A Research in The Air Transport Sector To Determine The Effect Of Stereotypes Towards Disabled Employees in Organizations On Inclusive Behavior

Öz

There are not enough studies in the management and organization literature investigating the effects of attitudes and stereotypes towards disabled employees in organizations on inclusive behaviors. There are basically two types of stereotypes towards disabled individuals: competence and warmth. The affection stereotype defines the degree to which a person likes a disabled individual, while the competence stereotype defines the degree to which they respect him/her. In the few studies in the literature, it’s emphasized that inclusive behaviors towards including disabled employees in work teams are important in revealing their true potential. Inclusive behaviors are additional role behaviors displayed by colleagues or coworkers towards disabled employees beyond the official role definition in the organization. Attitude is explained as a type of psychological tendency that includes negative or positive evaluations towards objects and individuals. The current study aims to determine whether attitudes towards disabled employees have a mediating effect on the effect of stereotypes on inclusive behaviors. In this context, the research was conducted with the participation of 316 employees in businesses operating in the air transportation sector. The results obtained show that colleagues with positive cognitive and behavioral attitudes towards disabled employees tend to exhibit inclusive behaviors at a high level.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Stereotypes;
• Attitudes Towards Disabled Employees;
• Inclusive Behaviors

ÖRGÜTLERDE ENGELLİ ÇALIŞANLARA YÖNELİK KALIP YARGILARIN KAPSAYICI DAVRANIŞLARA ETKİSİNİ BELİRLEMEYE YÖNELİK HAVA TAŞIMACILIĞI SEKTÖRÜNDE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Yönetim ve örgüt yazınında örgütlerdeki engelli çalışanlara ilişkin tutumların ve kalıp yargıların kapsayıcı davranışlara etkisini araştıran yeterli düzeyde çalışma bulunmamaktadır. Engelli bireylere yönelik temelde yetkinlik ve sevecenlik olmak üzere iki tür kalıp yargı vardır. Sevecenlik kalıp yargısı kişinin engelli bireyi beğenme, yetkinlik kalıp yargısı ise ona saygı duyma miktarını tanımlamaktadır. Yazındaki az sayıda araştırmada engelli çalışanların çalışma ekiplerine dâhil edilmesine yönelik kapsayıcı davranışların onların gerçek potansiyellerini ortaya çıkarılabilmesinde önem taşıdığı vurgulanmaktadır. Kapsayıcı davranışlar, örgütte resmi rol tanımının ötesinde meslektaşlar ya da çalışma arkadaşları tarafından engelli çalışanlara yönelik sergilenen ilave rol davranışlarıdır. Tutum ise nesnelere ve bireylere yönelik negatif veya pozitif değerlemeleri içeren bir tür psikolojik eğilim şeklinde açıklanmaktadır. Mevcut çalışma, kalıp yargıların kapsayıcı davranışlar üzerindeki etkisinde engelli çalışanlara yönelik tutumların aracı etkisinin olup olmadığını tespit etmek amaçlanmaktadır. Bu kapsamda araştırma, hava taşımacılığı üzerine faaliyet gösteren işletmelerdeki 316 çalışanın katılımı ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, engelli çalışanlara yönelik olumlu bilişsel ve davranışsal tutuma sahip meslektaşların kapsayıcı davranışlar sergileme eğiliminin, yüksek düzeyde olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, temelde meslektaş yargılarının aynı zamanda onların tutumlarını şekillendirdiğini işaret etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kalıp Yargılar
• Engelli Çalışanlara Yönelik Tutum
• Kapsayıcı Davranışlar

Kaynakça

1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude–behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research, Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.
2. Akardere, S. S. (2005). Employers' attitudes towards disabled employees (Master's thesis, Marmara University (Turkey).
3. Aktan, T. and Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2013). A social contextual approach to the stereotype content model: Stereotype contents in context, Turkish Psychology Writings, 16 (31), 15-31.
4. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New York: Addison-Wesley.
5. Ashmore, R. D., Del Boca, F. K., (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. (In D.L. Hamilton Eds.). Cognitive Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior, (pp. 1-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Basım, H., & Şeşen, H. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior scale adaptation and comparison study. Journal of Ankara University SBF, 61(4), 83-101.
7. Bellucci, M., Biggeri, M., Nitti, C., & Terenzi, L. (2023). Accounting for disability and work inclusion in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 98, 103526.
8. Bilgin, K. U. (2000). Problems of disabled people in working life and solution suggestions. Journal of Public - Labor Law and Economics, 1-19.

9. Bonaccio, S., Connelly, C. E., Gellatly, I. R., Jetha, A., & Martin Ginis, K. A. (2020). The participation of people with disabilities in the workplace across the employment cycle: Employer concerns and research evidence. Journal Of Business and Psychology, 35(2), 135-158.
10. Colella, A. (1994). Organizational socialization of employees with disabilities: Critical issues and implications for workplace interventions, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 4, 87-106.
11. Colella, A., & Varma, A. (1999). Disability-job fit stereotypes and the evaluation of persons with disabilities at work. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 9, 79-95.
12. Colella, A., & Boehm, S. A. (2026). Disability and Employment in Transition: Challenges, Innovations, and Opportunities. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 13(1), 277-307.
13. Coles, S., and Scior, K. (2012). Public attitudes towards people with intellectual disabilities: A qualitative comparison of White British & South Asian People. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 25, 177– 188.
14. Çınar-Altıntaş, F. (2006). An analysis to determine the dimensions of organizational citizenship behavior of nurses as service workers. Journal of Management Sciences, 4(2), 81-90.
15. Çınar-Altıntaş, F. (2016). The Impact of Gender Roles on Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Work, Power: Journal of Industrial Relations and Human Resources, 18(4).
16. Çınar-Altıntaş, F. and Kavurmacı-Aytaç, C. (2018). Analysis of perceived gender stereotypes about managerial characteristics, Ankara University Journal of SBF, 73(2), 527-543.
17. Demirdag, A. (2021). The relationship between stereotype content and behavior regarding Syrian refugees: the mediating role of emotions and moral exclusion [Ph.D. Thesis, Ankara University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology (Social Psychology)]. 1-176.
18. Dobusch, L. (2021). The inclusivity of inclusion approaches: A relational perspective on inclusion and exclusion in organizations. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 379-396.
19. Dwertmann, D. J., Boehm, S. A., McAlpine, K. L., & Kulkarni, M. (2025). Organizational burden or catalyst for ıdeas? Disability as a driver of cognitive flexibility and creativity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 00018392251326110.
20. Fels, D., Desai, S., Whitfield, M., Pennefather, P., & Hibbard, E. (2026). Business Models and Inclusive Design. In Inclusive Design Premises, Policies, Protocols, and Practices: From Usability to Empowerment (pp. 49-59). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
21. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., and Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878– 902.
22. Fiske, S. T. (2015). Intergroup biases: A focus on stereotype content. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 45-50.
23. Gandía, J. A. G., de Lucas Ancillo, A., & del Val Núñez, M. T. (2025). Knowledge and artificial intelligence on employee behaviour advancing safe and respectful workplace. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 10(4), 100750.
24. Gould, R., Harris, S. P., Mullin, C., & Jones, R. (2020). Disability, diversity, and corporate social responsibility: Learning from recognized leaders in inclusion. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 52(1), 29-42.
25. Kant, S., & Ashuro, T. (2026). Fostering Inclusive Leadership: Effect on OCB by Mediation of Workplace Well-Being in the Horn of Africa. In Leading Inclusive Workplaces Through Digital Transformation and Organizational Change (pp. 225-250). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
26. Kar, S., Yadav, M., & Panda, T. K. (2025). Inclusive organizational behaviour–the dynamic rules of building new workplaces. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 55(2), 492-510.
27. Krueger, J. I., & Funder, D. C. (2004). Towards a balanced social psychology: Causes, consequences, and cures for the problem-seeking approach to social behavior and cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(3), 313-327.
28. Kuknor, S. C., & Bhattacharya, S. (2022). Inclusive leadership: new age leadership to foster organizational inclusion. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(9), 771-797.
29. Lee, W. E., Roccapriore, A. Y., Lohrke, F. T., & Reutzel, C. R. (2026). Physical Disability in the Workplace: A Comprehensive Review and Unifying Framework. Journal of Management, 01492063251406535.
30. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York, NY: Harcourt.
31. Lu, J., Yan, S., Ogbonnaya, C., Gorny, T., Song, M., & Wang, C. (2025). Unpacking the linkage between green volunteering and ethical leadership behavior in managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 200(4), 911-926.
32. Mendoza, N. B., & Yan, Z. (2025). From beliefs to behaviors: Conceptualizing and assessing students’ practices that reflect a growth mindset. Social Psychology of Education, 28(1), 73(1-35).
33. Mullin, C., Gould, R., Harris, S. P., & Jones, R. (2023). Disability and the diversity framework in the post-pandemic workplace. In Disability in the Time of Pandemic (pp. 211-230). Emerald Publishing Limited.
34. Nelissen, P.T.J.H., Ruitenbeek, U. R. H.G. M.C. and Zijlstra, F. R.H. (2016). How and when stereotypes relate to inclusive behavior toward people with disabilities. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,14(27),1610-1625.
35. Organ, D.W. (1988). A restatement of the satisfaction-performance hypothesis. Journal of management, 14(4), 547-557.
36. Randel, A. E. (2025). Inclusion in the workplace: A review and research agenda. Group & Organization Management, 50(1), 119-162.
37. Sanclemente, F. J., Gamero, N., Medina, F. J., & Mendoza‐Denton, R. (2024). A multilevel model of job inclusion of employees with disabilities: The role of organizational socialization tactics, coworkers social support, and an inclusive team context. Applied Psychology, 73(3), 887-909.
38. Sepetis, A. (2026). International Organizations Policies for Inclusive Sustainable Development. In Theoretical and Applied Approaches to Economic Geography and Spatial Planning (pp. 85-116). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
39. Stone, D. L., & Colella, A. (1996). A model of factors affecting the treatment of individuals with disabilities in organizations. Academy of management review, 21(2), 352-401.
40. Usman, A., Hanif, M. Z., & Ahmed, S. (2025). Fostering challenge-oriented organizational citizenship behavior through inclusive leadership: A serial mediation model of psychological safety and work engagement. International Journal of Social Sciences Bulletin, 3(1), 582-596.
41. Van Laer, K., Jammaers, E., & Hoeven, W. (2022). Disabling organizational spaces: Exploring the processes through which spatial environments disable employees with impairments. Organization, 29(6), 1018-1035.
42. Williams, L., & Anderson, S. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.