Search

We conduct a large-scale natural field experiment with a Fortune 500 company to test several light-touch approaches to attract minorities to high-profile positions. A total of 5,000 prospective applicants were randomized into treatments that vary a small portion of recruiting materials. We find that self-selection at two early-career stages exhibits a substantial race gap. We then show that this gap can be strongly influenced by several treatments, with some closing the race gap and increasing application rates of minorities by 40% and others being particularly effective for minority women. These effects are not accompanied by any declines in application rates of majority group job seekers. In addition, we do not find that endorsing the "business case" for diversity reduces the race gap or raises application rates by minorities or women. The heterogeneities we find by gender, race, and career stage shed light on the underlying drivers of self-selection barriers among minorities. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, behavioral economics and decision analysis. Funding: The authors thank the Brigham Young University College of Family, Home, and Social Science for generous research support. This research was funded in part by the Lowe Institute of Political Economy at Claremont McKenna College as well as the Australian Research Council Future Fellowship grant Nr. 190100252. Christina Rott thanks the School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, for research support through the Hermine Weijland Fellowship. Supplemental Material: The data files and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4909. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyze the relationship between occupational gender composition and gender discrimination in recruitment and investigate whether there is hiring discrimination against men in female‐dominated occupations. We do this with a large‐scale field experiment where we submitted more than 12,000 job applications for 12 occupations in Australia, varying the gender of the applicants. Men received around 50% more callbacks than women in male‐dominated occupations, while they received over 40% fewer callbacks in female‐dominated occupations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Despite the increase of women in surgical fields and resources toward advancing women, there is no corresponding increased representation of women in higher academic ranks and leadership. The following hypotheses are explored: 1) men and women build/maintain different relationship networks and 2) women are not similarly included within the organization and do not receive the same sponsorship as male counterparts. Study Design: Prospective observational study. Methods: Three months of prospective, passive organizational network data of full‐time faculty at an academic medical center were collected by analysis of deidentified internal email communication logs. Data were analyzed and strength of network relationships was assessed using algorithms measuring the tie, or connection, score. Data analysis was performed with standard statistical methods and multivariable regression models, comparing network relationships based on gender and academic rank. Results: Among 345 full‐time faculties from surgical departments, 45.2% were female Assistant Professors, but only 9.8% were female full Professors. Men had 55% more network relationships with other men than women had with men. Gender homophily was particularly pronounced at the higher academic ranks. Men compared to women in higher ranks had 157% more network relationships to other men in lower ranks. Multivariable regression models suggested direct association of these gender differences in relationships with more women in lower academic ranks. Conclusion: Higher academic rank can be predicted by male gender, tenure, and number of meaningful relationships. Women are underrepresented at the leadership level in surgical departments. Gender homophily is present in collaboration networks among academic surgeons and is associated with impeded female career advancement. Level of Evidence: 2 Laryngoscope, 132:20–25, 2022 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Overfishing has become a major global issue that endangers ecosystems and the livelihoods of millions of people. Weak enforcement and illicit fishing behaviors limit the effectiveness of institutional arrangements designed to curb overfishing. In this paper, we designed and tested a series of potential interventions to reduce overexploitation driven by illegal fishing. We use surveys, interviews, and common pool resource experiments to investigate the behavior of Mexican fishermen in the upper part of the Gulf of Baja California. We find that resource exploitation can be reduced using a mechanism that regroups fishermen according to their past fishing exploitation levels. More precisely, we observe that the announcement of this mechanism and the actual regrouping reduce common pool exploitation, regardless of group composition. Further experimental evidence shows that the regrouping intervention also achieves the desired outcomes in environments with informational asymmetries or regrouping imperfections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]