Download
gender discrimination college graduates labor market n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Gender Discrimination College Graduates’ Labor Market PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Gender Discrimination College Graduates’ Labor Market

Gender Discrimination College Graduates’ Labor Market

355 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Gender Discrimination College Graduates’ Labor Market

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Gender Discrimination College Graduates’ Labor Market Presenter: Ge Yuhao

  2. Structure • Motivation; • Literature; • Experiment Design; • Empirical Results; • Conclusions;

  3. Motivation • Three kinds of gender discrimination: • Employment opportunity; • Wage or salary; • Industry (or occupation) distribution; • This paper focuses on employment opportunity in the labor market of college graduates. • Much attention in news papers and TV programs. • Few empirical research from scholars.

  4. Literature • Gustafsson & Li (2000). Discrimination accounts for 52.49% in the raw gender wage gap in 1988, and rises to 63.20% in 1995. • Kuhn and Shen (2013). Explicit gender discrimination is much more often on positions requiring low levels of skill. • Bertrand and Mullainathan(2004). Fake resumes by managing names.

  5. Experiment Design • Construct the resume template (Please see the attachment). • Choose the experiment sample and implement the training. • Every participant is asked to make a resume according to his\her true information, but the name is an exception. • Every participant is asked to make a fake resume by changing gender, height and weight.

  6. Experiment Design • The participants put these two resumes on the job websites. • Set the deadline to collect the information of the number of the offer. • At last, 95 participants, 190 observations. • Suggestions are welcomed.

  7. Discrimination Coefficient • Discrimination Coefficient: • Y: the number of the offer.

  8. Table 1

  9. Total sample • On average, male applicants get 40% higher offers than female. • High degree of discrimination.

  10. By different subsamples • Almost all the difference is positive and significant. Discrimination again by sample! • Party member. party_no <party_yes • Edu_level. Undergraduate<graduate • GPA. GPA_bad<GPA_normal<GPA_good • English. EN_bad<EN_normal<EN_good

  11. What is the wrong with the world? • Female applicants face more serious discrimination when they seems more successful. • Why?

  12. Possible Explanation • Statistical discrimination theory; • The employers assume the relation of true productivity (TP) and observable human capital score (S, such as edu_level, GPA, english) is that: • is the mean of for the group where the applicant belong to.

  13. Possible Explanation • The employers assume: • Then:

  14. Possible Explanation • The employer still want to recruit the applicants with high productivity. • Female applicants are discriminated because there is information asymmetry and they can not persuade the employers that they have high productivity.

  15. Practice • Back to Table 2. • practice_no> practice_yes; • Practice serves as a signal to solve the problem of information asymmetry; • Practice could alleviate the negative effect of discrimination for female college graduates.

  16. Conclusions • First, there is serious discrimination against female applicants in labor market of college graduates, and the degree of discrimination rises as applicants’ human capital level increase. • Second, practice could alleviate the negative effect of discrimination. • Third, the reason of discrimination in labor market of college graduates may be the information asymmetry.