The importance of disability representation to address implicit bias in the workplace.

Introduction: People are disabled by barriers in society, not by their impairment. Barriers can be physical or be caused by people's implicit and explicit attitudes towards people with disabilities. Methods: We utilise the Implicit Association Test to investigate implicit attitudes towards people with disabilities among Human Resource professionals and people involved in making hiring decisions. Results: We find no significant differences between people who work for large companies or Small- to Medium-sized Enterprises. Similarly, working in Human Resources (or making recruitment decisions) has no effect on implicit bias. We supply the first evidence linking a person's own health status (measured using EQ-5D-5L) to their implicit bias. We find that a worse health status is associated with lower implicit bias towards people with disabilities. In addition, we find women have lower implicit bias than men. Discussion: The discussion reflects on the need for greater disability representation within the workplace - especially in making hiring decisions.

On the robustness of gender differences in economic behavior.

Because of the importance of economic decisions, researchers have looked into what factors influence them. Gender has received a lot of attention for explaining differences in behavior. But how much can be associated with gender, and how much with an individual's biological sex? We run an experimental online study with cis- and transgender participants that (1) looks into correlational differences between gender and sex for competitiveness, risk-taking, and altruism by comparing decisions across these different subject groups. (2) we prime participants with either a masculine or feminine gender identity to examine causal gender effects on behavior. We hypothesize that if gender is indeed a primary factor for decision-making, (i) individuals of the same gender (but different sex) make similar decisions, and (ii) gender priming changes behavior. Based on 780 observations, we conclude that the role of gender (and sex) is not as decisive for economic behavior as originally thought.

Moral dilemmas and trust in leaders during a global health crisis.

Trust in leaders is central to citizen compliance with public policies. One potential determinant of trust is how leaders resolve conflicts between utilitarian and non-utilitarian ethical principles in moral dilemmas. Past research suggests that utilitarian responses to dilemmas can both erode and enhance trust in leaders: sacrificing some people to save many others ('instrumental harm') reduces trust, while maximizing the welfare of everyone equally ('impartial beneficence') may increase trust. In a multi-site experiment spanning 22 countries on six continents, participants (N = 23,929) completed self-report (N = 17,591) and behavioural (N = 12,638) measures of trust in leaders who endorsed utilitarian or non-utilitarian principles in dilemmas concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. Across both the self-report and behavioural measures, endorsement of instrumental harm decreased trust, while endorsement of impartial beneficence increased trust. These results show how support for different ethical principles can impact trust in leaders, and inform effective public communication during times of global crisis. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION STATEMENT: The Stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 13 November 2020. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13247315.v1 .