Complicated Opportunity
Males at the Tails: How Socioeconomic Status Shapes the Gender Gap
David Autor et al.
Economic Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
We document that the female advantage in childhood behavioural and academic outcomes is driven by gender gaps at the extremes of the outcome distribution. Using unconditional quantile regression, we show that family socioeconomic status (SES) particularly influences boys’ relative to girls’ outcomes at the lower tails of the outcome distribution, precisely where gender gaps are most pronounced. These relationships are not explained by school or neighbourhood factors, or parents’ differential treatment of boys. The disproportionate effect of SES on boys at the tails substantially contributes to the gender gap in high school dropout.
Demographic “Stickiness”: The Demographic Identity of Departing Group Members Influences Who Is Chosen to Replace Them
Edward Chang & Erika Kirgios
Management Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
People tasked with replacing a departing group member are disproportionately likely to choose a replacement with the same demographic identity, leading to demographic “stickiness” in group composition. We examine this effect in 2,163 U.S. federal judge appointments over 75 years, in the selection of 5,616 S&P 1500 board directors from 2014 to 2019, and in four preregistered experiments (n = 2,900). The patterns we document are generally consistent with both impact aversion (desires to minimize changes to group composition and dynamics) and diversity loss aversion (outsized concerns about losing ground on demographic diversity relative to interests in gaining ground). Ultimately, our results suggest that replacement decisions are influenced by loss-averse preferences regarding the demographic identities of departing group members. The propensity to choose new group members based on whether they demographically resemble their predecessors suggests that once progress toward diversification has occurred, it should be “sticky,” so backsliding is less likely than might otherwise be expected. An optimistic outlook is that one-time interventions to change group composition may have a lasting impact, and change agents committed to diversification may have enduring effects on equality beyond their tenure.
The Narrowing Gender Wage Gap Among Faculty at Public Universities in the U.S.
Cory Koedel & Trang Pham
SAGE Open, August 2023
Abstract:
We study the conditional gender wage gap among faculty at public research universities in the U.S. We begin by using a cross-sectional dataset from 2016 to replicate the long-standing finding in research that, conditional on rich controls, female faculty earn less than their male colleagues. Next, we construct a data panel to track the evolution of the wage gap through 2021. We show that the gender wage gap is narrowing. It declined by more than 50% over the course of our data panel to the point where by 2021, it is no longer detectable at conventional levels of statistical significance.
Gender Discrimination in Online Markets
Christopher Cotropia, Jonathan Masur & David Schwartz
American Law and Economics Review, forthcoming
Abstract:
We study whether a seller’s gender impacts the bargained-for price in a product market, specifically baseball cards. We isolate the seller’s gender using an online transaction exposing the buyer to the seller’s gender via the seller’s hand and name. In both a field experiment, in which we actually sell cards on eBay, and a laboratory experiment, in which we conduct surveys via Amazon Mechanical Turk, we find, contrary to current literature, that women sell baseball cards for a higher price and greater profit compared to men. The observed discrimination appears to be both statistical and taste based. These findings contribute to the law and economics literature on discrimination and have ramifications for the economic opportunities of women in the retail marketplace and for the law of gender discrimination.
The Impact of Hispanic Last Names and Identity on Labor Market Outcomes
Hussain Hadah
Tulane Working Paper, September 2023
Abstract:
In this paper, I study discrimination against Hispanics in the labor market. I compare the children of inter-ethnic marriages to study the impact of having a Hispanic last name. While males born to Hispanic father-White mothers earn 6 percentage points less than those born to White father-Hispanic mothers, the gap could be completely explained by educational differences. I also study the effect of identifying as Hispanic on earnings. I find that men with a Spanish-sounding last name who identify as Hispanic earn significantly less than those who do not identify as Hispanic, but the gap could also be explained by educational differences.
The Effect of Pay Range Disclosure Width on Gender Differences in Job Applications
Darren Bernard, Joe Croom & Benjamin Yang
University of Washington Working Paper, August 2023
Abstract:
Due to recent legislation and labor market pressures, pay range disclosures have become increasingly common on job postings in the United States. However, guidance on implementing these disclosures is limited or ambiguous, leading to substantial variation in their width. In this paper, we use a laboratory experiment to examine how the width of pay range disclosures on job postings affects application decisions of men versus women. While these disclosures are intended to close the wage gap between men and women, we predict and find that when companies widen the pay range disclosed in a job posting, they deter women more than men from applying in the first place. Results from both between-subjects and within-subjects tests show that women are significantly less willing to apply to a job when there is a wide pay range relative to a narrow pay range, while men appear indifferent between a wide and narrow pay range. Path analysis suggests that perception of pay inequity is a primary channel through which this interactive effect operates. Our findings have important implications for regulators considering implementing or amending pay disclosure laws and for companies navigating the emerging pay disclosure landscape.
Diversity protects: The role of school and classroom racial/ethnic diversity on the experience of peer victimization during the middle school years
Sandra Graham & Leslie Echols
Development and Psychopathology, forthcoming
Abstract:
The effects of school and classroom racial/ethnic diversity on peer victimization, self-blame, and perceived school safety were examined in a racially/ethnically diverse sample of students followed over the three years of middle school. Sixth grade students (N = 5,991, 52% female; M = 11.63 years) were recruited from 26 urban middle schools that systematically varied in racial/ethnic diversity. Based on student self-report, the sample was 31.6% Latino/Mexican, 19.6% White, 17.4%, Multiethnic/Biracial, 13% East/Southeast Asian, 10.9% Black, and 6.9% Other very small racial/ethnic groups. Each school had a structural diversity score based on the number and size of racial/ethnic groups enrolled. Using a novel method based on course schedules and class rosters, each student’s individual exposure to diversity in their classes was assessed to capture dynamic diversity. Latent growth modeling showed that structural school diversity and dynamic classroom diversity were both related to less victimization at the start of middle school and a decrease over time. Dynamic classroom diversity buffered the associations between victimization and self-blame and between victimization and perceiving school as unsafe. Dynamic classroom diversity was more protective than structural school diversity. Implications for practice, intervention and policies to promote school racial/ethnic diversity were discussed.
Echoes from the Past: The Impact of Racial Transference on Leader Selection during Succession
McKenzie Preston & Andrew Carton
Academy of Management Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
The dominant perspective used to understand racial bias in leader selection decisions is leader categorization theory (LCT). The received wisdom is twofold: evaluators prefer White leaders because they possess prototypical leader traits; however, during periods of decline, evaluators prefer racial minority leaders because their stereotypical traits (e.g., warmth) position them to galvanize followers. We argue that whereas LCT is useful for explaining racial bias in non-succession contexts, it is insufficient for explaining racial bias during succession. During succession, evaluators focus on the predecessor as the point of comparison when evaluating candidates. This causes stereotypes and prototypes to fade from evaluators' minds, only to be replaced by a different racial bias -- racial transference -- which occurs when evaluators falsely assume that a leader candidate has the same personality traits as a racially similar predecessor, and thus will perform similarly. Consequently, evaluators select (reject) candidates who are racially similar to successful (unsuccessful) predecessors. We find support for these predictions in an archival study, a pre-registered experiment, and three supplementary studies. Altogether, theory on racial transference establishes that racial bias during succession is driven by evaluators’ tendency to generalize between racially similar predecessors and candidates, even if such generalizations are inconsistent with prevailing stereotypes and prototypes.
Gender and Gender-Role Attitudes in Wage Negotiations: Evidence from an Online Experiment
Melisa Demirović, Jonathan Rogers & Blaine Robbins
Social Psychology Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
Gender differences in wage negotiations have been offered as a popular explanation for why the gender gap in pay persists in the United States. In this study, we use data from an artificial wage negotiation experiment (N = 307) to examine the relationship between gender and wage negotiations and to test whether gender-role attitudes moderate this relationship. We find that gender-role attitudes moderate how gender influences the decision to negotiate, but not the outcomes of negotiations, and that forced negotiations do not lead to additional gains for women regardless of their gender-role attitudes. We conclude with a discussion of implications and directions for future research.
Happy Talk: Is Common Diversity Rhetoric Effective Diversity Rhetoric?
Lisa Leslie et al.
Academy of Management Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
Despite their prevalence, diversity initiatives do not necessarily motivate employees to facilitate diversity goals. We advance understanding of diversity rhetoric -- defined as how leaders talk about diversity and its effects -- as a tool for motivating employees to foster diversity and inclusion. Prior work investigates rhetoric that emphasizes diversity in organizations is necessarily beneficial (value-in-diversity rhetoric), which is puzzling given the reality that diversity can have positive or negative consequences. We introduce the construct of contingent-diversity rhetoric, which emphasizes diversity is beneficial if its challenges are overcome, and thus captures the reality of diversity’s effects. Drawing from the psychology of the self, we theorize leaders use contingent-diversity rhetoric less commonly than value-in-diversity rhetoric, due to fear of appearing prejudiced. Drawing from the psychology of employee motivation, we theorize contingent-diversity rhetoric results in more diversity effort among employees than value-in-diversity rhetoric does because it increases perceptions that diversity goals are difficult to achieve. Four multi-method studies support the proposed descriptive-prescriptive paradox: contingent-diversity rhetoric is descriptively less common, but prescriptively more effective, than value-in-diversity rhetoric is. Our research advances theory on fostering diversity and inclusion in organizations and suggests leaders can increase employees’ diversity effort by changing the way they talk about diversity.
Discrimination in Hiring: Evidence from Retail Sales
Alan Benson, Simon Board & Moritz Meyer-ter-vehn
Review of Economic Studies, forthcoming
Abstract:
We propose a simple model of racial bias in hiring that encompasses three major theories: taste-based discrimination, screening discrimination, and complementary production. We derive a test that can distinguish these theories based on the mean and variance of workers’ productivity under managers of different pairs of races. We apply this test to study discrimination at a major U.S. retailer using data from 48,755 newly-hired commission-based salespeople. White, black and Hispanic managers within the same store are significantly more likely to hire workers of their own race, consistent with all three theories. For black-Hispanic pairs, productivity variance is lower for same-race pairs than cross-race pairs, implying that screening discrimination dominates. For white-Hispanic pairs, mean productivity is higher for same-race pairs, indicating a combination of screening discrimination and complementary production. For white-black pairs, biased hiring implies the presence of discrimination, but productivity results suggest the effects of the three forms of discrimination offset one another.
Gender, Pay Transparency, and Competitiveness: Why Salary Information Sometimes, but Not Always, Mitigates Gender Gaps in Salary Negotiations
Julia Bear et al.
Group Decision and Negotiation, October 2023, Pages 1143–1163
Abstract:
Although pay transparency is a widely accepted remedy for the gender pay gap, research has devoted little attention to the specific types of salary information that are available to job seekers and whether the framing of this information moderates gender differences in negotiation outcomes. We first conducted an exploratory study to investigate whether men and women differ in how much they rely on and perceive the usefulness of various sources of salary information. A survey of experienced MBA students revealed that, relative to women, men tend to place greater value on sources that involve direct social comparisons (e.g., professional networks) as opposed to more aggregate, general sources (e.g., websites). We then conducted a controlled experiment using a hypothetical job offer negotiation to determine whether framing salary information in terms of social comparison moderates gender gaps in salary requests. Our results supported a moderated mediation model, revealing that men requested higher salaries than women when presented with upward social comparison information (i.e., what a more qualified employee earns), but not downward (i.e., what a less qualified employee earns) or lateral comparison information (i.e., what a similarly qualified employee earns). These effects were driven by heightened competitiveness among men. We also discovered that both men and women experienced the greatest boost in competitiveness and salary requests when presented with downward social comparison information. Overall, salary information is effective in reducing gender gaps, but the effects are nuanced, as they depend on the social comparison inherent to the information.