What Counts as Discrimination? How Principles of Merit Shape Fairness of Demographic Decisions

Demographic attributes (e.g., age, disability, race) frequently affect people's decisions. We provide a novel perspective as to why such discrimination persists: Meritocratic principles lead people to perceive some demographic attributes as fair to use, rather than as discriminatory. Specifically, we theorize that meritocracy requires that controllable and relevant inputs determine outcomes; as a result, perceived controllability and relevance affect the degree to which demographic attributes are perceived as fair to use. Moreover, we suggest perceived relevance outweighs controllability, such that even uncontrollable attributes can be perceived as fair criteria if perceived to be outcome relevant. In two qualitative studies, we probed how people think about demographic attributes used in selection (Studies 1a-b). We find that people refer to controllability and relevance dimensions to justify their perceptions. Further, people largely associate uncontrollable, irrelevant attributes with discrimination (race, sex), neglecting attributes they perceive as controllable and/or relevant (disability, caregiving status). Next, three surveys (Studies 2a-c) support our theorizing that perceived relevance impacts fairness perceptions more strongly than perceived controllability. In three experiments (Studies 3a-c), we provide causal evidence that relevance and controllability shape perceived fairness, which in turn affects selection behaviors, including seeking information regarding demographic attributes during hiring. Finally, Study 4 demonstrates downstream consequences: Perceived controllability, relevance, and use of demographic attributes together impact employees' psychological safety and job satisfaction. Overall, we find that principles of merit lead people to believe that even some legally protected demographic attributes are fair to use, allowing discrimination to persist.