|
on Gender |
|
Issue of 2026–10–26
seven papers chosen by Jan Sauermann, Institutet för Arbetsmarknads- och Utbildningspolitisk Utvärdering |
| By: | Jonas Radbruch; Amelie Schiprowski |
| Abstract: | This paper provides empirical evidence on the aggregation of information in hiring committees. We use data from the hiring process of a large company in which committee members first conduct independent one-on-one interviews and then deliberate to reach a collective hiring decision. Results show that the mapping of committee members' initial assessments to final decisions is not deterministic, leaving scope for deliberation and individual influence. Committee decisions are systematically less aligned with recommendations made by women than with those made by men, despite similar qualifications, experience, and evaluation behavior. This gender difference in influence is strongest when disagreement is high and when women are in the minority. Further results suggest that it has implications for the gender composition of new hires. |
| Keywords: | committee decision-making, gender quotas, hiring |
| JEL: | D71 J16 M51 |
| Date: | 2026 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ces:ceswps:_13064 |
| By: | Matsuda, Norihiko; Fasih, Tazeen; Nomura, Shinsaku; Tas, Emcet Oktay |
| Abstract: | In the presence of gender-specific barriers, certain workplace environments and amenities may be particularly important for women, yet difficult to observe during job search due to information frictions. A large-scale field experiment on Pakistan's online job board publicized these job characteristics—namely, supervisor gender, coworker gender composition, work flexibility, commuting support, and overnight travel requirements. Information on these characteristics was randomly disclosed in job advertisements and email alerts. Analysis at the job-alert level shows that female jobseekers respond to supervisor gender, remote work, and commuting support. At the job level, when these characteristics were disclosed, the number of female applicants increased as the jobs were more favorable to women. |
| Date: | 2026–10–15 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:11484 |
| By: | Ana Melissa Ferreira; Pedro Brinca; João Duarte; João Pereira; Pedro Martins |
| Abstract: | While pay transparency is an increasingly popular policy to reduce the gender wage gap (GWG), its effectiveness is still unclear. We evaluate the impact of a 2018 law in Portugal that required firms to assess their potential gender wage disparities, while imposing penalties to firms of 250 or more employees that did not correct or justify gender gaps. Using difference-in-difference-in-differences, regression discontinuity, and difference-in-discontinuity methods, together with detailed matched data, we find that the transparency reform had a minimal impact to reduced the GWG by around 1 percentage point (p.p.). These effects are particularly strong in firms that employ high-skilled females, and for employees that are not covered by collective bargaining, where the impacts rise to 1.5 p.p.. This effect is not associated with employment effects. |
| JEL: | J16 J31 J78 |
| Date: | 2026 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ptu:wpaper:w202610 |
| By: | Andrew Smith; Alfonso Flores-Lagunes; Maria Zhu |
| Abstract: | Over 15 percent of college graduates in the United States graduate with more than one major. While much research exists on the returns to different individual majors, less is known about the causal effects of double majoring. This study provides novel estimates on the returns to those who choose to double major as an undergraduate. We improve on previous studies that rely on controls for observable characteristics by addressing selection concerns in two notable ways. First, we control for institution-specific differences that may influence both the decision to double major and subsequent earnings using proprietary data by including institution fixed effects. Second, we adopt a partial identification approach to address non-random selection into double majoring within institutions. Results broadly align with estimates from prior studies at the aggregate level, but reveal notable gender differences not previously detected. Women experience an earnings return to double majoring of approximately 5 percent, while the return for men is statistically negligible. Our analysis suggests that this discrepancy is consistent with double majors serving as a signaling effect in the labor market, which may help offset the gender pay gap. |
| Keywords: | double majoring; returns to education; gender wage gap; labor market signaling; human capital; college major choice |
| JEL: | I26 J16 J31 I23 J24 |
| Date: | 2026–09 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cen:wpaper:26-60 |
| By: | Lordan, Grace; Will, Paris |
| Abstract: | We examine whether women and men working in financial services have different perceptions of a hypothetical mistake at work. Using a survey of 1, 485 UK financial sector professionals, we analyse three self-reported measures: comfort in admitting a mistake, expected penalization for the mistake, and whether the mistake would be seen as a learning opportunity. Regression analysis relates these perceptions to the respondent’s gender and the gender composition of their workplace. The results suggest that women’s perceptions of mistakes are significantly more negative than men’s, and this gap is amplified in male-dominated environments. In highmale teams (e.g., those with ≥75% men), women report feeling markedly less comfortable about mistakes and less likely to view mistakes as learning opportunities, compared to men. By contrast, women report the most positive attitudes toward mistakes in environments with low shares of men, where mistakes are also most likely to be viewed as learning opportunities; men’s perceptions vary comparatively little with workplace composition. In other words, maledominated workplaces are associated with more negative perceptions of errors, especially for women. |
| Keywords: | finance;gender;mistakes;mistakes and errors;psychological safety |
| JEL: | R14 J01 |
| Date: | 2026–10–08 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:140866 |
| By: | Johannes Geyer; Peter Haan; Lukas Harder |
| Abstract: | Progressive pension supplements mechanically reduce the gender pension gap because women receive lower pensions on average. However, labor supply responses may offset these gains and create fiscal externalities. Using German administrative data, we analyze the distributional and welfare effects of a progressive pension supplement. We find no labor supply responses during working life, but small effects on women’s employment and earnings in retirement. The supplement reduces the gender income gap by about two percent, with sizable heterogeneity across pension levels. The marginal value of public funds is 0.83. Means-testing based on household income improves welfare even with low redistributive preferences. |
| Keywords: | gender, pensions, retirement, labor supply, redistribution |
| JEL: | H55 H23 J16 J26 J22 |
| Date: | 2026 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp2185 |
| By: | Andrea GASPARRONI (Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milan); Enkelejda HAVARI (IESEG School of Management, Paris, Lille Economics and Management (LEM), IZA@LISER, Global Labor Organization); Theodor KOURO (UC San Diego, CERGE-EI, Prague) |
| Abstract: | Do parents hold misbeliefs about their children’s future college eligibility? Are these misbeliefs gendered? Do they affect present track choice. We survey approximately 4, 000 parents of ninth-graders in Albania and benchmark their future beliefs against administrative records of 9, 370 students from an earlier cohort. Parents systematically overestimate their children’s college-eligibility chances — and do so substantially more for sons than for daughters, especially when they aspire for STEM careers. This gap is not explained by son favoritism, nor by ignorance of current academic performance. The primary mechanism is a failure to incorporate a known reality into belief formation: parents know girls do better, but fail to translate this into realistic forecasts. While misbeliefs are positively associated with actual track enrollment, the association is negligible in magnitude because track choice is mainly driven by actual performance. |
| Keywords: | aspirations, college, overoptimism, favoritism, track choice |
| Date: | 2026–09 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ies:wpaper:e20260928 |