Multiple disadvantages: An empirical test of intersectionality theory in eeo litigation

Rachel Kahn Best, Lauren B. Edelman, Linda Hamilton Krieger, Scott R Eliason

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

68 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A rich theoretical literature describes the disadvantages facing plaintiffs who suffer multiple, or intersecting, axes of discrimination. This article extends extant literature by distinguishing two forms of intersectionality: demographic intersectionality, in which overlapping demographic characteristics produce disadvantages that are more than the sum of their parts, and claim intersectionality, in which plaintiffs who allege discrimination on the basis of intersecting ascriptive characteristics (e.g., race and sex) are unlikely to win their cases. To date, there has been virtually no empirical research on the effects of either type of intersectionality on litigation outcomes. This article addresses that lacuna with an empirical analysis of a representative sample of judicial opinions in equal employment opportunity (EEO) cases in the U.S. federal courts from 1965 through 1999. Using generalized ordered logistic regression and controlling for numerous variables, we find that both intersectional demographic characteristics and legal claims are associated with dramatically reduced odds of plaintiff victory. Strikingly, plaintiffs who make intersectional claims are only half as likely to win their cases as plaintiffs who allege a single basis of discrimination. Our findings support and elaborate predictions about the sociolegal effects of intersectionality.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)991-1025
Number of pages35
JournalLaw and Society Review
Volume45
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2011

Fingerprint

intersectionality
discrimination
legal claim
employment opportunity
empirical research
logistics
regression

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Multiple disadvantages : An empirical test of intersectionality theory in eeo litigation. / Best, Rachel Kahn; Edelman, Lauren B.; Krieger, Linda Hamilton; Eliason, Scott R.

In: Law and Society Review, Vol. 45, No. 4, 12.2011, p. 991-1025.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Best, Rachel Kahn ; Edelman, Lauren B. ; Krieger, Linda Hamilton ; Eliason, Scott R. / Multiple disadvantages : An empirical test of intersectionality theory in eeo litigation. In: Law and Society Review. 2011 ; Vol. 45, No. 4. pp. 991-1025.
@article{4228137ff14249a0aa327bcb346a6f31,
title = "Multiple disadvantages: An empirical test of intersectionality theory in eeo litigation",
abstract = "A rich theoretical literature describes the disadvantages facing plaintiffs who suffer multiple, or intersecting, axes of discrimination. This article extends extant literature by distinguishing two forms of intersectionality: demographic intersectionality, in which overlapping demographic characteristics produce disadvantages that are more than the sum of their parts, and claim intersectionality, in which plaintiffs who allege discrimination on the basis of intersecting ascriptive characteristics (e.g., race and sex) are unlikely to win their cases. To date, there has been virtually no empirical research on the effects of either type of intersectionality on litigation outcomes. This article addresses that lacuna with an empirical analysis of a representative sample of judicial opinions in equal employment opportunity (EEO) cases in the U.S. federal courts from 1965 through 1999. Using generalized ordered logistic regression and controlling for numerous variables, we find that both intersectional demographic characteristics and legal claims are associated with dramatically reduced odds of plaintiff victory. Strikingly, plaintiffs who make intersectional claims are only half as likely to win their cases as plaintiffs who allege a single basis of discrimination. Our findings support and elaborate predictions about the sociolegal effects of intersectionality.",
author = "Best, {Rachel Kahn} and Edelman, {Lauren B.} and Krieger, {Linda Hamilton} and Eliason, {Scott R}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00463.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "991--1025",
journal = "Law and Society Review",
issn = "0023-9216",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multiple disadvantages

T2 - An empirical test of intersectionality theory in eeo litigation

AU - Best, Rachel Kahn

AU - Edelman, Lauren B.

AU - Krieger, Linda Hamilton

AU - Eliason, Scott R

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - A rich theoretical literature describes the disadvantages facing plaintiffs who suffer multiple, or intersecting, axes of discrimination. This article extends extant literature by distinguishing two forms of intersectionality: demographic intersectionality, in which overlapping demographic characteristics produce disadvantages that are more than the sum of their parts, and claim intersectionality, in which plaintiffs who allege discrimination on the basis of intersecting ascriptive characteristics (e.g., race and sex) are unlikely to win their cases. To date, there has been virtually no empirical research on the effects of either type of intersectionality on litigation outcomes. This article addresses that lacuna with an empirical analysis of a representative sample of judicial opinions in equal employment opportunity (EEO) cases in the U.S. federal courts from 1965 through 1999. Using generalized ordered logistic regression and controlling for numerous variables, we find that both intersectional demographic characteristics and legal claims are associated with dramatically reduced odds of plaintiff victory. Strikingly, plaintiffs who make intersectional claims are only half as likely to win their cases as plaintiffs who allege a single basis of discrimination. Our findings support and elaborate predictions about the sociolegal effects of intersectionality.

AB - A rich theoretical literature describes the disadvantages facing plaintiffs who suffer multiple, or intersecting, axes of discrimination. This article extends extant literature by distinguishing two forms of intersectionality: demographic intersectionality, in which overlapping demographic characteristics produce disadvantages that are more than the sum of their parts, and claim intersectionality, in which plaintiffs who allege discrimination on the basis of intersecting ascriptive characteristics (e.g., race and sex) are unlikely to win their cases. To date, there has been virtually no empirical research on the effects of either type of intersectionality on litigation outcomes. This article addresses that lacuna with an empirical analysis of a representative sample of judicial opinions in equal employment opportunity (EEO) cases in the U.S. federal courts from 1965 through 1999. Using generalized ordered logistic regression and controlling for numerous variables, we find that both intersectional demographic characteristics and legal claims are associated with dramatically reduced odds of plaintiff victory. Strikingly, plaintiffs who make intersectional claims are only half as likely to win their cases as plaintiffs who allege a single basis of discrimination. Our findings support and elaborate predictions about the sociolegal effects of intersectionality.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=83255162178&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=83255162178&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00463.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00463.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:83255162178

VL - 45

SP - 991

EP - 1025

JO - Law and Society Review

JF - Law and Society Review

SN - 0023-9216

IS - 4

ER -