ABSTRACT
Recently, Thomas, Edwards, Perry, and David (1998) conducted a detailed content analysis of fi tness report (i.e., performance evaluation) narratives for a sample of male Navy offi cers. Consistent with fi ndings from earlier studies on gender differences (e.g., Thomas, Holmes, & Carroll, 1983), Thomas et al. found statistically signifi cant racial differences in some of the descriptors ascribed to black offi cers and those ascribed to white offi cers.1 White Navy offi cers, for instance, were more likely to be described as “Thorough,” whereas black offi cers were more likely to be described as “Dedicated.” Arguably, both descriptors appear to be favorable assessments. In discussing the pattern of results, Thomas et al. noted that although clear evidence of racial bias was not demonstrated, the fi ndings did indicate the performance and potential of black offi cers were viewed differently (emphasis added) from that of white offi cers. Operating under the assumption that certain traits probably had little effect on selection boards (the process used to determine promotions), Thomas et al. asked several Navy offi cers with selection board experience to evaluate the lists of traits used to describe black offi cers and white offi cers.2 These offi cers concluded that both lists were “equally positive”—neither list appearing to be more favorable than the other.
