IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v91y2024i4p2135-2167..html

On the Use of Outcome Tests for Detecting Bias in Decision Making

Author

Listed:
  • Ivan A Canay
  • Magne Mogstad
  • Jack Mount

Abstract

The decisions of judges, lenders, journal editors, and other gatekeepers often lead to significant disparities across affected groups. An important question is whether, and to what extent, these group-level disparities are driven by relevant differences in underlying individual characteristics or by biased decision makers. Becker (1957, 1993) proposed an outcome test of bias based on differences in post-decision outcomes across groups, inspiring a large and growing empirical literature. The goal of our paper is to offer a methodological blueprint for empirical work that seeks to use outcome tests to detect bias. We show that models of decision making underpinning outcome tests can be usefully recast as Roy models, since heterogeneous potential outcomes enter directly into the decision maker’s choice equation. Different members of the Roy model family, however, are distinguished by the tightness of the link between potential outcomes and decisions. We show that these distinctions have important implications for defining bias, deriving logically valid outcome tests of such bias, and identifying the marginal outcomes that the test requires.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivan A Canay & Magne Mogstad & Jack Mount, 2024. "On the Use of Outcome Tests for Detecting Bias in Decision Making," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(4), pages 2135-2167.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:91:y:2024:i:4:p:2135-2167.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/restud/rdad082
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Adriana Corredor-Waldron & Janet Currie & Molly Schnell, 2024. "Drivers of Racial Differences in C-Sections," NBER Working Papers 32891, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Arcidiacono, Peter & Kinsler, Josh & Ransom, Tyler, 2022. "Asian American Discrimination in Harvard Admissions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    3. David Arnold & Will Dobbie & Peter Hull, 2022. "Measuring Racial Discrimination in Bail Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(9), pages 2992-3038, September.
    4. Fan Wu & Yi Xin, 2024. "Estimating Nonseparable Selection Models: A Functional Contraction Approach," Papers 2411.01799, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2025.
    5. Deb, Rahul & Renou, Ludovic, 2022. "Which Wage Distributions are Consistent with Statistical Discrimination?," CEPR Discussion Papers 17676, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Federico A. Bugni & Ivan A. Canay & Deborah Kim, 2025. "Testing Conditional Stochastic Dominance at Target Points," Papers 2503.14747, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2025.
    7. Laura Blattner & Scott Nelson, 2021. "How Costly is Noise? Data and Disparities in Consumer Credit," Papers 2105.07554, arXiv.org.
    8. Trevor J. Bakker & Stefanie DeLuca & Eric A. English & Jamie Fogel & Nathaniel Hendren & Daniel Herbst, 2025. "Credit Access in the United States," Working Papers 25-45, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    9. Ashesh Rambachan, 2022. "Identifying Prediction Mistakes in Observational Data," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Artificial Intelligence, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Will Dobbie & Crystal S. Yang, 2021. "The US Pretrial System: Balancing Individual Rights and Public Interests," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(4), pages 49-70, Fall.
    11. Lee, Ji Hyung & Park, Byoung G., 2023. "Nonparametric identification and estimation of the extended Roy model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 1087-1113.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C26 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • J15 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Minorities, Races, Indigenous Peoples, and Immigrants; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J71 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Hiring and Firing
    • K14 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Criminal Law
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

    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:restud:v:91:y:2024:i:4:p:2135-2167.. 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/restud .

    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.