{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02074074074074074, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0014814814814814814, 'mean_word_length': 5.526570048309178, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Selected or rejected: Men and women’s reactions to affirmative action procedures in hiring

Previous research suggests that affirmative action policies tend to be perceived more negatively by men than by women, and by non-beneficiaries relative to beneficiaries. However, studies focusing on men as beneficiaries are lacking. The present paper reports the results of two pre-registered experiments conducted in Sweden. Study 1 investigated gender differences in reactions to being selected for a position based on either a strong or weak type of affirmative action policy. The results revealed that men (relative to women) displayed more negative attitudes, but not stronger resentment, and that a procedure using explicit quotas was perceived more negatively than a softer type of preferential treatment. In Study 2, we experimentally manipulated whether participants imagined being selected or rejected due to the same preferential treatment policy. Again, men displayed more negative attitudes, but not stronger resentment. The results further showed that attitudes were negative regardless of whether one was selected or rejected. However, those who were rejected felt stronger resentment than those who were selected, and this effect was especially pronounced for women. Implications for research, organizations, and policy-makers are discussed.