Oppositional identities and the labor market

Journal of Urban Economics

2017

Self 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. The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent nonprofit organization supported by Deutsche Post Foundation. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its international network, workshops and conferences, data service, project support, research visits and doctoral program. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. Terms of use: Documents in D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E S The Role of Social Networks in Cultural AssimilationIZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author.IZA Discussion Paper No. 9341 September 2015 ABSTRACTThe Role of Social Networks in Cultural Assimilation * We develop a model where, in the first stage, minority individuals have to decide whether or not they want to assimilate to the majority culture while, in the second stage, all individuals (both from the majority and the minority group) embedded in a network have to decide how much effort they exert in some activity (say education). We show that the more central minority agents are in the social network, the more they assimilate to the majority culture. We also show that denser networks tend to favor assimilation so that, for example, it is easier to assimilate in a complete network than in a star-shaped network. We show that the subgameperfect equilibrium is not optimal because there is not enough activity and assimilation. We then endogeneize the network and show under which condition the ethnic minorities either assimilate to or separated themselves from the majority group.JEL Classification: D85, J15, Z13

“…We have seen that if the planner only subsidizes effort, then the optimal subsidy is given by (12), that is…”

Section: Effort Versus Assimilation Subsidymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, a number of empirical studies have shown that individuals or organizations who bridge 'structural holes' in networks gain significant payoff advantages. 12 7 Network formation and assimilation choices …”

Section: Finally Ifmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of social networks in cultural assimilation

Verdier

Journal of Urban Economics

2017

Self Cite

“…4 In economics, different aspects of conformism and social norms have been explored from a theoretical point of view. To name a few, (i) peer pressures and partnerships (Kandel and Lazear 1992) where peer pressure arises when individuals deviate from a well-established group norm, e.g., individuals are penalized for working less than the group norm, (ii) religion (Iannaccone 1992, Berman 2000) since praying is much more satisfying the more average participants there are, (iii) social status and social distance (Akerlof 1980, Bernheim 1994, Battu et al, 2007, among others) where deviations from the social norm (average action) imply a loss of reputation and status. 5 To be more precise, the Bonacich centrality measure takes into account both direct and indirect friends of each individual but puts less weight to distant friends.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Juvenile Delinquency and Conformism

Patacchini

2010

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

This paper studies whether conformism behavior affects individual outcomes in crime. We present a social network model of peer effects with ex-ante heterogeneous agents and show how conformism and deterrence affect criminal activities. We then bring the model to the data by using a very detailed dataset of adolescent friendship networks. A novel social network-based empirical strategy allows us to identify peer effects for different types of crimes. We find that conformity plays an important role for all crimes, especially for petty crimes. This suggests that, for juvenile crime, an effective policy should not only be measured by the possible crime reduction it implies but also by the group interactions it engenders.

“…With probability 1 − α, she (incorrectly) believes that the worker is good. 10 A good worker is never mistaken for a bad one. Our results are robust to the case of a more general screening technology, which allows for the mistaken classification of good workers as long as the probability of making a mistake about bad workers is larger than the probability of making a mistake about good ones.…”

Section: Endogenous Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural transmission and discrimination

Saez-Marti

Journal of Urban Economics

2012

Self Cite

Workers can have good or bad work habits. These traits are transmitted from one generation to the next through a learning and imitation process, which depends on parents' investment in the trait and the social environment where children live. We show that if a sufficiently high proportion of employers have taste-based prejudices against minority workers, their prejudices are always selffulfilled in steady state and minority workers end up having, on average, worse work habits than majority workers. This leads to a ghetto culture. Affirmative Action can improve the welfare of minorities whereas integration can be beneficial to minority workers but detrimental to workers from the majority group.J.E.L. Classification: J15, J71.