Distributive justice criteria and social categorization processes predict healthcare allocation bias.

Objectives: Drawing on theories of distributive justice and intergroup discrimination, we examined how much distributive justice criterion and racial group membership contribute to bias in healthcare allocation decisions, by testing a theoretical model that specifies perceived stereotypicality and individual responsibility as a serial mediation process in the relationship between disease's contraction controllability (controllable vs. non‐controllable) and bias in medical decision‐making. Method: White Portuguese medical students (N = 213) participated in an online experimental study conducted in two phases. In phase 1, we manipulated the cause of disease contagion and the salience of patient's racial categorization, and measured the stereotypicality of behaviour. In phase 2, we assessed perceived responsibility and likelihood of recommending medical treatment. Results: Controllable (vs. non‐controllable) contraction behaviours in phase 1 were perceived as more stereotypic. As a spillover effect, more stereotypical behaviours in phase 1 predicted more patient's responsibility for their disease in phase 2. Importantly, controllable behaviours of disease contraction in phase 1 negatively affected recommendations for medical treatment in phase 2; and this negative effect was serially mediated by the stereotypicality of behaviour and patient responsibility. Furthermore, patients' skin colour moderated this process, meaning that perceptions of controllable behaviour as more stereotypic were stronger for Black than for White patients. Conclusions: This research shows how stereotyping and social categorization bias allocation decisions through the patient's level of responsibility in decision‐making processes. The findings are discussed in light of principles of distributive justice and the literature on intergroup relations with respect to racial disparities in health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]