No abstract

Despite women's rising participation in higher education in recent decades, gender inequalities in the labor market persist in the United States and other Western societies. Most prominently, women's hourly wages remain approximately 80 percent of men's wages (Blau and Kahn 2007; Ridgeway 2011). Even after extensively controlling for human capital and working hours, a remarkable gender pay gap remains, with the ratio of female-to-male earnings being .90 (for the United States, see Blau and Kahn 2007; for Germany, see Gartner and Hinz 2009). Moreover,

Discrimination is long seen as a meaningful factor for ethnic inequalities on rental housing markets. Yet empirically, the extent of discrimination is still debatable. For the first time, this article provides a quantitative meta-analysis of field experiments (in person audits and correspondence tests) that were run over the last four decades in the United States, Canada and Europe (N = 71). Special focus is given to a possible inflation of effect sizes by publication bias; to time trends; and to evidence for statistical discrimination. Taken together, nearly all experiments document the occurrence of ethnic discrimination. Effect sizes are inflated by publication bias, but there is still substantial evidence left once the bias is removed. The analysis reveals a consistent decline in the extent of discrimination over time, from moderate levels of discrimination in the 1970s and 1980s, up to only small but still statistically significant levels in the 1990s and 2000s. A significant part of the discriminatory behaviour can be attributed to missing information about the social status of applicants, which supports theories on statistical discrimination. It is discussed how future research could move our knowledge on the underlying mechanisms forward.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in First equals most important? Order effects in vignette-based measurement Non-technical summaryVignettes are increasingly used in social science surveys, to measure how people make decisions and what determines their attitudes. A vignette typically describes a hypothetical situation or object, about which respondents are asked to make a judgment. The object is described as having various characteristics. For example in our research, the vignettes describe full-time employees. The characteristics of the vignettes are experimentally varied, so that researchers can estimate the impact of individual characteristics on respondents'judgments. In our research we use vignettes to investigate which characteristics of an employee, or the organization they are working for, should determine how much they earn, in order for their earnings to be judged as fair. Our results show that strong order effects can occur, which alter conclusions about which characteristics respondents think should determine how much an employee earns. The order however only matters when the vignettes are complex, that is, when employees are described with 12 rather than 8 different characteristics -or when respondents are asked two questions about each vignette rather than just one. Order effects are more likely for respondents who have little knowledge or weak attitudes about the topic the vignettes are describing. Contrary to expectations respondents' cognitive ability did not appear to matter. The results have implications for how best to design vignettes, in order to avoid order effects that could impact results. First equals most important?Order effects in vignette-based measurement Katrin Auspurg (University of Konstanz) and Annette Jäckle (University of Essex) AbstractA vignette typically describes a hypothetical situation or object which respondents are asked to judge. The object is described as having different dimensions, the values of which are experimentally varied, so that their impact on respondents' judgments can be estimated. We examine 1) whether the order in which dimensions are presented impacts estimates, and 2) under which conditions order effects are mostly likely. Using data from a web survey of students we analyze several possible conditions: features of the vignette design, characteristics of respondents, and interactions between these. Our results show that strong order effects can occur, but only when the vignettes are complex.

This article focuses on the problems faced by dual‐earner partnerships arising from the regional coordination of the partners' careers. It is still unknown whether the fact that couples are less mobile than singles is caused by homogeneous preferences within couples or by a process of balancing conflicting interests. Consequently, we analyze the potential conflicts provoked by work‐related migration incentives. We test hypotheses derived from bargaining theory using quasi‐experimental data from a factorial survey of nearly 280 European couples. Our results support the bargaining approach and confirm that asymmetrical shifts in bargaining power drive the potential for conflict. Women's willingness to move is generally less than men's, but the impact of employment prospects differs only slightly by gender.