使用条款与网络规模:来自美国在线招聘网站和简历库的证据

IF 4.5 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Information Economics and Policy Pub Date : 2024-03-06 DOI:10.1016/j.infoecopol.2024.101091
Vera Brenčič
{"title":"使用条款与网络规模:来自美国在线招聘网站和简历库的证据","authors":"Vera Brenčič","doi":"10.1016/j.infoecopol.2024.101091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Data on websites that hosted job boards and CV banks in the U.S. from 2000 to 2011 reveal that websites imposed fewer restrictions (in terms of the duration of use) and lower fees for job searchers relative to employers. This asymmetry in the treatment (or the terms of use) changed as the relative scarcity of job searchers and job vacancies in the labor market in which the websites offered their services changed. Compared with job searchers, employers faced less stringent restrictions and lower fees when job searchers were scarce relative to job openings. These adjustments imply that the value of using an employment website changes with the number of potential users and the probability of finding a quality match. We find that these adjustments were most pronounced for websites that relied exclusively on employers and job searchers for their content (job ads and CVs). Whereas existing literature on the role that network size plays in intermediaries’ decision-making has focused on prices, our findings reveal that this focus can overlook other adjustments that affect the terms of use. Given that these adjustments in our context may result in longer periods during which CVs and job ads remain online, our findings suggest that the optimal design of intermediaries must include tools that help users sort through stale information.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47029,"journal":{"name":"Information Economics and Policy","volume":"67 ","pages":"Article 101091"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167624524000131/pdfft?md5=f019622a13c175adf9def43e2996c710&pid=1-s2.0-S0167624524000131-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Terms of use and network size: Evidence from online job boards and CV banks in the U.S.\",\"authors\":\"Vera Brenčič\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.infoecopol.2024.101091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Data on websites that hosted job boards and CV banks in the U.S. from 2000 to 2011 reveal that websites imposed fewer restrictions (in terms of the duration of use) and lower fees for job searchers relative to employers. This asymmetry in the treatment (or the terms of use) changed as the relative scarcity of job searchers and job vacancies in the labor market in which the websites offered their services changed. Compared with job searchers, employers faced less stringent restrictions and lower fees when job searchers were scarce relative to job openings. These adjustments imply that the value of using an employment website changes with the number of potential users and the probability of finding a quality match. We find that these adjustments were most pronounced for websites that relied exclusively on employers and job searchers for their content (job ads and CVs). Whereas existing literature on the role that network size plays in intermediaries’ decision-making has focused on prices, our findings reveal that this focus can overlook other adjustments that affect the terms of use. Given that these adjustments in our context may result in longer periods during which CVs and job ads remain online, our findings suggest that the optimal design of intermediaries must include tools that help users sort through stale information.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Economics and Policy\",\"volume\":\"67 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101091\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167624524000131/pdfft?md5=f019622a13c175adf9def43e2996c710&pid=1-s2.0-S0167624524000131-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Economics and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167624524000131\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Economics and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167624524000131","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2000 年至 2011 年期间美国求职网站和简历库的数据显示,相对于雇主而言,网站对求职者的限制较少(在使用期限方面),收费也较低。这种待遇(或使用条款)上的不对称随着网站提供服务的劳动力市场中求职者和职位空缺的相对稀缺性而发生变化。与求职者相比,当求职者相对职位空缺稀缺时,雇主面临的限制较少,收费也较低。这些调整意味着,使用就业网站的价值会随着潜在用户数量和找到优质匹配的概率而变化。我们发现,这些调整对于完全依赖雇主和求职者提供内容(招聘广告和简历)的网站最为明显。关于网络规模在中介决策中所起作用的现有文献主要关注价格,而我们的研究结果表明,这种关注可能会忽略影响使用条款的其他调整。鉴于在我们的语境中,这些调整可能会导致简历和招聘广告在网上停留的时间更长,我们的研究结果表明,中介机构的最佳设计必须包括帮助用户对陈旧信息进行分类的工具。
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
Terms of use and network size: Evidence from online job boards and CV banks in the U.S.

Data on websites that hosted job boards and CV banks in the U.S. from 2000 to 2011 reveal that websites imposed fewer restrictions (in terms of the duration of use) and lower fees for job searchers relative to employers. This asymmetry in the treatment (or the terms of use) changed as the relative scarcity of job searchers and job vacancies in the labor market in which the websites offered their services changed. Compared with job searchers, employers faced less stringent restrictions and lower fees when job searchers were scarce relative to job openings. These adjustments imply that the value of using an employment website changes with the number of potential users and the probability of finding a quality match. We find that these adjustments were most pronounced for websites that relied exclusively on employers and job searchers for their content (job ads and CVs). Whereas existing literature on the role that network size plays in intermediaries’ decision-making has focused on prices, our findings reveal that this focus can overlook other adjustments that affect the terms of use. Given that these adjustments in our context may result in longer periods during which CVs and job ads remain online, our findings suggest that the optimal design of intermediaries must include tools that help users sort through stale information.

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
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
10.70%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: IEP is an international journal that aims to publish peer-reviewed policy-oriented research about the production, distribution and use of information, including these subjects: the economics of the telecommunications, mass media, and other information industries, the economics of innovation and intellectual property, the role of information in economic development, and the role of information and information technology in the functioning of markets. The purpose of the journal is to provide an interdisciplinary and international forum for theoretical and empirical research that addresses the needs of other researchers, government, and professionals who are involved in the policy-making process. IEP publishes research papers, short contributions, and surveys.
期刊最新文献
Three things about mobile app commissions Digital payment systems in emerging economies: Lessons from Kenya, India, Brazil, and Peru “I don't care about cookies!” data disclosure and time-inconsistent users Algorithms in the marketplace: An empirical analysis of automated pricing in e-commerce Editorial Board
×
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