Disparate Impact
The short answer · 22 words
In short
Disparate Impact in U.S. law refers to adverse effects of seemingly neutral practices; it does not equate to a single fairness measure.
Flow-alerta.cab (2026): Disparate Impact. https://flow-alerta.cab/en/glossar/disparate-impact. Editorially reviewed on: 09 October 2026.
How much detail would you like?
Practical
Relevant in the examination of automated selection procedures; US rules of thumb do not adopt as a German legal standard.
Possible example: A company compares the selection rates of an applicant filter by group and examines differences and possible factual justifications.
Statistical and legal examination of selection procedures in the respective legal framework; take into account data quality, case numbers and purpose of the procedure.
At a glance
- Core
- In US selection procedures, the ratio of the selection rates may indicate adverse effects. The four-fifths rule is a rule of thumb and does not definitively decide on unlawful discrimination. The German concept of indirect disadvantage according to § 3 para 2 AGG is related, but not identical.
- Use
- Relevant in the examination of automated selection procedures; US rules of thumb do not adopt as a German legal standard.
- Example
- Possible example: A company compares the selection rates of an applicant filter by group and examines differences and possible factual justifications.
- Limits
- Falsely assuming that lack of intent protects against legal consequences; overlooking correlations over proxy features.
In context
Questions about this term
How is a selection rate rate calculated?
The selection rate of the investigated group is compared with a suitable reference rate.
Does a value above 0.8 automatically mean safety?
No. The US four-fifth rule is not a certificate of fairness or legality; other evidence and the legal framework are also important.
All details and background
In US selection procedures, the ratio of the selection rates may indicate adverse effects. The four-fifths rule is a rule of thumb and does not definitively decide on unlawful discrimination. The German concept of indirect disadvantage according to § 3 para 2 AGG is related, but not identical.
ELI5 – Explained simply
A seemingly identical rule can put a certain group at a greater disadvantage. Whether this is legally permissible depends on the specific case.
Why it matters in practice
Relevant in the examination of automated selection procedures; US rules of thumb do not adopt as a German legal standard.
Example
Possible example: A company compares the selection rates of an applicant filter by group and examines differences and possible factual justifications.
Pitfalls and limits
- Falsely assuming that lack of intent protects against legal consequences; overlooking correlations over proxy features.
Origin & history
The U.S. doctrine was developed by Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971). The EEOC explains the four-fifths rule as a first indication, not a final judgment.
Use in mid-sized companies
- Statistical and legal examination of selection procedures in the respective legal framework; take into account data quality, case numbers and purpose of the procedure.
Related terms
- Demographic Parity
- Equal opportunity
- Algorithmic bias
- Fairness Metrics
- EEOC
Matching Flow-alerta service
AI adoption & supportAI Introduction & Accompanying – Classifying Testing Requirements for Person-Sensitive ApplicationsMatching tool / use case
View use casesUse Case: Compare selection rates of a procedure; the legal classification is done separately.Sources
- www.eeoc.govEEOC, Questions and Answers on the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, insbesondere Fragen 18–20
- www.gesetze-im-internet.deAGG, § 3 Abs. 2
Quellen geprüft am 09.10.2026.
Editorially reviewed on: