Traditional Muslim headscarves are called hijabs. The authors show that hijabs and headscarves are closely associated with people’s mental representation of “typical” Muslim women in Germany. They then investigate the influence of wearing such hijabs on acceptance rates in a human resources selection procedure. In this paradigm, the authors demonstrate a selection bias against women wearing hijabs: Although factual information about academic achievements had the largest effect on participants' decisions, decisions on all achievement levels were biased against women wearing hijabs. This pattern was substantiated by participants' response latencies; women wearing hijabs were more quickly rejected and more slowly accepted compared to women not wearing hijabs. The authors discuss these results' implications for public referendums (e.g., in Switzerland, 2009) and policy making (e.g., in France, 2004; in Germany, 2005) regarding Islamic culture.
BlessH.FiedlerK. (2006). Mood and the regulation of information processing and behavior. In ForgasJ. P. (Ed.), Affect, cognition and social behavior: Affect in social thinking and behavior (pp. 65–84). New York: Psychology Press.
2.
CorrellJ.ParkB.JuddC. M.WittenbrinkB. (2002). The police officer's dilemma: Using ethnicity to disambiguate potentially threatening individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1314–1329.
3.
CorrellJ.ParkB.JuddC. M.WittenbrinkB.SadlerM. S.KeeseeT. (2007). Across the thin blue line: Police officers and racial bias in the decision to shoot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1006–1023.
4.
DevineP. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18.
5.
DroogsmaR. (2007). Redefining Hijab: American Muslim women's standpoints on veiling. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 35, 294–319.
6.
EzekielJ. (2006). French dressing: Race, gender, and the hijab story. Feminist Studies, 32, 256–278.
7.
EzekielM. (1930). Methods of correlation analysis.
Oxford, UK: Wiley.
8.
ForgasJ. P. (1998). On being happy but mistaken: Mood effects on the fundamental attribution error. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 318–331.
9.
GhummanS.JacksonL. (2010). The downside of religious attire: The Muslim headscarf and expectations of obtaining employment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 4–23.
10.
JuddC.BlairI.ChapleauK. (2004). Automatic stereotypes vs. automatic prejudice: Sorting out the possibilities in the Payne (2001) weapon paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 75–81.
11.
JudgeH. (2004). The Muslim headscarf and French schools. American Journal of Education, 111, 1–24.
12.
KahnR. A. (2006). The headscarf as threat? A comparison of German and American legal discourses (Berkeley Electronic Press Paper 1504). Retrieved fromhttp://law.bepress.com/expresso/eps/1504
13.
KarakasogluY. (2005). Frauen mit Kopftuch in Deutschland: Symbol der Religiosität, Zeichen von Unterdrückung, Ausdruck neuer Identitäten? [Women with headscarves in Germany: Symbol of religiosity, sign of oppression, expression of new identities?]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.bpb.de/themen/V1NOYB.html
14.
KoriatA.FiedlerK.BjorkR. (2006). Inflation of conditional predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 429–447.
15.
Koyuncu LorasdağiB. (2009). The headscarf and emancipation in the Netherlands. Feminism & Psychology, 19, 328–334.
16.
LunneyG. H. (1970). Using analysis of variance with a dichotomous dependent variable: An empirical study. Journal of Educational Measurement, 7, 263–269.
17.
MahmudY.SwamiV. (2010). The influence of the hijab (Islamic head-cover) on perceptions of women's attractiveness and intelligence. Body Image, 7, 90–93.
18.
PayneB. K. (2001). Prejudice and perception: The role of automatic and controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 181–192.
19.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T.StrathmanA. J.PriesterJ. R. (2005). To think or not to think: Exploring two routes to persuasion. In BrockT. C.GreenM. C. (Eds.), Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 81–116). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
SimeanerH.DippelhoferS.BargelH.RammM.BargelT. (2008). Datenalmanach Studierendensurvey 1983–2007 nach Geschlecht (Heft 52) [Data Almanac Student Survey 1983–2007, Issue 52]. Konstanz, Germany: Universität Konstanz.
21.
TarloE. (2007). Hijab in London: Metamorphosis, resonance and effects. Journal of Material Culture, 12, 131–156.
22.
UnkelbachC.ForgasJ. P.DensonT. F. (2008). The turban effect: The influence of Muslim headgear and induced affect on aggressive responses in the shooter bias paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1409–1413.
23.
UnkelbachC.GoldenbergL.MüllerN.SobbeG.SpannausN. (2009). A shooter bias against people wearing Muslims headgear in Germany. International Review of Social Psychology, 22, 181–201.
