IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sej/ancoec/v652y1998p245-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discrimination by Gender and Disability Status: Do Worker Perceptions Match Statistical Measures?

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin F. Hallock
  • Wallace Hendricks
  • Emer Broadbent

Abstract

We explore whether perceptions of discrimination are related to ordinary statistical measures. The majority of disabled respondents report feeling some discrimination due to their disability, the majority of women feel some discrimination because of their gender, and a surprising number of men also report some discrimination. We do not find a strong link between perceptions of discrimination and measured discrimination perhaps because those who perceive discrimination feel that it occurs along other dimensions than pay. However, we do find a connection between whether a person feels his or her income is inadequate and measured discrimination for all groups studied.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin F. Hallock & Wallace Hendricks & Emer Broadbent, 1998. "Discrimination by Gender and Disability Status: Do Worker Perceptions Match Statistical Measures?," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 65(2), pages 245-263, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sej:ancoec:v:65:2:y:1998:p:245-263
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trudy Ann Cameron, 1991. "Interval Estimates of Non-Market Resource Values from Referendum Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 413-421.
    2. John Whitehead & Ju-Chin Huang & Glenn Blomquist & Richard Ready, 1998. "Construct Validity of Dichotomous and Polychotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 107-116, January.
    3. Boyle Kevin J. & Desvousges William H. & Johnson F. Reed & Dunford Richard W. & Hudson Sara P., 1994. "An Investigation of Part-Whole Biases in Contingent-Valuation Studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 64-83, July.
    4. Haab, Timothy C. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 1997. "Referendum Models and Negative Willingness to Pay: Alternative Solutions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 251-270, February.
    5. Kanninen Barbara J., 1995. "Bias in Discrete Response Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 114-125, January.
    6. Richard T. Carson & Robert Cameron Mitchell, 1993. "The Issue of Scope in Contingent Valuation Studies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(5), pages 1263-1267.
    7. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 1998. "Referendum Models and Economic Values: Theoretical, Intuitive, and Practical Bounds on Willingness to Pay," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 216-229.
    8. John C. Whitehead, 1995. "Willingness to Pay for Quality Improvements: Comparative Statics and Interpretation of Contingent Valuation Results," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(2), pages 207-215.
    9. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    10. Daniel McFadden, 1994. "Contingent Valuation and Social Choice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 689-708.
    11. Diamond, Peter, 1996. "Testing the Internal Consistency of Contingent Valuation Surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 337-347, May.
    12. Loomis John & Lockwood Michael & DeLacy Terry, 1993. "Some Empirical Evidence on Embedding Effects in Contingent Valuation of Forest Protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 45-55, July.
    13. Smith, V. Kerry & Osborne, Laura L., 1996. "Do Contingent Valuation Estimates Pass a "Scope" Test? A Meta-analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 287-301, November.
    14. Randall, Alan & Hoehn, John P., 1996. "Embedding in Market Demand Systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 369-380, May.
    15. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    16. Carson Richard T. & Mitchell Robert Cameron, 1995. "Sequencing and Nesting in Contingent Valuation Surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 155-173, March.
    17. Fischhoff, Baruch & Quadrel, Marilyn Jacobs & Kamlet, Mark & Loewenstain, George & Dawes, Robyn & Fischbeck, Paul & Klepper, Steven & Leland, Jonathan & Stroh, Patrick, 1993. "Embedding Effects: Stimulus Representation and Response Mode," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 211-234, June.
    18. Harrison, Glenn W. & Lesley, James C., 1996. "Must Contingent Valuation Surveys Cost So Much?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 79-95, July.
    19. Berrens, Robert P. & Ganderton, Philip T. & Silva, Carol L., 1996. "Valuing The Protection Of Minimum Instream Flows In New Mexico," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 21(02), December.
    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. Goldsmith, Arthur H. & Sedo, Stanley & Darity, William Jr. & Hamilton, Darrick, 2004. "The labor supply consequences of perceptions of employer discrimination during search and on-the-job: Integrating neoclassical theory and cognitive dissonance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 15-39, February.
    2. Antecol, Heather & Cobb-Clark, Deborah A., 2008. "Identity and racial harassment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(3-4), pages 529-557, June.
    3. Scott Adams & John Heywood & Laurie Miller, 2014. "Caregivers, firm policies and gender discrimination claims," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 359-377, June.
    4. Antecol, Heather & Barcus, Vanessa E. & Cobb-Clark, Deborah, 2009. "Gender-biased behavior at work: Exploring the relationship between sexual harassment and sex discrimination," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 782-792, October.
    5. Alan Duncan & Astghik Mavisakalyan & Yashar Taverdi, 2016. "Self-assessed versus statistical evidence of labour market discrimination," Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Working Paper series WP1602, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School.
    6. Antecol, Heather & Barcus, Vanessa E. & Cobb-Clark, Deborah A., 2007. "Gender-Biased Behavior at Work: What Can Surveys Tell Us About the Link Between Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination?," IZA Discussion Papers 2647, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    7. Alan Duncan & Astghik Mavisakalyan & Yashar Tarverdi, 2016. "Self-assessed versus statistical evidence of labour market discrimination The case of indigenous Australians," WIDER Working Paper Series 070, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Angel López-Nicolás & Jaume García & Pedro J. Hernández, 2001. "How wide is the gap? An investigation of gender wage differences using quantile regression," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 149-167.

    More about this item

    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:sej:ancoec:v:65:2:y:1998:p:245-263. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Laura Razzolini). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/seaaaea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.