IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v193y2021ics0047272720301870.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing discrimination in the field: Evidence from an awareness raising intervention targeting gender biases in student evaluations of teaching

Author

Listed:
  • Boring, Anne
  • Philippe, Arnaud

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a field experiment designed to reduce gender discrimination in student evaluations of teaching (SET). In the first intervention, students receive a normative statement reminding them that they should not discriminate in SETs. In the second intervention, the normative statement includes precise information about how other students (especially male students) have discriminated against female teachers in previous years. The purely normative statement has no significant impact on SET overall satisfaction scores, suggesting that a blanket awareness-raising campaign may be inefficient to reduce discrimination. However, the informational statement appears to significantly reduce gender discrimination. The effect we find mainly comes from a change in male students’ evaluation of female teachers.

Suggested Citation

  • Boring, Anne & Philippe, Arnaud, 2021. "Reducing discrimination in the field: Evidence from an awareness raising intervention targeting gender biases in student evaluations of teaching," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:193:y:2021:i:c:s0047272720301870
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104323
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272720301870
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104323?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. Collins, William J., 2004. "The housing market impact of state-level anti-discrimination laws, 1960-1970," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 534-564, May.
    2. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    3. Dylan Glover & Amanda Pallais & William Pariente, 2017. "Discrimination as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Evidence from French Grocery Stores," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(3), pages 1219-1260.
    4. Alberto Alesina & Michela Carlana & Eliana La Ferrara & Paolo Pinotti, 2018. "Revealing Stereotypes: Evidence from Immigrants in Schools," NBER Working Papers 25333, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. William J. Collins, 2003. "The Labor Market Impact of State-Level Anti-Discrimination Laws, 1940–1960," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 56(2), pages 244-272, January.
    6. Joseph Price & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Racial Discrimination Among NBA Referees," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1859-1887.
    7. Devin G. Pope & Joseph Price & Justin Wolfers, 2018. "Awareness Reduces Racial Bias," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(11), pages 4988-4995, November.
    8. Rooth, Dan-Olof, 2010. "Automatic associations and discrimination in hiring: Real world evidence," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 523-534, June.
    9. Asensio, Javier & Gómez-Lobo, Andrés & Matas, Anna, 2014. "How effective are policies to reduce gasoline consumption? Evaluating a set of measures in Spain," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 34-42.
    10. Anne Boring, 2015. "Gender Biases in student evaluations of teachers," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2015-13, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    11. Marianne Bertrand & Dolly Chugh & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2005. "Implicit Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 94-98, May.
    12. 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.
    13. Astrid Kunze & Amalia R. Miller, 2017. "Women Helping Women? Evidence from Private Sector Data on Workplace Hierarchies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(5), pages 769-775, December.
    14. Cecilia Rouse & Claudia Goldin, 2000. "Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of "Blind" Auditions on Female Musicians," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 715-741, September.
    15. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1seuirq4ak9b9bouu1j29ebui7 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Wagner, N. & Rieger, M. & Voorvelt, K.J., 2016. "Gender, ethnicity and teaching evaluations : Evidence from mixed teaching teams," ISS Working Papers - General Series 617, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    17. Boring, Anne, 2017. "Gender biases in student evaluations of teaching," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 27-41.
    18. Rieger, Matthias & Voorvelt, Katherine, 2016. "Gender, ethnicity and teaching evaluations: Evidence from mixed teaching teamsAuthor-Name: Wagner, Natascha," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 79-94.
    19. Philip Oreopoulos, 2011. "Why Do Skilled Immigrants Struggle in the Labor Market? A Field Experiment with Thirteen Thousand Resumes," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 148-171, November.
    20. Hunt Allcott & Todd Rogers, 2014. "The Short-Run and Long-Run Effects of Behavioral Interventions: Experimental Evidence from Energy Conservation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(10), pages 3003-3037, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicolás Urdaneta Andrade, 2021. "¿Hombres "cracks" y mujeres "amables"? Sesgos de género en encuestas de profesores," Documentos CEDE 19557, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    2. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Sarah Jewell & Carl Singleton, 2023. "Can Awareness Reduce (and Reverse) Identity-driven Bias in Judgement? Evidence from International Cricket," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2023-10, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    3. Ayllón, Sara, 2022. "Online teaching and gender bias," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Robert Dur & Carlos Gomez-Gonzalez & Cornel Nesseler, 2022. "How to reduce discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in amateur soccer," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-005/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Ryo Takahashi, 2022. "Gender differences in tolerance for women's opinions and the role of social norms," Working Papers 2123, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.

    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. Ayllón, Sara, 2022. "Online teaching and gender bias," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. J. Michelle Brock & Ralph De Haas, 2023. "Discriminatory Lending: Evidence from Bankers in the Lab," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 31-68, April.
    3. Barron, Kai & Ditlmann, Ruth & Gehrig, Stefan & Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian, 2020. "Explicit and implicit belief-based gender discrimination: A hiring experiment," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2020-306, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Eren, Ozkan, 2023. "Potential in-group bias at work: Evidence from performance evaluations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 296-312.
    5. 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.
    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. Robert Dur & Carlos Gomez-Gonzalez & Cornel Nesseler, 2022. "How to reduce discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in amateur soccer," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-005/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    8. Michela Carlana, 2019. "Implicit Stereotypes: Evidence from Teachers’ Gender Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1163-1224.
    9. 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.
    10. David Neumark, 2016. "Experimental Research on Labor Market Discrimination," NBER Working Papers 22022, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Arceo-Gomez, Eva O. & Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M., 2022. "Gender Bias in Evaluation Processes," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    12. J. Aislinn Bohren & Alex Imas & Michael Rosenberg, 2019. "The Dynamics of Discrimination: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(10), pages 3395-3436, October.
    13. Paredes, Valentina & Paserman, M. Daniele & Pino, Francisco J., 2020. "Does Economics Make You Sexist?," IZA Discussion Papers 13223, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Ayaita, Adam, 2021. "Labor Market Discrimination and Statistical Differences in Unobserved Characteristics of Applicants," EconStor Preprints 236615, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    15. Daniel J. Lee, 2018. "Does Implicit Bias Predict Dictator Giving?," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, September.
    16. Kondylis,Florence & Legovini,Arianna & Vyborny,Kate & Zwager,Astrid Maria Theresia & Cardoso De Andrade,Luiza, 2020. "Demand for Safe Spaces : Avoiding Harassment and Stigma," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9269, The World Bank.
    17. Nikoloz Kudashvili & Philipp Lergetporer, 2019. "Do Minorities Misrepresent Their Ethnicity to Avoid Discrimination?," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp644, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    18. Morten Størling Hedegaard & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2018. "The Price of Prejudice," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 40-63, January.
    19. Principe, Francesco & van Ours, Jan C., 2022. "Racial bias in newspaper ratings of professional football players," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    20. Arceo-Gomez, Eva O. & Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M., 2019. "Gender stereotypes: The case of MisProfesores.com in Mexico," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 55-65.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Student evaluations of teaching; Gender biases; Field experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • J71 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Hiring and Firing

    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:eee:pubeco:v:193:y:2021:i:c:s0047272720301870. 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/locate/inca/505578 .

    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.