IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2109.14343.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Testing the Presence of Implicit Hiring Quotas with Application to German Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Lena Janys

Abstract

It is widely accepted that women are underrepresented in academia in general and economics in particular. This paper introduces a test to detect an under-researched form of hiring bias: implicit quotas. I derive a test under the Null of random hiring that requires no information about individual hires under some assumptions. I derive the asymptotic distribution of this test statistic and, as an alternative, propose a parametric bootstrap procedure that samples from the exact distribution. This test can be used to analyze a variety of other hiring settings. I analyze the distribution of female professors at German universities across 50 different disciplines. I show that the distribution of women, given the average number of women in the respective field, is highly unlikely to result from a random allocation of women across departments and more likely to stem from an implicit quota of one or two women on the department level. I also show that a large part of the variation in the share of women across STEM and non-STEM disciplines could be explained by a two-women quota on the department level. These findings have important implications for the potential effectiveness of policies aimed at reducing underrepresentation and providing evidence of how stakeholders perceive and evaluate diversity.

Suggested Citation

  • Lena Janys, 2021. "Testing the Presence of Implicit Hiring Quotas with Application to German Universities," Papers 2109.14343, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2109.14343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.14343
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bagues, Manuel & Campa, Pamela, 2021. "Can gender quotas in candidate lists empower women? Evidence from a regression discontinuity design," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    2. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2020. "Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(1), pages 269-327.
    3. Thomas Buser & Muriel Niederle & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2014. "Gender, Competitiveness, and Career Choices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(3), pages 1409-1447.
    4. Arcidiacono, Peter & Kinsler, Josh & Ransom, Tyler, 2022. "Asian American Discrimination in Harvard Admissions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    5. Boring, Anne, 2017. "Gender biases in student evaluations of teaching," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 27-41.
    6. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2021. "Gender Gaps in the Evaluation of Research: Evidence from Submissions to Economics Conferences," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(3), pages 590-618, June.
    7. Alice H. Wu, 2018. "Gendered Language on the Economics Job Market Rumors Forum," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 175-179, May.
    8. Shelly Lundberg & Jenna Stearns, 2019. "Women in Economics: Stalled Progress," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    9. Agata Maida & Andrea Weber, 2022. "Female Leadership and Gender Gap within Firms: Evidence from an Italian Board Reform," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(2), pages 488-515, March.
    10. Heather Sarsons, 2017. "Recognition for Group Work: Gender Differences in Academia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 141-145, May.
    11. Paryavi, Maliheh & Bohnet, Iris & van Geen, Alexandra, 2019. "Descriptive Norms and Gender Diversity: Reactance from Men," Working Paper Series rwp19-007, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Claudia Goldin, 2014. "A Pollution Theory of Discrimination: Male and Female Differences in Occupations and Earnings," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital in History: The American Record, pages 313-348, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Maliheh Paryavi & Iris Bohnet & Alexandra van Geen, 2019. "Descriptive norms and gender diversity: Reactance from men," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    14. Catherine Porter & Danila Serra, 2020. "Gender Differences in the Choice of Major: The Importance of Female Role Models," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 226-254, July.
    15. Friederike Mengel & Jan Sauermann & Ulf Zölitz, 2019. "Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 535-566.
    16. Amanda Bayer & Cecilia Elena Rouse, 2016. "Diversity in the Economics Profession: A New Attack on an Old Problem," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 221-242, Fall.
    17. Junming Huang & Alexander J. Gates & Roberta Sinatra & Albert-László Barabási, 2020. "Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(9), pages 4609-4616, March.
    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. Lena Janys, 2022. "Testing the Presence of Implicit Hiring Quotas with Application to German Universities," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 165, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    2. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2021. "Gender Gaps in the Evaluation of Research: Evidence from Submissions to Economics Conferences," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(3), pages 590-618, June.
    3. Paredes, Valentina & Paserman, M. Daniele & Pino, Francisco J., 2020. "Does Economics Make You Sexist?," IZA Discussion Papers 13223, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Janys, Lena, 2020. "Evidence for a Two-Women Quota in University Departments across Disciplines," IZA Discussion Papers 13372, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Friebel, Guido & Weinberger, Alisa & ,, 2021. "Women in Economics: Europe and the World," CEPR Discussion Papers 16686, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Laura Hospido & Carlos Sanz, 2019. "Gender gaps in the evaluation of research: evidence from submissions to economics conferences (Updated March 2020)," Working Papers 1918, Banco de España, revised Mar 2020.
    7. Iriberri, Nagore & Funk, Patricia & Savio, Giulia, 2022. "Does Scarcity of Female Instructors Create Demand for Diversity among Students? Evidence from an M-Turk Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 14190, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Pierre Deschamps, 2018. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: a Boon or a Bane for Women?," Sciences Po publications 82, Sciences Po.
    9. Martina Viarengo & Ugo Panizza & Enrico Nano, 2021. "A Generation of Italian Economists," CID Working Papers 400, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    10. Richard McManus & Karen Mumford & Cristina Sechel, 2022. "Measuring research excellence amongst economics lecturers in the UK," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 386-404, April.
    11. Gamage, Danula K. & Sevilla, Almudena & Smith, Sarah, 2020. "Women in Economics: A UK Perspective," IZA Discussion Papers 13477, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Fabiana Rocha, Paula Pereda, & Liz Matsunaga & Maria Dolores Montoya Diaz & Renata Narita, & Bruna Borges, 2021. "Gender differences in the academic career of economics in Brazil," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 40(84), pages 815-892, October.
    13. Koffi, Marlene, 2021. "Innovative ideas and gender inequality," CLEF Working Paper Series 35, Canadian Labour Economics Forum (CLEF), University of Waterloo.
    14. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7bucmgmilh9ul9ogmiku5legh5 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & María Inés Moraes & Tatiana Pérez, 2021. "Women in Research in Economics in Uruguay," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 40(84), pages 763-790, October.
    16. Markus Eberhardt & Giovanni Facchini & Valeria Rueda, 2023. "Gender Differences in Reference Letters: Evidence from the Economics Job Market," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(655), pages 2676-2708.
    17. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2022. "Gender Differences in Peer Recognition by Economists," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(5), pages 1937-1971, September.
    18. Farré, Lídia & Ortega, Francesc, 2021. "Family Ties, Geographic Mobility and the Gender Gap in Academic Aspirations," IZA Discussion Papers 14561, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Arceo-Gomez, Eva O. & Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M., 2022. "Gender Bias in Evaluation Processes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. Jenny Bourne & Nathan D. Grawe & Michael Hemesath & Prathi Seneviratne & Maya Jensen, 2024. "The Disappearing Gender Gap in Scholarly Publication of Economists at Liberal Arts Colleges," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 50(1), pages 117-134, January.
    21. Audinga Baltrunaite & Alessandra Casarico & Lucia Rizzica, 2024. "Women in economics: the role of gendered references at entry in the profession," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1438, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2109.14343. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.