are openly lesbian or gay are more likely to be discriminated against at the hiring stage (Flage, 2018). These examples demonstrate how LGBT people are disadvantaged when it comes to work and social life. Therefore, the need to review the existing works on LGBT discrimination further arises.
Summary of Existing Literature
The first article to be explored deals with general LGBT discrimination, specifically, the pressure to be “out”. The article “Identity Processes and Psychological Wellbeing upon Recall of a Significant “Coming Out” Experience in Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual People” is authored by B. Lopes and R. Jaspal. The research question posed by the article is what effects remembering prior instances of coming out (disclosing one’s sexual orientation) has on a sample of LGB individuals’ psychological health. The study reveals that remembering past painful coming-out experiences, particularly those involving a close partner, can have long-term psychological effects on the person.
To be reviewed next are the articles on the general discrimination of LGBT people in the workforce. The first of them is “LGBT Workplace Inequality in the Federal Workforce: Intersectional Processes, Organizational Contexts, and Turnover Considerations” by E. A. Cech and W. R. Rothwell (2020). The second one is “Systemic Inequalities for LGBTQ Professionals in STEM,” authored once again by E. A. Cech and T. J. Waidzunas (2021). These articles are grouped together as they both explore the difficulties LGBT people face at work and therefore pose similar research questions: how are LGBT employees disadvantaged in the sectors of federal workforce and STEM, respectively? Although vastly different job sectors were studied, the authors of both studies came to similar conclusions: LGBT people do face discrimination.
Three of the chosen articles focused on the process of hiring. ‘Evaluations of LGBT Job Applicants: Consequences of Applying “Out”’ by K. B. Bryant-Lees and M. E. Kite (2019) explored whether it would affect hiring practices to disclose one’s sexual orientation during job search. The authors came to the conclusion that LGBT status significantly lowers one’s chances of being hired (Bryant-Lees & Kite, 2019).
While delving further into the topic of LGBT discrimination during hiring, researchers found that gender stereotypes related to jobs and workers play a significant role; the following two articles explore this connection. The first of them is “The Influence of Sexual Orientation on the Perceived Fit of Male Applicants for Both Male- and Female-Typed Jobs” by H. M. Clarke and K. A. Arnold (2018). The authors discovered that while a heterosexual man was rated highly suitable for a stereotypically male-typed job and not suitable for a female-typed one, a gay man was seen as less hireable for both types of jobs.
The next article covers a set of studies documented by R. J. Barrantes and A. A. Eaton, “Sexual Orientation and Leadership Suitability: How Being a Gay Man Affects Perceptions of Fit in Gender-Stereotyped Positions” (2018). This work researched how gay men are perceived when applying for positions of leadership and found that gay people are more favorably rated for feminine-typed leadership positions. The perceived overlaps and discrepancies between the two studies seem interesting for future exploration.
Critique of Research Design & Analyses
The articles selected seem to have a pattern to them based on topics and the research design. Namely, both articles that focused on the workforce utilized correlational design in the form of taking surveys and examining the resulting data for correlations. Meanwhile, all three articles that researched the process of hiring used experimental design, specifically, between-subjects design. The choice of experimental design for hiring studies seems to be connected to the relative shortness of this process, therefore calling for experiments that can reproduce a typical situation. In contrast, correlational design fits the studies that aim to gather a large amount of information on a set topic, i.e., the current satisfaction of LGBT people working in STEM. This pattern provides material for further studies. For example, a type of research design typically assigned to a certain topic could be used to explore another.
APA Principles & Standards
The authors of the articles reviewed state that the participants were informed and willing in adherence to the APA Principle of Assessment. R. J. Barrantes and A. A. Eaton directly invoke the APA standards and assure their compliance. The study by K. B. Bryant-Lees and M. E. Kite mentions that consent was provided directly by the participants before the experiment. H. M. Clarke and K. A. Arnold reiterate that the subjects of the study provided written consent, while B. Lopes and R. Jaspal used an online consent form. Only E. A. Cech and W. R. Rothwell’s work (2020) does not mention informed consent. However, this is improved in later works, as in 2021, E. A. Cech and T. J. Waidzunas state that the participants were informed about the survey on its landing page. Undoubtedly, the Standards set by the APA should be upheld in further studies on the subject.
Gaps in the Literature
Although six articles are barely enough to cover the current research on LGBT issues, they may be used to point out existing gaps in it. Of the three reviewed articles that researched the hiring issues of LGBT people, two focused on the experiences of gay male participants. However, LGBT as a term comprises many other groups, such as lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Further works that would look into the issues of these demographics could be beneficial for the integrity of LGBT research. Additionally, as the results of the study of R. J. Barrantes and A. A. Eaton and that of B. Lopes and R. Jaspal seemed to simultaneously overlap and differ, it seems the topic of hiring LGBT discrimination still has room for research.
Theoretical Considerations
As we have established, there are still questions unanswered regarding the discrimination of LGBT people at work and elsewhere. A framework through which one could address these questions is C. Ridgeway’s theory of status beliefs. According to the theory, status beliefs are cultural precepts that favor one social group over others by giving them greater authority, competence, and skills (Ridgeway, 2001). Through the lens of these concepts, one could obtain an explanation for subtle forms of occupational segregation (Ridgeway, 2001). To explain further, the status beliefs could be the reason behind the difficulties LGBT people face during the job search. Therefore, this method of describing workplace discrimination against LGBT people can be applied to the hiring process.
Research Question, Variables, and Hypothesis
Based on all of the above, the research question for the future study would be: to what extent does people’s LGBT+ status impact how others perceive them in terms of professionalism, hiring, and overall assessment? The dependent variable would be the perceptions of individuals in terms of their professionalism, hiring, and overall assessment. Conversely, the independent variable would be people’s LGBT+ status. As the reviewed studies have demonstrated, it is expected that people’s LGBT+ status can significantly influence how other individuals perceive these people.
This will be the hypothesis for the given research; it is going to demonstrate that if a person’s LGBT+ status is revealed, then they would be likely to suffer from discriminatory attitudes. Moreover, the study would employ correlational design in the form of a survey. Informed participants identifying as LGBT would be posed questions regarding which positions they apply to, whether they are open about their LGBT-status, and how well they are assessed in correlation with the previous two questions.
Conclusion
After having reviewed six articles, the groundwork for a new study based on C. Ridgeway’s theory of status beliefs regarding LGBT discrimination has been laid. To explore the difficulties LGBT people meet while being hired, a survey is proposed to gather information about their experiences with the process. The future study’s main draw would be a research method that is unconventional for the topic, as well as conflicting previous works on the subject.
References
Adamczyk, A. & Yen-Chiao, L. (2019). Examining public opinion about LGBTQ-related issues in the United States and across multiple nations. Annual Review of Sociology, 45, 401–423. Web.
Barrantes, R. J., & Eaton, A. A. (2018). Sexual orientation and leadership suitability: How being a gay man affects perceptions of fit in gender-stereotyped positions. Sex Roles, 79, 549–564. Web.
Bryant-Lees, K. B., & Kite, M. E. (2019). Evaluations of LGBT job applicants: Consequences of applying “out”. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 40(7). Web.
Cech, E. A., & Rothwell, W. R. (2020). LGBT workplace inequality in the federal workforce: Intersectional processes, organizational contexts, and turnover considerations. ILR Review, 73(1), 25–60. Web.
Cech, E. A., & Waidzunas, T. J. (2021). Systemic inequalities for LGBTQ professionals in STEM. Science Advances, 7(3). Web.
Clarke, H. M., & Arnold, K. A. (2018). The influence of sexual orientation on the perceived fit of male applicants for both male- and female-typed jobs. Front Psychol, 9(656). Web.
Flage, A. (2018). Discrimination against gays and lesbians in hiring decisions: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Manpower, 41(6). Web.
Lopes, B., & Jaspal, R. (2022). Identity processes and psychological wellbeing upon recall of a significant “coming out” experience in lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Journal of Homosexuality. Web.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 637–655. Web.
Suppes, A., van der Toorn, J., & Begeny, C. T. (2021). Unhealthy closets, discriminatory dwellings: The mental health benefits and costs of being open about one’s sexual minority status. Social Science & Medicine, 285. Web.