The role of intergroup threats for explaining political bias in screening decisions

Abstract

In many places, the current political landscape is increasingly polarized. Unfortunately, such polarization may cause organizations to miss out on valuable human capital if their recruiters and hiring managers exhibit political bias. This research draws on integrated threat theory to investigate the implications of political polarization on applicant evaluations when information about their political views can be gleaned from cues in their application materials or social media. Through four lab studies (total N = 4223) involving Prolific participants with real-world hiring experience, we explore how subtle cues about an applicant's inferred political beliefs influence screening decisions. Study 1 indicates that political bias manifests primarily as a bias against those with differing political views rather than favoritism toward those with similar views. Drawing from integrated threat theory, Studies 2–3 find that political dissimilarity between applicants and hiring managers affects evaluations through perceived intergroup threats, particularly symbolic threats arising from conflicting values and beliefs. Study 3 reveals that political bias persists even when candidates are clearly highly qualified for the position. Studies 1–3 used COVID-related employment gaps, and Study 4 shows that these effects persist when evaluators are exposed to the applicant's views about abortion. We discuss how and when political bias may surface and offer suggestions for organizations to mitigate these biases to leverage the available human capital in their applicant pools.