Open AccessPosted Content
Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
In this paper, the authors examine labor market favoritism in a unique laboratory experiment design that can shed light on both the private benefits and spillover costs of employer favoritism (or discrimination) and identify one potential micro-foundation of societal unrest that may link back to labor market opportunity.Abstract:
In this paper, we examine labor market favoritism in a unique laboratory experiment design that can shed light on both the private benefits and spillover costs of employer favoritism (or discrimination). Group identity is induced on subjects such that each laboratory « society » consists of eight individuals each belonging to one of two different identity groups. In some treatments randomly assigned employer-subjects give preference rankings of potential worker-subjects who would make effort choices that impact employer payoffs. Though it is common knowledge that group identity in this environment provides no special productivity information and cannot facilitate communication or otherwise lower costs for the employer, employers preferentially rank in-group members. In such instances, the unemployed workers are aware that an intentional preference ranking resulted in their unemployment. Unemployed workers are allowed to destroy resources in a final stage of the game, which is a simple measure of the spillover effects of favoritism in our design. Though we find evidence that favoritism may privately benefit a firm in terms of higher worker effort, the spillover costs that result highlight a reason to combat favoritism/discrimination. This result also identifies one potential micro-foundation of societal unrest that may link back to labor market opportunity. Key Words: Discrimination, Experimental Economics, Social identity, Conflictsread more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Your Performance Is My Concern: A Perspective-Taking Competition Task Affects ERPs to Opponent’s Outcomes
TL;DR: The results providing evidence for the enhanced attention toward out-group individuals after competition manipulation, as well as the motivation significance account of FRN, suggest perspective-taking may induce greater monitoring to opponent’s performance, which increases the win vs. loss differentiation brain response to the out-groups agent.
Posted Content
Using Ethical Dilemmas to Predict Antisocial Choices with Real Payoff Consequences: An Experimental Study
David L. Dickinson,David Masclet +1 more
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used a within-subjects laboratory design to study choices in the well-known (hypothetical) Trolley problem as well as in a real payoff money burning experiment that can inform our understanding of moral preferences and antisocial behavior.
Journal ArticleDOI
Antisocial behaviour in experiments: What have we learned from the past two decades?
TL;DR: In this paper, the antecedents of antisocial behavior are grouped into eight categories based on their focus and approach, and they also find that antisocial behaviour is more prevalent when the experiment was conducted with nonstandard subjects.
Journal ArticleDOI
Profit, morality and discrimination
Mathieu Bunel,Elisabeth Tovar +1 more
TL;DR: This article study the normative acceptability of the trade-off between immoral profit (discrimination) and costly morality (non-discrimination), and test the causal influence of the causal influen...
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Money burning and rank egalitarianism with random dictators
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present the results of an experiment in Oxford where relative standing can be improved by randomly chosen dictators only by reducing (burning) the money of the coplayers at a cost to themselves.
Journal ArticleDOI
Bias in reward allocation in an intergroup and an interpersonal context.
TL;DR: The authors examined children's strategies in giving money to others in an intergroup condition, based on a "weak" act of social categorization, and in an interpersonal condition based on "strong" friendship choice.
Journal ArticleDOI
Social Dominance Orientation and Group Context in Implicit Group Prejudice
Felicia Pratto,Margaret Shih +1 more
TL;DR: There was no difference between participants with high and low social dominance orientation (SDO), but when the intergroup context was made more salient (Experiment 2), high-SDO participants alone showed implicit group prejudice.
Journal ArticleDOI
Gender selection discrimination: Evidence from a Trust game
Robert Slonim,Pablo Guillen +1 more
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined discrimination in a variant of Berg et al. this paper where subjects can and cannot select partners and found little evidence of discrimination without selection but significant discrimination with selection: subjects select and send more to partners of the opposite gender.
Related Papers (5)
Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market.
Discrimination and In-group Favoritism in a Citywide Trust Experiment
Armin Falk,Christian Zehnder +1 more