Field experimental evidence on gender discrimination in hiring: Biased as Heckman and Siegelman predicted?

Arbeitspapier

Correspondence studies are nowadays viewed as the most compelling avenue to test for hiring discrimination. However, these studies suffer from one fundamental methodological problem, as formulated by Heckman and Siegelman (The Urban Institute audit studies: Their methods and findings. In M. Fix, and R. Struyk (Eds.), Clear and convincing evidence: Measurement of discrimination in America, 1993), namely the bias in their results in case of group differences in the variance of unobserved determinants of hiring outcomes. In this study, the authors empirically investigate this bias in the context of gender discrimination. They do not find significant evidence for the predicted bias.

Object Details

• Language: Englisch

References and Relationships

• Bibliographic citation: Series: Economics Discussion Papers ; No. 2015-44

Classification and Topics

• Classification: Wirtschaft ; Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination ; Labor Discrimination ; Personnel Economics: Firm Employment Decisions; Promotions ; Labor Contracts ; Field Experiments
• Subject: correspondence experiments ; gender discrimination ; unobserved heterogeneity

Contributors, Places and Time

• Event: Geistige Schöpfung
• (who): Baert, Stijn
• Event: Veröffentlichung
• (who): Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
• (where): Kiel
• (when): 2015

Further information

• Handle: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/110920
• Last update: 10.03.2025, 11:41 AM CET