No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Moving from i-frame to s-frame focus in equity, diversity, and inclusion research, practice, and policy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 August 2023
Abstract
Meaningful and long-lasting progress in equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) continue to elude academics, practitioners, and policymakers. Extending Chater & Loewenstein's arguments to the EDI space, we argue that, despite conventional focus on individual-level solutions (i-frame), increasing EDI also requires a systemic focus (s-frame). We thus call for the design, testing, and implementation of multipronged s-frame interventions.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Amis, J. M., Mair, J., & Munir, K. (2020). The organizational reproduction of inequality. The Academy of Management Annals, 14, 195–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, E. H., Milkman, K. L., Gromet, D. M., Rebele, R. W., Massey, C., Duckworth, A. L., & Grant, A. M. (2019). The mixed effects of online diversity training. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(16), 7778–7783.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheryan, S., & Markus, H. R. (2020). Masculine defaults: Identifying and mitigating hidden cultural biases. Psychological Review, 127(6), 1022–1052.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. The American Psychologist, 54(7), 493–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, J. C., & Kang, S. K. (2021). Covering in cover letters: Gender and self-presentation in job applications. Academy of Management Journal, 64(4), 1097–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, J. C., Kang, S. K., & Lacetera, N. (2021). Opt-out choice framing attenuates gender differences in the decision to compete in the laboratory and in the field. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(42), e2108337118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2108337118Google ScholarPubMed
Kalev, A., Dobbin, F., & Kelly, E. (2006). Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 589–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, S. K., & Kaplan, S. (2019). Working toward gender diversity and inclusion in medicine: Myths and solutions. In The lancet (Vol. 393(10171), pp. 579–586). Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33138-6Google Scholar
Kim, J. Y., Fitzsimons, G. M., & Kay, A. C. (2018). Lean in messages increase attributions of women's responsibility for gender inequality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(6), 974–1001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kochan, T., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi, A., Jehn, K., … Thomas, D. (2003). The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the diversity research network. Human Resource Management, 42(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newkirk, P. (2019). Diversity has become a booming business. So where are the results? Time. October 10. https://time.com/5696943/diversity-business/Google Scholar
Rivera, L. A., & Tilcsik, A. (2016). Class advantage, commitment penalty: The gendered effect of social class signals in an elite labor market. American Sociological Review, 81(6), 1097–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. The Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 743–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudman, L. A., & Phelan, J. E. (2008). Backlash effects for disconfirming gender stereotypes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray
Related commentaries (33)
An inconvenient truth: Difficult problems rarely have easy solutions
Behavioral market design
Behavioral mechanism design
Behavioral public policy in practice: Misconceptions and opportunities
Behavioral winter: Disillusionment with applied behavioral science and a path to spring forward
Community-engaged research is best positioned to catalyze systemic change
Conspiracy theory
Don't throw the individual perspective out while waiting for systemic change
Expectations, opportunities, and awareness: A case for combining i- and s-frame interventions
i-Frame interventions enhance s-frame interventions
Individual-level solutions may support system-level change â if they are internalized as part of one's social identity
It's always both: Changing individuals requires changing systems and changing systems requires changing individuals
Misdiagnosing the problem of why behavioural change interventions fail
Moral psychology biases toward individual, not systemic, representations
Moving from i-frame to s-frame focus in equity, diversity, and inclusion research, practice, and policy
Nudges, regulations, and behavioral public choice
Nudging is being framed
On Skinner's pendulum: A framework for assessing s-frame hope
Optimizing behavior change through integration of individual- and system-level intervention approaches
Real systemic solutions to humanity's problems require a radical reshaping of the global political system
Structural problems require structural solutions
The influence of private interests on research in behavioural public policy: A system-level problem
The psychology and policy of overcoming economic inequality
The real cause of our complicity: The preoccupation with human weakness
The social sciences are increasingly ill-equipped to design system-level reforms
The “hearts-and-minds frame”: Not all i-frame interventions are ineffective, but education-based interventions can be particularly bad
Unpacking the nudge muddle
Use behavioral research to improve the feasibility and effectiveness of system-level policy
Using effective psychological techniques to subvert a US sociopolitical context
When nudges have societal-level impact
Why a group-level analysis is essential for effective public policy: The case for a g-frame
Wise interventions consider the person and the situation together
“More effective” is not necessarily “better”: Some ethical considerations when influencing individual behaviour
Author response
Where next for behavioral public policy?