@techreport{BarronDitlmannGehrigetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Barron, Kai and Ditlmann, Ruth K. and Gehrig, Stefan and Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian}, title = {Explicit and Implicit Belief-Based Gender Discrimination: A Hiring Experiment}, edition = {No. 35}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-5361}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-53610}, pages = {73}, abstract = {This paper studies a key element of discrimination, namely when stereotypes translate into discriminatory actions. Using a hiring experiment, we rule out taste-based discrimination by design and test for the presence of two types of belief-based gender discrimination. We document evidence of explicit discriminators—individuals who are willing to discriminate even when their hiring choices are highly revealing of their gender-biased beliefs. Crucially, we also identify implicit discriminators—individuals who do not discriminate against women when taking a discriminatory action is highly revealing of their biased beliefs, but do discriminate against women when their biased motive is obscured. Our analysis highlights the central role played by features of the choice environment in determining whether and how discrimination will manifest. We conclude by discussing the implications for policy design.}, language = {en} } @techreport{SchweighoferKodritschBarronDitlmannetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian and Barron, Kai and Ditlmann, Ruth K. and Gehrig, Stefan}, title = {Explicit and Implicit Belief-Based Gender Discrimination: A Hiring Experiment}, series = {Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers}, journal = {Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers}, edition = {No. 35}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-5359}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-53592}, pages = {73}, abstract = {This paper studies a key element of discrimination, namely when stereotypes translate into discriminatory actions. Using a hiring experiment, we rule out taste-based discrimination by design and test for the presence of two types of belief-based gender discrimination. We document evidence of explicit discriminators—individuals who are willing to discriminate even when their hiring choices are highly revealing of their gender-biased beliefs. Crucially, we also identify implicit discriminators—individuals who do not discriminate against women when taking a discriminatory action is highly revealing of their biased beliefs, but do discriminate against women when their biased motive is obscured. Our analysis highlights the central role played by features of the choice environment in determining whether and how discrimination will manifest. We conclude by discussing the implications for policy design.}, language = {en} } @techreport{SchweighoferKodritsch, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian}, title = {Bounded Rationality, Beliefs, and Behavior}, series = {Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers}, journal = {Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers}, edition = {No. 37}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-5363}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-53637}, pages = {36}, abstract = {This chapter presents a microeconomic, behavioral perspective on bounded rationality and beliefs. It begins with an account of how research on belief biases, in particular via probabilistic belief elicitation, has become mainstream in economics only relatively recently and late, even in behavioral economics (aka "psychology and economics"). The chapter then offers a review of the decision-theoretic foundations of modeling and eliciting (subjective) beliefs as probabilities, as well as selected—both classic and recent—evidence on humans' bounded rationality from related research in psychology and economics. In doing so, it connects the historical debates within decision theory, on the one hand, and within psychology, on the other, concerning the normative status of expected utility and Bayesianism, as well as its methodological implications. A conclusion draws lessons for the practice of belief elicitation and future research.}, language = {en} } @techreport{JessenSchweighoferKodritschWeinhardtetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Jessen, Jonas and Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian and Weinhardt, Felix and Berkes, Jan}, title = {Separate Housework Spheres}, series = {Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers}, journal = {Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers}, edition = {No. 43}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-5549}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-55494}, pages = {39, xxiv}, abstract = {Using novel time-use data from Germany before and after reunification, we document two facts: First, spouses who both work full-time exhibit similar housework patterns whether they do so voluntarily or due to a full-time mandate, as in the GDR. Second, men's amount of housework is independent of their spouse's labour supply. We theoretically explain this pattern by the presence of two household goods and socially learned gender-specific comparative advantage in their home production. We label this gender specialisation as separate housework spheres. Empirical evidence strongly confirms separate housework spheres in the GDR, West Germany, subsequent years post-reunification, and in international time-use data across 17 countries since the 1970s. We consider several implications, such as those for child penalties, where separate housework spheres provide a novel explanation for why it is the mothers whose labour market outcomes strongly deteriorate upon the arrival of children.}, language = {en} } @article{BarronDitlmannGehrigetal., author = {Barron, Kai and Ditlmann, Ruth K. and Gehrig, Stefan and Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian}, title = {Explicit and Implicit Belief-Based Gender Discrimination: A Hiring Experiment}, series = {Management Science}, journal = {Management Science}, issn = {0025-1909 (print)}, doi = {10.1287/mnsc.2022.01229}, abstract = {This paper studies a key element of discrimination, namely, when stereotypes translate into discriminatory actions. Using a hiring experiment, we rule out taste-based discrimination by design and test for the presence of two types of belief-based gender discrimination. We document evidence of explicit discriminators—individuals who are willing to discriminate even when their hiring choices are highly revealing of their gender-biased beliefs. Crucially, we also identify implicit discriminators—individuals who do not discriminate against women when taking a discriminatory action is highly revealing of their biased beliefs, but do discriminate against women when their biased motive is obscured. Our analysis highlights the central role played by features of the choice environment in determining whether and how discrimination will manifest. We conclude by discussing the implications for policy design.}, language = {en} }