IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v147y2021icp269-283.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of the MeToo scandal on women’s perceptions of security

Author

Listed:
  • AitBihiOuali, Laila
  • Graham, Daniel J.

Abstract

This study assesses whether the negative exogenous informational shock of the MeToo scandal has affected women’s perception of security. The MeToo movement was first reported in the media worldwide in October 2017, and has received enormous press coverage since then. The exogenous and unanticipated nature of the scandal provides a natural experiment that we can use to quantify how wider external information affects ‘ordinary’ women’s perceptions of security and their willingness to report feelings of dissatisfaction with security levels. To do so, we use a case study of women’s’ perception of security in 12 metro systems in Europe, for which we have large-scale unique customer satisfaction data over the years 2014 to 2018. We use interview dates to determine perceptions pre and post scandal, and we take the MeToo scandal as a ‘treatment’ affecting women in the sense that they were the primary target of the informational shock. Using pre and post treatment data, for our defined treated (women) and control (men) units, we apply a difference-in-differences estimator to identify the impact of the scandal on perceptions of security. Our results show a 2.5% increase in the probability of women being dissatisfied with security in stations and in metro carriages post-scandal. These results support the conclusion that revealed preferences are only revealed up to a certain extent. A change in the context (e.g., an informational shock), can alter perceptions and in turn, can encourage individuals to disclose lower (or higher) satisfaction levels as perceptions of the norm change.

Suggested Citation

  • AitBihiOuali, Laila & Graham, Daniel J., 2021. "The impact of the MeToo scandal on women’s perceptions of security," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 269-283.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:147:y:2021:i:c:p:269-283
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2021.02.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856421000525
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2021.02.018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margalit, Yotam, 2013. "Explaining Social Policy Preferences: Evidence from the Great Recession," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 80-103, February.
    2. Laila Ait Bihi Ouali, 2020. "Effects of signalling tax evasion on redistribution and voting preferences: Evidence from the Panama Papers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2011. "Identity, Morals, and Taboos: Beliefs as Assets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(2), pages 805-855.
    4. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2005. "Self-Confidence and Personal Motivation," International Economic Association Series, in: Bina Agarwal & Alessandro Vercelli (ed.), Psychology, Rationality and Economic Behaviour, chapter 2, pages 19-57, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Stephen G. Donald & Kevin Lang, 2007. "Inference with Difference-in-Differences and Other Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(2), pages 221-233, May.
    6. Bernardo, Valeria & Fageda, Xavier, 2017. "The effects of the Morocco-European Union open skies agreement: A difference-in-differences analysis," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 24-41.
    7. Ilyana Kuziemko & Michael I. Norton & Emmanuel Saez & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2015. "How Elastic Are Preferences for Redistribution? Evidence from Randomized Survey Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1478-1508, April.
    8. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    9. Laila Ait Bihi Ouali & Daniel J. Graham & Alexander Barron & Mark Trompet, 2020. "Gender differences in the perception of safety in public transport," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(3), pages 737-769, June.
    10. Cruces, Guillermo & Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Tetaz, Martin, 2013. "Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 100-112.
    11. Gallego, Francisco & Montero, Juan-Pablo & Salas, Christian, 2013. "The effect of transport policies on car use: Evidence from Latin American cities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 47-62.
    12. David H. Autor, 2003. "Outsourcing at Will: The Contribution of Unjust Dismissal Doctrine to the Growth of Employment Outsourcing," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 1-42, January.
    13. Crane, Randall, 2007. "Is There a Quiet Revolution in Women's Travel? Revisiting the Gender Gap in Commuting," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt8nj9n8nb, University of California Transportation Center.
    14. Church, A. & Frost, M. & Sullivan, K., 2000. "Transport and social exclusion in London," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 195-205, July.
    15. Ross, Catherine E., 2000. "Walking, exercising, and smoking: does neighborhood matter?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 265-274, July.
    16. Boarnet, Marlon G. & Hsu, Hsin-Ping, 2015. "The gender gap in non-work travel: The relative roles of income earning potential and land use," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 111-127.
    17. Matthew Rabin & Joel L. Schrag, 1999. "First Impressions Matter: A Model of Confirmatory Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(1), pages 37-82.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laila Ait Bihi Ouali, 2020. "Effects of signalling tax evasion on redistribution and voting preferences: Evidence from the Panama Papers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Faia, Ester & Fuster, Andreas & Pezone, Vincenzo & Zafar, Basit, 2021. "Biases in information selection and processing: Survey evidence from the pandemic," SAFE Working Paper Series 307, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    3. Lydia Mechtenberg & Grischa Perino & Nicolas Treich & Jean-Robert Tyran & Stephanie Wang, 2021. "Self-Signaling in Moral Voting," Discussion Papers 21-01, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    4. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2023. "Beliefs about Racial Discrimination and Support for Pro-Black Policies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(1), pages 40-53, January.
    5. Bilal El Rafhi & Alexandre Volle, 2019. "The Effect of the Arab Spring on the Preferences for Redistribution in Egypt," Post-Print hal-02101392, HAL.
    6. Javier Olivera, 2014. "Preferences for redistribution after the economic crisis," Economics and Business Letters, Oviedo University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 137-145.
    7. Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica & Morelli, Massimo & Rosso, Anna Cecilia, 2023. "In medio stat virtus? Effective communication and preferences for redistribution in hard times," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 105-147.
    8. Mounir Karadja & Johanna Mollerstrom & David Seim, 2017. "Richer (and Holier) Than Thou? The Effect of Relative Income Improvements on Demand for Redistribution," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(2), pages 201-212, May.
    9. Summers, Kate & Accominotti, Fabien & Burchardt, Tania & Hecht, Katharina & Mann, Liz & Mijs, Jonathan J.B, 2022. "Deliberating inequality: a blueprint for studying the social formation of beliefs about economic inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114591, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Liu, Manwei, 2021. "Interdependent individuals : How aggregation, observation, and persuasion affect economic behavior and judgment," Other publications TiSEM ab3ef470-c4a4-4d6c-ba1a-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2020. "Labor market concerns and support for immigration," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    12. Le Yaouanq, Yves, 2023. "A model of voting with motivated beliefs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 394-408.
    13. Laila Ait Bihi Ouali, 2019. "Top Income Tax Evasion and Redistribution Preferences: Evidence from the Panama Papers," Working Papers halshs-01978131, HAL.
    14. Le Yaouanq, Yves, 2018. "A Model of Ideological Thinking," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 85, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    15. Grigorieff, Alexis & Roth, Christopher & Ubfal, Diego, 2016. "Does Information Change Attitudes Towards Immigrants? Representative Evidence from Survey Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 10419, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Jeffrey, Karen, 2021. "Automation and the future of work: How rhetoric shapes the response in policy preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 417-433.
    17. Chen, Jaden Yang, 2022. "Biased learning under ambiguous information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    18. Darya Korlyakova, 2021. "Learning about Ethnic Discrimination from Different Information Sources," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp689, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    19. Grigorieff, Alexis & Roth, Christopher & Ubfal, Diego, 2016. "Does Information Change Attitudes Towards Immigrants? Representative Evidence from Survey Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 10419, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Bobba, Matteo & Frisancho, Veronica, 2022. "Self-perceptions about academic achievement: Evidence from Mexico City," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 58-73.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:147:y:2021:i:c:p:269-283. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.