META-ANALYTICAL INTEGRATION OF RESEARCH ON DIVERSITY 1
A Meta-Analytical Integration of Over 40 Years of Research on Diversity Training
Evaluation
Katerina Bezrukova
University at Buffalo
Chester S. Spell
Rutgers University
Jamie L. Perry
Cornell University
Karen A. Jehn
University of Melbourne
Final version published in Psychological Bulletin (2016), No. 11, 1227-1274
Author Note
Katerina Bezrukova, School of Management, University at Buffalo; Chester S. Spell,
School of Business, Rutgers University; Jamie L. Perry, College of Business, School of Hotel
Administration, Cornell University; Karen A. Jehn, Melbourne Business School, University of
Melbourne.
This research was supported by the Santa Clara University Thomas Terry Grant.
META-ANALYTICAL INTEGRATION OF RESEARCH ON DIVERSITY 2
We thank Christy Arsky for her assistance with data coding. We are grateful to Michelle
Campion and students from the “Managing Diverse Workforce” course at Santa Clara University
for helping with additional data collection.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Katerina Bezrukova,
School of Management, University at Buffalo, 274 Jacobs Management Center, Buffalo, NY
14260. E-mail: ybezruko@buffalo.edu
META-ANALYTICAL INTEGRATION OF RESEARCH ON DIVERSITY 3
Abstract
This meta-analysis of 260 independent samples assessed the effects of diversity training on 4
training outcomes over time and across characteristics of training context, design, and
participants. Models from the training literature and psychological theory on diversity were used
to generate theory-driven predictions. The results revealed an overall effect size (Hedges g) of
.38 with the largest effect being for reactions to training and cognitive learning; smaller effects
were found for behavioral and attitudinal/affective learning. Whereas the effects of diversity
training on reactions and attitudinal/affective learning decayed over time, training effects on
cognitive learning remained stable and even increased in some cases. While many of the
diversity training programs fell short in demonstrating effectiveness on some training
characteristics, our analysis does reveal that successful diversity training occurs. The positive
effects of diversity training were greater when training was complemented by other diversity
initiatives, targeted to both awareness and skills development, and conducted over a significant
period of time. The proportion of women in a training group was associated with more favorable
reactions to diversity training. Implications for policy and directions for future research on
diversity training are discussed.
Keywords: diversity training, diversity education, training effectiveness, bias, discrimination
META-ANALYTICAL INTEGRATION OF RESEARCH ON DIVERSITY 4
A Meta-Analytical Integration of Over 40 Years of Research on Diversity Training Evaluation
During a diversity training session, a female participant was forced to stand up in front of
her colleagues as an example of “the privileged White elite.” Later in the same session, the
consultant again asked her to stand proclaiming, “We all know who the most beautiful woman in
the room is. It’s the woman with the three private [school] degrees and the blond hair and the
blue eyes.” The woman remained in her seat, sobbing (MacDonald, 1993).
As this example illustrates, the effectiveness of some diversity training programs is open
to question. Yet, the increasing demand for diversity training due to changing workforce
demographics, globalization, continuing litigation, and other trends calls for a better
understanding of the types of programs that can be effective. The case of a gay Rutgers
University student’s suicide after being harassed by fellow students (Schwartz, 2010) and similar
incidents are a reminder that intimidation, discrimination, and threats to privacy based on
individual differences remain commonplace. Other incidents over the past few years—the
incident in Ferguson, Missouri, and the resulting civil unrest; the killings of New York police;
and the massacre at the offices of the newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris, France—while different
on many levels, all share one theme: They demonstrate how lives are at stake when differences
between people are not accepted. As a response to this social issue, diversity training has the
potential to make a huge, positive impact because diversity training strives to address prejudice,
stereotyping and other biases (King, Gulick, & Avery, 2010).
Diversity scholars have indeed given generous attention to this topic, providing
guidelines for successful implementation and evaluation of diversity training (e.g., Curtis,
Dreachslin, & Sinioris, 2007; Ely, 2004; Kalev, Dobbin, & Kelly, 2006; Kalinoski et al., 2013;
META-ANALYTICAL INTEGRATION OF RESEARCH ON DIVERSITY 5
Kulik & Roberson, 2008a, 2008b; Paluck, 2006; Paluck & Green, 2009). This is clearly an area
of psychology that can contribute to the enhancement of human well-being and society. The
American Psychological Association (APA) has described diversity education as one of the five
major learning goals for undergraduate education (American Psychological Association [APA],
2013). The variety and sheer numbers of training methods and designs employed on campuses
and in organizations attests to how widespread the practice of diversity education has become.
But what is the evidence that diversity training and education “works?” Reviews on
diversity training and education conclude the evidence is decidedly mixed. At worst, diversity
training has been shown to backfire in some cases by reinforcing stereotypes and prejudice
among students (Robb & Doverspike, 2001) or creating new problems for the company (Kaplan,
2006), such as when air traffic controllers sued the Federal Aviation Administration because they
had found diversity training traumatic (Epstein, 1994). Yet, other evidence suggests that
diversity training can be effective. There are studies demonstrating how diversity training can
reduce prejudice among students, enhance multicultural skills of nurses and medical students,
improve productivity and engagement of diverse employees, and help retention of women and
people of color in the workplace (cf. Anand & Winters, 2008; Rudman, Ashmore, & Gary, 2001;
Smith, Constantine, Dunn, Dinehart, & Montoya, 2006). But little has been done to reconcile the
opposing effects of diversity training to understand when and how diversity training promotes
positive changes in trainees’ learning outcomes.
Part of the problem is that researchers have approached the topic of diversity training
evaluation using a wide array of theoretical interests, conceptualizations, and evaluations, both
across and within disciplines (e.g., Bezrukova, Jehn, & Spell, 2012; Curtis et al., 2007; Kulik &
Roberson, 2008a; Paluck & Green, 2009; Pendry, Driscoll, & Field, 2007; Smith et al., 2006).