A study examined discrimination in a grocery delivery platform. Customer ratings affected whether drivers received priority access to high-paying orders. Researchers noted that some customers left lower ratings after minor issues when the driver's name suggested membership in Group Z. The platform also automatically reduced a driver's visibility after a small number of low ratings, without auditing for bias. The report referenced cumulative disadvantage. Which conclusion is most consistent with cumulative disadvantage at the institutional level?
- Biased ratings are purely individual discrimination and cannot affect institutional outcomes.
- An automated visibility penalty can institutionalize biased customer ratings by converting them into persistent reductions in opportunities for certain drivers. (correct answer)
- If the algorithm is blind to names, it cannot reproduce any inequality.
- Cumulative disadvantage means a single discriminatory event fully determines a person's long-term outcomes.
Explanation: This question tests understanding of discrimination at individual and institutional levels (Foundational Concept 8C). Discrimination can be individual in ratings and institutionalized through algorithms perpetuating bias. The vignette notes biased customer ratings and visibility penalties, referencing cumulative disadvantage. Choice B is consistent as the algorithm institutionalizes biases cumulatively, aligning with disadvantage accumulation. A distractor like C assumes blindness eliminates inequality, misconstruing reproduction. Individual discrimination features biased inputs like ratings. Institutional discrimination is seen in automated processes amplifying prior disparities.