Post on 21-Dec-2015
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 1
LABOR TOPICS
Nick Bloom
Discrimination
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 2
Thoughts on Bertrand and Mullainathan
Other papers
A research idea
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 3
Comments on Bertrand and Mullainathan (1/2)
• I love this kind of paper – ingenious, informative & well executed. It took a lot of effort but was clearly well worth it.
• Developed the idea far beyond just black/white names:• Always need to push multiple angles • Takes time and feedback (seminars)
• Think big – raising funds for good studies is not impossible (at least not at Stanford). Best way is step-by-step: pilot, raise small sum, bigger pilot, raise a larger sum etc…
• Collect data on everything – they recorded lots of information, and kept all the adverts during the period
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 4
Comments on Bertrand and Mullainathan (2/2)
• Table 7 is a good example of a well explained table – in particular the full footnotes!• Tables & figures should be self contained
• I assume much of section “IV Interpretation” derived from seminar and referees feedback. When writing a paper always acknowledge problems and try to address them
• Also to note: papers accrue footnotes in response to comments and feedback – e.g. footnote 43. Better to keep these in and drop in the refereeing process
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 5
Thoughts on Bertrand and Mullainathan
Other papers
A research idea
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 6
The Nature and Extent of Discrimination in the Marketplace: Evidence from the Field
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2004
by John List (Chicago)
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 7
Shows evidence of statistical discrimination in buying and selling of baseball cards
• Paper uses four different experiments employing subjects at baseball card conventions to test between:• Animus discrimination• Statistical discrimination• Bargaining ability differences (not an issue in B&M)
• Finds evidence of discrimination against women, minorities and old people (those aged above 30!)
• Effects mostly initial offer price, to a lesser extent final acceptance price, and also bargaining time
• Strongest effect for least experienced minorities
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 8
Innovative methodology of multiple tests and direct recruitment of the public (1/4)
The paper is very well thought out in terms of running four different experiments to distinguish between hypothesis
Experiment A: Recruit subjects to randomly approach dealers to buy/sell cards. Select mix of subjects by demographics
- Also collect information on subjects- Different subjects approach same dealer
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 9
Evidence for discrimination (1/3)
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 10
Evidence for discrimination (2/3)
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 11
Evidence for discrimination (3/3)
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 12
Innovative methodology of multiple tests and direct recruitment of the public (2/4)
Experiment B: Also asks subjects to play a $5 dictator game, telling them in advance demographics of their partner
Finds no evidence of differential treatment (i.e. no animus)
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 13
Innovative methodology of multiple tests and direct recruitment of the public (3/4)
Experiment C: Also asks subjects to play two Chamberlain games – in one people are given random reservation prices, in the other they are not
- Finds no evidence of differential treatment in first game- Finds evidence of differential treatment in the second
Suggests discrimination related to dealers views over different reservation prices
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 14
Innovative methodology of multiple tests and direct recruitment of the public (4/4)
Experiment D: Play Vickrey (second-price) auctions to find out subjects reserve valuations for cards
Evidence minorities, women and older people have more dispersion, so discrimination is profit maximizing
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 15
Impressive paper, but rather complex
Neat paper with clear identification and well thought out. But less cited than B&M (50 vs 350 Google scholar hits)
Key reason is probably complexity – B&M has one neat idea and simple execution (and a memorable title).
But complexity matters less in long-run – so should age well
List takes a number of steps to ease presentation – like bullet point result summaries, e.g.
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 16
ORCHESTRATING IMPARTIALITY: THE IMPACT OF “BLIND” AUDITIONS ON FEMAL MUSICIANS
American Economic Review, 2000
Claudia Goldin and Cecilia Rouse
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 17
Finds evidence in favor of discrimination against females
Evidence that orchestra’s historically had been discriminatory towards women:
“I just don’t think women should be in orchestras”
Zubin Mehta, conductor to the LA and NY Philharmonics from 1964-1978 and 1978-1990 respectively
Orchestras started introducing blind auditions in 1970s and 1980s, but with a wide time spread (Boston had some in the 1950s while Cleveland still had none in 2000)
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 18
Uses data from staggered introduction of blind orchestra auditions
In the raw data the success rate of females in auditions after the introduction of blind auditions goes down!
But if you control of quality – i.e. look at people who repeatedly audition – it goes up
Hence, evidence is that:
(A) Blind auditions helped improved female success rates(B) As a result more marginal female candidates applied, pushing down average success rates of women
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 19
Women have a lower unconditional success rate in blind auditions
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 20
But a higher success rate conditional on taking part in blind and non-blind auditions (i.e. controlling for selection changes)
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 21
Simple neat idea which is well executed
Key idea of using blind-orchestra auditions is great – simple to understand and clean results
Also well written, in that clear on it’s statistical defects (small sample and reversed results) – again, do acknowledge issues
As a result is quite well cited and well known
Also fits the AER shorter-papers format – crisp clean result
Only fly in the ointment is the semi-final results reverse
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 22
TESTING THEORIES OF DISCRIMINATION: EVIDENCE FROM THE WEAKEST LINK
Journal of Law & Economics, 2004
Steve Levitt
Nick Bloom, Labor Topics, Spring 2008 23
Uses data from “The Weakest link” game shows & finds limited discrimination evidence
Game show where:(i) The final prize is a function of number of correctly
answered questions(ii)Only one winner that collects this final prize(iii) Start with many contestants and they vote each other out
Strategy is early on to vote out bad contestants and later on to vote out good contestants
Finds some evidence for:• statistical discrimination against hispanics: voted out more
early on and less later then prior performance warrants• animus discrimination against old people (50+): always
voted out more often