IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v97y2022ics2214804321001506.html

The social pay gap across occupations: Experimental evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Bublitz, Elisabeth
  • Regner, Tobias

Abstract

Although receiving equal wages for work of equal value is a legal right in many countries, there is evidence that it does not hold for social occupations (e.g., health care, education). Considering this existing wage penalty or social pay gap, we design a laboratory experiment that mimics actual income distributions (Germany, USA), incorporates social occupations in the lab society, and allows for (voluntary) redistribution among subjects. The results show that – regardless of (non-)random assignment to social jobs and the level of income inequality – individuals in social jobs are only partly compensated for their social effort in a market design. Indeed, a downward spiral, induced by emotional reactions, emerges as social effort and donations converge to a ‘low’ equilibrium. These results suggest that a market approach fails to eliminate the social pay gap.

Suggested Citation

  • Bublitz, Elisabeth & Regner, Tobias, 2022. "The social pay gap across occupations: Experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:97:y:2022:i:c:s2214804321001506
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2021.101810
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804321001506
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2021.101810?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ryan O. Murphy & Kurt A. Ackerman & Michel J. J. Handgraaf, 2011. "Measuring social value orientation," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(8), pages 771-781, December.
    2. Klammer, Ute & Klenner, Christina & Lillemeier, Sarah, 2018. "Comparable Worth: Arbeitsbewertungen als blinder Fleck in der Ursachenanalyse des Gender Pay Gaps?," WSI Studies 14, The Institute of Economic and Social Research (WSI), Hans Böckler Foundation.
    3. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pc:p:3143-3259 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    5. Blau Francine D & Kahn Lawrence M, 2007. "The Gender Pay Gap," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 4(4), pages 1-6, June.
    6. Greiner, Ben, 2004. "An Online Recruitment System for Economic Experiments," MPRA Paper 13513, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Claudia Goldin, 2014. "A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1091-1119, April.
    8. Elisabeth Bublitz & Tobias Regner, 2020. "The social pay gap among occupational twins: a task-based comparison," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(3), pages 2440-2444.
    9. Luigino Bruni & Robert Sugden, 2013. "Reclaiming Virtue Ethics for Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 141-164, Fall.
    10. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    11. Murphy, Ryan O. & Ackermann, Kurt A. & Handgraaf, Michel J. J., 2011. "Measuring Social Value Orientation," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(8), pages 771-781, December.
    12. Michael J. Sandel, 2013. "Market Reasoning as Moral Reasoning: Why Economists Should Re-engage with Political Philosophy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 121-140, Fall.
    13. Timothy Besley, 2013. "What's the Good of the Market? An Essay on Michael Sandel's What Money Can't Buy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 478-495, June.
    14. Kristin J. Kleinjans & Karl Fritjof Krassel & Anthony Dukes, 2017. "Occupational Prestige and the Gender Wage Gap," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(4), pages 565-593, November.
    15. Elaine Sorensen, 1990. "The Crowding Hypothesis and Comparable Worth," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(1), pages 55-89.
    16. Johnson, George & Solon, Gary, 1986. "Estimates of the Direct Effects of Comparable Worth Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1117-1125, December.
    17. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    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. Brandts, Jordi & Riedl, Arno, 2020. "Market interaction and efficient cooperation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    2. repec:grz:wpsses:2013-05 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Jürgen Fleiß, 2015. "Merit norms in the ultimatum game: an experimental study of the effect of merit on individual behavior and aggregate outcomes," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 389-406, June.
    4. Brandts, J. & Riedl, A.M., 2016. "Market competition and efficient cooperation," Research Memorandum 006, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    5. Christoph Engel & Paul A. M. Van Lange, 2021. "Social mindfulness is normative when costs are low, but rapidly declines with increases in costs," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 290-322, March.
    6. Quement, Mark T. Le & Marcin, Isabel, 2020. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 449-468.
    7. Fabian Winter, 2013. "Fairness norms can explain the emergence of specific cooperation norms in the Battle of the Prisoners Dilemma," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-016, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    8. Mark T. Le Quement & Isabel Marcin, 2016. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2016_05, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics, revised Oct 2016.
    9. Gortner, Paul J. & van der Weele, Joël J., 2019. "Peer effects and risk sharing in experimental asset markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 129-147.
    10. Santiago Sanchez-Pages, 2013. "Two Studies on the Interplay between Social Preferences and Individual Biological Features," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 218, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    11. Alexia Gaudeul, 2013. "Social preferences under uncertainty," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-024, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    12. Mittlaender, Sergio, 2025. "Conflict and property law: The hidden costs of takings and of liability rule protection," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    13. Fadong Chen & Urs Fischbacher, 2015. "Cognitive Processes of Distributional Preferences: A Response Time Study," TWI Research Paper Series 101, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    14. Bublitz, Elisabeth & Regner, Tobias, 2016. "The social pay gap across occupations: Survey and experimental evidence," HWWI Research Papers 174, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).
    15. Fadong Chen & Urs Fischbacher, 2020. "Cognitive processes underlying distributional preferences: a response time study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 421-446, June.
    16. James Bland & Nikos Nikiforakis, 2013. "Tacit Coordination in Games with Third-Party Externalities," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2013_19, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics.
    17. Ubeda, Paloma, 2014. "The consistency of fairness rules: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 88-100.
    18. Andrea Isoni & Robert Sugden & Jiwei Zheng, 2018. "The Pizza Night Game: Efficiency, Conflict and Inequality in Tacit Bargaining Games with Focal Points," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 18-01, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    19. Nadine Chlaß & Peter G. Moffatt, 2017. "Giving in Dictator Games - Experimenter Demand Effect or Preference over the Rules of the Game?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-044, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    20. Sliwka, Dirk & Werner, Peter, 2016. "How Do Agents React to Dynamic Wage Increases? An Experimental Study," IZA Discussion Papers 9855, IZA Network @ LISER.
    21. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Peterle, Emmanuel, 2018. "Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 220-236.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials

    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:soceco:v:97:y:2022:i:c:s2214804321001506. 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/620175 .

    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.