[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-595472-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-595472-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","balance-between-merit-and-equity-in-academic-hiring-decisions-vol-52-issue-2-2010","Balance between merit and equity in academic hiring decisions - Vol 52 - Issue 2 - 2010","","Examines how language used in Australian university tenure-stream job advertisements balances academic merit and employment equity. A judgemental content analysis approach was applied in which three judges rated 810 Australian tenure-stream advertisements on seven-point scales for equity and merit. The study tested effects of time (1970-1973, 1984-1987, 2000-2003), institution type and discipline. Inter-rater reliabilities were high (≥0.92), and an “equivalence hypothesis” was not supported, suggesting complex policy and latent influences. Recommends administrator sensitivity when formulating hiring policies.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/balance-between-merit-and-equity-in-academic-hiring-decisions-vol-52-issue-2-2010/595472/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/balance-between-merit-and-equity-in-academic-hiring-decisions-vol-52-issue-2-2010/595472.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Well Done","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-03","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What method was used to evaluate merit and equity in the advertisements?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Three judges applied judgemental content analysis by rating 810 Australian tenure-stream advertisements on seven-point magnitude scales for equity and merit.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which factors were tested for their influence on merit and equity ratings?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The study examined effects of time (1970-1973, 1984-1987, 2000-2003), institution type (including major research universities and other categories), and academic discipline (physical sciences and technology, social sciences, and humanities).",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What did the study conclude about the relationship between merit and equity?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Inter-rater reliabilities were high (≥0.92), and the equivalence hypothesis (that merit and equity are the same) was not supported. Merit and equity criteria increased over time and were influenced by institution type and discipline, though in different ways.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},595472,1792430892,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":106,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},5909892210082,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/56001069da27c9f41e8?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1789614185077863061","A U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \nBalance between merit and equity in academic hiring decisions  \nJudgemental content analysis applied to the phraseology of Australian tenure-stream advertisements in comparison with Canadian advertisements  \nGregory J Boyle Bond University, Queensland  \nJohn J Furedy  \nUniversity of Toronto, Canada  \nDavid L Neumann, H Rae Westbury & Magnus Reiestad Griffith University, Queensland  \nThe wording of university academic job advertisements can reflect a commitment to equity (affirmative action) as opposed to academic merit in hiring decisions. The method of judgemental content analysis was applied by having three judges rate 810 Australian tenurestream advertisements on seven-point magnitude scales of equity and merit. The influence of time (Years: 1970-1973; 1984-1987; 2000- 2003), institution (major research universities, the self-designated Group of Eight (Go8); colleges of advanced education and institutes of technology; regional and distance education institutions), as well as academic discipline (physical sciences and technology; social sciences; humanities) on ratings were also examined. Inter-rater reliabilities were high (≥ 0.92), and the ‘equivalence hypothesis’(that merit and equity are the same) was not supported. Merit and equity criteria increased over time and were influenced by institution type and academic discipline, although in different ways. While some effects could be viewed as being due to rational policy decisions, other significant effects suggested influences that are more difficult to explain. University administrators need to be sensitive to the balance between merit and equity when formulating hiring policies.  \nIntroduction  \nIn the early 1970s, the introduction of public advertisements for all academic positions in North American and Australian universities brought about a substantial change in the hiring process. In principle, the reform increased the possibility that academic merit (i.e. what the candidate knew rather than who the candidate  \nknew) would provide the basis of selection for academic positions. In the early 1980s, in addition to the goal of merit in appointments, a goal variously described as‘diversity’,‘affirmative action’, or ‘equity’ was adopted to a greater or lesser extent by universities. Affirmative action policies applied to tenure-stream academic appointments involve a certain degree of preference for individuals who are members of particular sub-  \nvol. 52, no. 2, 2010 Balance between merit and equity in academic hiring decisions, Gregory J Boyle et al. 49  \nA U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \ngroups (e.g. based on gender or ethnic background) . These policies were intended to produce ‘equity’ in outcomes of the proportions of competition winners from within the specified subgroups, rather than just in opportunities to apply for such competitions.  \nAny preferential treatment given to certain applicants based on their subgroup membership can be interpreted as being incompatible with a merit-based system (Kranz 1974).The conflict between group-preference and merit policies is especially problematic when merit itself involves complex,expert judgements, as is the case for academic tenure-stream positions.The degree of commitment to employment equity policy in tenure-stream hiring can vary considerably along the equity-merit continuum. In some universities, for example, ‘equity officers’ exert direct pressure on departmental chairs regarding both the wording of job advertisements and decisions on appointments.  \nInstitutional commitment to affirmative action is partly influenced by conscious decisions made by university administrations. However, there may be less conscious, latent influences that play a role in determining the point of ‘balance’ universities settle on regarding the somewhat conflicting principles of equity and merit. It is possible to study systematically the differential adaptat","cbCaicukkrytpuOC","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicukkrytpuOC","pdf",311191,"English","# Introduction\n## Merit and equity in hiring policies\n## Judgemental content analysis method\n## Factors examined: time, institution, discipline\n## Results and implications","[{\"question\":\"What method was used to evaluate merit and equity in the advertisements?\",\"answer\":\"Three judges applied judgemental content analysis by rating 810 Australian tenure-stream advertisements on seven-point magnitude scales for equity and merit.\"},{\"question\":\"Which factors were tested for their influence on merit and equity ratings?\",\"answer\":\"The study examined effects of time (1970-1973, 1984-1987, 2000-2003), institution type (including major research universities and other categories), and academic discipline (physical sciences and technology, social sciences, and humanities).\"},{\"question\":\"What did the study conclude about the relationship between merit and equity?\",\"answer\":\"Inter-rater reliabilities were high (≥0.92), and the equivalence hypothesis (that merit and equity are the same) was not supported. Merit and equity criteria increased over time and were influenced by institution type and discipline, though in different ways.\"}]","Balance between merit and equity in academic hiring decisions - Vol 52 - Issue 2 - 2010 | PDF",1792081207,18]