IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/qjecon/v138y2023i4p2069-2126..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender Differences in Job Search and the Earnings Gap: Evidence from the Field and Lab

Author

Listed:
  • Patricia Cortés
  • Jessica Pan
  • Laura Pilossoph
  • Ernesto Reuben
  • Basit Zafar

Abstract

This article investigates gender differences in the job search process in the field and lab. Our analysis is based on rich information on initial job offers and acceptances from undergraduates of Boston University’s Questrom School of Business. We find (i) a clear gender difference in the timing of job offer acceptance, with women accepting jobs substantially earlier than men, and (ii) a sizable gender earnings gap in accepted offers, which narrows in favor of women over the course of the job search period. To understand these patterns, we develop a job search model that incorporates gender differences in risk aversion and overoptimism about prospective offers. We validate the model’s assumptions and predictions using the survey data and present empirical evidence that the job search patterns in the field can be partly explained by the greater risk aversion displayed by women and the higher levels of overoptimism displayed by men. We replicate these findings in a laboratory experiment that features sequential job search and provide direct evidence on the purported mechanisms. Our findings highlight the importance of risk preferences and beliefs for gender differences in job-finding behavior and, consequently, early-career wage gaps among the highly educated.

Suggested Citation

  • Patricia Cortés & Jessica Pan & Laura Pilossoph & Ernesto Reuben & Basit Zafar, 2023. "Gender Differences in Job Search and the Earnings Gap: Evidence from the Field and Lab," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(4), pages 2069-2126.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:qjecon:v:138:y:2023:i:4:p:2069-2126.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/qje/qjad017
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:qjecon:v:138:y:2023:i:4:p:2069-2126.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/qje .

    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.