Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The disparate impact theory is in contrast with disparate treatment provisions under civil rights laws as well as the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. For example, if an hypothetical fire department used a 100-pound test, that policy might disproportionately exclude female job applicants from employment.
Justice Alito argued that the Fair Housing Act never authorized such disparate impact claims in 1968, when the law was enacted, "[a]nd nothing has happened since then to change the law's meaning". [16] Justice Thomas also issued a separate dissenting opinion in which he questioned Justice Kennedy's reliance upon Griggs v.
On certiorari, the United States Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case for further proceedings. Seven members of the Court (1) agreed that disparate impact analysis may be applied to allegedly discriminatory subjective or discretionary employment practices, and (2) agreed regarding certain aspects of the evidentiary standards applicable in such case
Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971), was a court case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 14, 1970. It concerned employment discrimination and the disparate impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971. [1]
The theory has spawned basic research on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and the facilitation and undermining of volitional motivation. SDT has been widely applied on research and interventions in work organizations, schools, clinical settings, virtual environments and sports, among other areas of application.
Social Impact Theory was created by Bibb Latané in 1981 and consists of four basic rules which consider how individuals can be "sources or targets of social influence". [1] Social impact is the result of social forces, including the strength of the source of impact, the immediacy of the event, and the number of sources exerting the impact. [2]
Positive youth development originated from ecological systems theory to focus on the strengths of adolescents. [11] Central to this theory is the understanding that there are multiple environments that influence children.
Three variables have been suggested to impact this motivation: 1) the value of the considered life domain, the importance and relevance the individual gives to a domain (i.e., higher education, family life); 2) expectancy/confidence of hopes, goals and plans occurring and optimism towards these outcomes; 3) internal control is the extent to ...