IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v55y2026i3p981-1026.html

The Unrealized Potential of Audits: Applicant-Side Inequalities in Effort, Opportunities, and Certainty

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Vuolo
  • Sadé L. Lindsay
  • Vincent J. Roscigno
  • Shawn D. Bushway

Abstract

Randomized audits and correspondence studies are widely regarded as a “gold standard†for capturing discrimination and bias. However, gatekeepers (e.g., employers) are the analytic unit even though stated implications often center on group-level inequalities. Employing simple rules, we show that audits have the potential to uncover applicant-side inequalities and burdens beyond the gatekeeper biases standardly reported. Specifically, applicants from groups facing lower callback rates must submit more applications to ensure an eventual callback, have fewer opportunities to choose from, and face higher uncertainty regarding how many applications to submit. These results reflect several sequential and cumulative stratification processes “real-world†applicants face that warrant attention in conventional audit reporting. Our approach can be straightforwardly applied and, we show, is particularly pertinent for employment relative to other institutional domains (e.g., education, religion). We discuss the methodological and theoretical relevance of our suggested extensions and the implications for the study of inequality, discrimination, and social closure.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Vuolo & Sadé L. Lindsay & Vincent J. Roscigno & Shawn D. Bushway, 2026. "The Unrealized Potential of Audits: Applicant-Side Inequalities in Effort, Opportunities, and Certainty," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 55(3), pages 981-1026, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:55:y:2026:i:3:p:981-1026
    DOI: 10.1177/00491241251338240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00491241251338240
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00491241251338240?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:somere:v:55:y:2026:i:3:p:981-1026. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.