Research from the American Psychological Association suggests that attractive people can be discriminated against when applying for low-level jobs.
In general, a good appearance is a blessing . Most of us think that those who are attractive have it all easier, especially in the world of work; However, the study carried out by the London Business School (United Kingdom) shows that the most attractive or beautiful people may be at a disadvantage in certain recruitment situations. Specifically, when applying for jobs that are perceived as less desirable (such as being employed at a fast food restaurant), physically attractive candidates can be negatively discriminated against, the researchers note.
The reason for this discrimination – according to the scientists’ hypothesis – is that companies seek to hire people who are satisfied with their jobs, but the prejudice that attractive people have higher expectations leads them to believe that these candidates will not be happy with their jobs. work (and they won’t be hired).
“ Our research suggests that attractive people can be discriminated against in the selection of relatively less desirable jobs. This is in contrast to a large body of research that concluded that attractiveness generally helps candidates in the selection process,” explains Margaret Lee, job leader.
To test their hypothesis, the researchers conducted four experiments that included more than 750 participants. Using a couple of photos that showed different visual appeal, 148 volunteers were individually asked to identify which of the two people in the photos was dissatisfied with their work. (The photos they used were rated as attractive and unattractive in previous research.)
The second study went one step further. They asked 200 volunteers which of the people in the photo would be dissatisfied with a job titled “Team Member in the Business Operations Department.”
The last two studies were designed to make the process more like the real world, asking volunteers whether candidates, both invented and real, would be hired for a variety of desirable and less desirable positions. They also had the participation of human resource managers to evaluate the jobs for which they were looking for personnel.
“We found that participants perceived attractive people as having a better right to do well than unattractive people, and predicted that attractive people would be less satisfied with an undesirable job than with an unattractive person,” says Lee.
In other words, the same biases that made us see beautiful people as more worthy of respect, for a high-paying job and a position of authority, also make us think that they are not as well suited for less challenging and less rewarding tasks.
“In the selection decision for an unwanted job, the decision makers were more likely to choose the unattractive individual than the attractive person,” says Lee.
Decisions were not affected by the tenant’s own level of attractiveness, nor did the handsomest volunteers report having more entitlement to more challenging work.
“ The most interesting part of our findings is that decision makers take into account the supposed aspirations of others in their decisions . Since participants thought attractive people would want better results and that attractive people would be less satisfied, they reversed their pattern of discrimination “, comments Madan Pillutla, co-author of the work.
The study therefore supports the claim that if you want a relatively undesirable job, you shouldn’t be too handsome. Before dismissing this research as trivial, it serves as a reminder to verify our biases or find ways to eliminate them when possible, since the most attractive do not always win at all jobs. And being discriminated against because of an irrelevant physical attribute (being very handsome) is effectively discrimination, no matter how you look at it.
Referencia: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ‘Perceived Entitlement Causes Discrimination Against Attractive Job Candidates in the Domain of Relatively Less Desirable Jobs’. Margaret Lee, Marko Pitesa, Madan M. Pillutla, and Stefan Thau. Online First Publication, October 23, 2017. DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000114
