People with and without disabilities prefer plain-language ads, finds first study of its kind
An office job calls for a “fast-paced, fit and energetic” person who can “stand out” in a crowd. How likely are you to apply?
A new University of Guelph study, led by Dr. Melissa Walker as part of her PhD, says that more neutral language might be key to drawing in applicants of all ability levels.
To analyze more than 1,800 job postings in U.S. and Canada, researchers in the Department of Psychology developed an ableist dictionary, with phrases like “blind spots,” “give a leg up” or “jump in with both feet” that can be off-putting for those with disabilities or imply fitness and ability levels that exclude many people.
Compiling such words and phrases with subject matter experts, researchers assessed the effect of ableist language in a job ad on a person’s likelihood to apply.
“Ableism is really ingrained in a lot of the words we use without us realizing it,” says Walker, who completed the project under the supervision of Dr. Deborah Powell, College of Social and Applied Human Sciences. “Words like ‘vision’ and ‘blindness’ tend to be used in ways that are positive for vision, negative for blindness.
“Our study shows people prefer just more straightforward wording in job ads, as opposed to that corporate-speak that may point to a lack of inclusivity.”
Ableist language present in 84 per cent of job ads
The study, published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, found that ableist language was present in 84% of more than 1,800 online job postings across platforms like Indeed and LinkedIn. Only 19% included equal employment opportunity (EEO) statements, and less than 10% of these included accommodation statements.
Notably, these job postings specifically did not include physical requirements like heavy lifting.
Researchers also created fictitious job postings, inserting or deleting certain phrases. A “fast-paced” environment might have been edited to “a changing” environment. Participants recruited through a survey then read different ads and rated how likely they were to apply.
As predicted, people with disabilities were significantly less likely to apply to jobs containing ableist language. In contrast, they were more likely to apply to jobs containing EEO and accommodation statements.
What surprised researchers, however, was that people without disabilities also preferred more neutral ads and those with EEO and accommodation statements.
Researchers found this was true even when they started manipulating salary levels.
“While people were more likely to apply to jobs when pay was higher, it didn’t negate the impact of ableism,” Walker says. “You can’t just add more pay and assume it cancels out the language in your job ads.”
Following new Ontario legislation requiring employers to disclose salary in job postings for jobs paying under $200,000, the study could have timely implications for organizations in Canada.
“With greater pay transparency today, companies should be aware of the different signals they’re sending out to applicants,” Walker says.
Certain words signal a culture of exclusion
Powell, principal investigator and professor of organizational psychology, says that the work is informed by a concept called signalling theory – how people interpret communication signals when they have limited information.
“Job ads can signal a lot about an organization,” says Powell, “so the clearer and more accurate signals you can give out, the more likely you’re going to get the applicants who are the right fit.”
Researchers believe ableist language sends negative signals to all applicants about the inclusivity of the workplace, even to those without disabilities.
They might overlap with ageist language, deterring older applicants for instance, or simply exclude certain personality types.
As one participant said, “Fast-paced, flexible work requirements negatively influenced my decision to apply for that company, as that kind of work is not suitable for me. I am a slow and methodical person.”
‘Strip out the buzzwords’
Continuing recent research into gendered language in job ads, Walker wanted to consider ableist language in the same context; her study is the first to do so.
She hopes that the ableist dictionary that they developed can continue to evolve with more perspectives. One day, it might become a more comprehensive tool for organizations to conduct their own language checks.
For now, Walker says, there is an immediate step any employer can take: strip out the buzzwords.
“The easiest low-hanging fruit is those colloquial sayings related to ability – ‘jump right in’ or ‘stand out in a crowd,’” says Walker. “These punchy phrases don’t really add much meaning. We can use more plain language instead, and that helps everyone.”
This work was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Department of Psychology’s “Workplace Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Graduate Research Fund.”