Culture, Information, and Screening Discrimination

Cornell, Bradford; Welch, Ivo

doi:10.1086/262033

Cited by 291 publications

(191 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

176

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Section 2 develops the basic model, which simultaneously determines the screening expenditure on a job applicant and 3 When there is a difference in variance of the productivity distribution or reliability of individual information between the ingroup and the outgroup in favour of the ingroup, rising risk aversion as a result of increasing competitive pressure will raise discrimination against the outgroup (see Aigner and Cain 1977;Hendricks et al 2003; see also Cornell and Welch 1996). Shleifer (2004) finds that under strong competition unethical cost-reducing behaviour becomes more tempting, and thus can lead to more (efficient) discrimination.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification, screening and stereotyping in labour market discrimination

Vendrik

Schwieren

2009

J. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to social-psychological research, feelings of uncertainty in decision-making evoke two opposite responses: (i) reduction of uncertainty by information search, leading to less stereotyping of people, and hence less discrimination; (ii) social identification with an ingroup, inducing more reliance on stereotypic perceptions and prejudices, and hence more discrimination against an outgroup. We integrate both responses in a microeconomic model of hiring and pay decisions by an employer. Increasing competition in the product market makes the employer feel more uncertain about his profits, but also raises the opportunity cost of screening expenditures. This elicits substitution of ingroup identification for screening expenditures, and hence enhances discrimination.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification, screening and stereotyping in labour market discrimination

Vendrik

Schwieren

2009

J. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The average evaluator had participated 2.4 times in a similar committee over the previous five years. 10 Evaluators may differ in terms of their field of specialization. In Table 4 we report the field of specialization of professors, court secretaries and judges.…”

Section: Candidatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interpersonal attraction then leads to positive bias in the recruiter's interview conduct." 2 On the other hand, other authors have pointed out that a similar-to-me effect might arise if there exist information asymmetries about the real productivity of workers and evaluators can observe more reliable signals of quality when they evaluate candidates that share the same background as themselves (Cornell and Welch 1996). According to these authors, if it "is easier for individuals to screen people of similar background ... people 1 Most authors have focused on similarity in terms of demographic characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do recruiters prefer applicants with similar skills? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment

Bagues

Villadóniga

2012

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we examine the potential existence of a similar-to-me effect in terms of skills between recruiters and applicants. Using evidence from entry exams to the Spanish Judiciary, where applicants are randomly assigned across evaluation committees, we find that committee members tend to be more demanding at those stages where they are more knowledgeable. As a result, applicants who excel in the same dimensions as recruiters are more likely to be hired.

show abstract

“…The first one is prejudice (Becker (1959)) arising if employers are biased against disabled employees. The second is imperfect information which could lead to statistic discrimination (Phelps (1972); Aigner and Cain (1977); Lang (1986); Cornell and Welch (1996); Lundberg and Starz (1983)). 5 The state of the available information is relevant since the future productivity of the workers is not known before the investment, but it can only be predicted on the basis of observed actions or observed characteristics.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%