Sex Discrimination and Employment Practices: An Experiment with Unconventional Job Inquiries

Levinson, Richard

doi:10.1525/sp.1975.22.4.03a00070

Cited by 43 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To the extent that data-entry positions can be regarded as analogous to secretarial jobs, our finding is consistent with the pro-female bias in US secretary applications submitted in the 1970s (Levinson 1975) and UK secretary applications submitted in the 2000s (Riach and Rich 2006). However, our results differ from the finding of Riach and Rich (1987) who used data from Melbourne in 1983-86.…”

Section: Empirical Analysissupporting

confidence: 64%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do employers discriminate by gender? A field experiment in female-dominated occupations

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Empirical Analysissupporting

confidence: 64%

“…Levinson 1975;Riach and Rich 1987;Neumark 1996;Riach and Rich 2006). The audit discrimination technique has also been used to measure discrimination on the basis of ethnicity/race, age, obesity, having a criminal record, facial attractiveness, and sexual orientation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do employers discriminate by gender? A field experiment in female-dominated occupations

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is also a smaller literature on lab experiments on discrimination (see Anderson et al, 2006, for a survey), which we do not review here, as it has not specifically addressed the gender dimension. 6 Results from earlier audit studies (Levinson, 1975;Firth, 1982;Riach and Rich, 1987) are reviewed by Riach and Rich (2002). A general conclusion from this body of work is that women are likely to encounter discrimination in higher-status jobs, but discrimination is not detected in many of the occupations considered.…”

Section: Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A general conclusion from this body of work is that women are likely to encounter discrimination in higher-status jobs, but discrimination is not detected in many of the occupations considered. In particular, there is evidence of discrimination against men in female-dominated occupations (Levinson, 1975).…”

Section: Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender and the labor market: What have we learned from field and lab experiments?

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We discuss the contribution of the experimental literature to the understanding of both traditional and previously unexplored dimensions of gender differences and discuss their bearings on labor market outcomes. Experiments have offered new findings on gender discrimination, and while they have identified a bias against hiring women in some labor market segments, the discrimination detected in field experiments is less pervasive than that implied by the regression approach. Experiments have also offered new insights into gender differences in preferences: to gain less from negotiation, women appear to have lower preferences than men for risk and competition and may be more sensitive to social cues. These gender differences in preferences also have implications in group settings, whereby the gender composition of a group affects team decisions and performance. Most of the evidence on gender traits comes from the lab, and key open questions remain as to the source of gender preferences-nature versus nurture, or their interaction-and their role, if any, in the workplace.JEL classification: J16, J24, J71, C91, C92, C93

show abstract

“…It is most likely, that the different sex types of the jobs were responsible for this outcome. Levinson (1975) conducted another field experiment, where equally qualified male and female students applied for masculine and feminine jobs. It was found that women suffered clear-cut discrimination in 28 % when applying for a masculine job, while men's chances for an out-of-role job were even lower -they were clearly discriminated in 44 % of the cases.…”

Section: Violation Of One's Stereotypical Sex-rolementioning

confidence: 99%

Is it Sex or Personality? The Impact of Sex-Stereotypes on Discrimination in Applicant Selection

Weichselbaumer

2001

SSRN Journal

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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. All data of the experiment, standard letters of application, CVs, school reports and photographs are available from the author. Terms of use: Documents in 2 ABSTRACTThis paper investigates whether differential treatment of men and women in the labor market is due to unobservable differences in productivity or if it is motivated by a taste for discrimination. While studies on sex-discrimination typically control for human capital (formal education, job-experience etc.), there is usually no information on personality traits available.We argue that personality might affect productivity just as human capital: For many traditionally male occupations (e.g. managers) stereotypically masculine characteristics -like being ambitious, competitive, dominant -seem to be required. On the other hand, stereotypically feminine characteristics -like being gentle, cheerful, friendly -are particularly acknowledged in traditionally female occupations (e.g. nurses). The central question of this paper is whether women are treated differently because "they are different" (they posses more "feminine" and less"masculine" personality traits on the average) or because they are discriminated against.To gather the necessary data a field experiment is conducted. Job applications of candidates, who are equivalent in their human capital but differ in sex and personality are sent out in response to various job advertisements.We found minor indicators that signaling a masculine personality slightly reduces unfavorable treatment of women in typically male professions; nevertheless discrimination in hiring prevails even after controlling for personality characteristics.

show abstract

Sex Discrimination and Employment Practices: An Experiment with Unconventional Job Inquiries

Cited by 43 publications

References 0 publications

Do employers discriminate by gender? A field experiment in female-dominated occupations

Do employers discriminate by gender? A field experiment in female-dominated occupations

Gender and the labor market: What have we learned from field and lab experiments?

Is it Sex or Personality? The Impact of Sex-Stereotypes on Discrimination in Applicant Selection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About