注意辨别:监测信息获取的理论与现场实验

Vojtěch Bartoš, Michal Bauer, Julie Chytilová, Filip Matějka
{"title":"注意辨别:监测信息获取的理论与现场实验","authors":"Vojtěch Bartoš, Michal Bauer, Julie Chytilová, Filip Matějka","doi":"10.1257/AER.20140571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We link two important ideas: attention is scarce and lack of information about an individual drives discrimination in selection decisions. Our model of allocation of costly attention implies that applicants from negatively stereotyped groups face \"attention discrimination\": less attention in highly selective cherry-picking markets, where more attention helps applicants, and more attention in lemon-dropping markets, where it harms them. To test the prediction, we integrate tools to monitor information acquisition into correspondence field experiments. In both countries we study we find that unfavorable signals, minority names, or unemployment, systematically reduce employers' efforts to inspect resumes. Also consistent with the model, in the rental housing market, which is much less selective than labor markets, we find landlords acquire more information about minority relative to majority applicants. We discuss implications of endogenous attention for magnitude and persistence of discrimination in selection decisions, returns to human capital and, potentially, for policy.","PeriodicalId":345692,"journal":{"name":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"236","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attention Discrimination: Theory and Field Experiments with Monitoring Information Acquisition\",\"authors\":\"Vojtěch Bartoš, Michal Bauer, Julie Chytilová, Filip Matějka\",\"doi\":\"10.1257/AER.20140571\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We link two important ideas: attention is scarce and lack of information about an individual drives discrimination in selection decisions. Our model of allocation of costly attention implies that applicants from negatively stereotyped groups face \\\"attention discrimination\\\": less attention in highly selective cherry-picking markets, where more attention helps applicants, and more attention in lemon-dropping markets, where it harms them. To test the prediction, we integrate tools to monitor information acquisition into correspondence field experiments. In both countries we study we find that unfavorable signals, minority names, or unemployment, systematically reduce employers' efforts to inspect resumes. Also consistent with the model, in the rental housing market, which is much less selective than labor markets, we find landlords acquire more information about minority relative to majority applicants. We discuss implications of endogenous attention for magnitude and persistence of discrimination in selection decisions, returns to human capital and, potentially, for policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":345692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"236\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1257/AER.20140571\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1257/AER.20140571","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 236

摘要

我们将两个重要的观点联系在一起:注意力是稀缺的,关于个体的信息缺乏会导致选择决策中的歧视。我们的昂贵注意力分配模型表明,来自负面刻板印象群体的申请人面临“注意力歧视”:在高度选择性的樱桃采摘市场中,关注较少,在那里更多的关注有助于申请人,在柠檬掉落市场中,关注较多,在那里伤害他们。为了验证预测,我们将监控信息采集的工具集成到对应的现场实验中。在我们研究的两个国家中,我们发现不利的信号,少数民族的名字,或者失业,系统地减少了雇主检查简历的努力。同样与模型一致的是,在比劳动力市场选择性低得多的租赁住房市场,我们发现相对于多数申请人,房东获得了更多关于少数族裔申请人的信息。我们讨论了内生注意力对选择决策中歧视的程度和持久性的影响,对人力资本的回报,以及对政策的潜在影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Attention Discrimination: Theory and Field Experiments with Monitoring Information Acquisition
We link two important ideas: attention is scarce and lack of information about an individual drives discrimination in selection decisions. Our model of allocation of costly attention implies that applicants from negatively stereotyped groups face "attention discrimination": less attention in highly selective cherry-picking markets, where more attention helps applicants, and more attention in lemon-dropping markets, where it harms them. To test the prediction, we integrate tools to monitor information acquisition into correspondence field experiments. In both countries we study we find that unfavorable signals, minority names, or unemployment, systematically reduce employers' efforts to inspect resumes. Also consistent with the model, in the rental housing market, which is much less selective than labor markets, we find landlords acquire more information about minority relative to majority applicants. We discuss implications of endogenous attention for magnitude and persistence of discrimination in selection decisions, returns to human capital and, potentially, for policy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Do American Voters Really Not Punish Overt Undemocratic Behavior at the Polls? Natural Experimental Evidence from the 2021 Insurrection of the U.S. Capitol Absolute versus Relative: Asymmetric Framing and Feedback in a Heterogeneous-Endowment Public Goods Game Improving Studies of Sensitive Topics Using Prior Evidence: A Unified Bayesian Framework for List Experiments Are More Children Better Than One? Evidence from a Lab Experiment of Decision Making Financial Vulnerability and Seeking Expert Advice: Evidence from a Survey Experiment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1