IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/15972.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Charity and Favoritism in the Field: Are Female Economists Nicer (to Each Other)?

Author

Listed:
  • Jason Abrevaya
  • Daniel S. Hamermesh

Abstract

Using a very large sample of matched author-referee pairs, we examine how the gender of referees and authors affects the former's recommendations. Relying on changing matches of authors and referees, we find no evidence of gender differences among referees in charitableness toward authors; nor do we find any effect of the interaction between the referees' and authors' gender. With substantial research showing gender differences in fairness, the results suggest that an ethos of objectivity can overcome tendencies toward same-group favoritism/opposite-group discrimination.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason Abrevaya & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2010. "Charity and Favoritism in the Field: Are Female Economists Nicer (to Each Other)?," NBER Working Papers 15972, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:15972
    Note: LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15972.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. N/A, 2010. "Referees," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 47(2), pages 261-262, March.
    2. Christopher A. Parsons & Johan Sulaeman & Michael C. Yates & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2011. "Strike Three: Discrimination, Incentives, and Evaluation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1410-1435, June.
    3. Joseph Price & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Racial Discrimination Among NBA Referees," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1859-1887.
    4. John M. Abowd & Francis Kramarz & David N. Margolis, 1999. "High Wage Workers and High Wage Firms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(2), pages 251-334, March.
    5. James Andreoni & Lise Vesterlund, 2001. "Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(1), pages 293-312.
    6. Blank, Rebecca M, 1991. "The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1041-1067, December.
    7. Stephen G. Donald & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2006. "What is Discrimination? Gender in the American Economic Association, 1935-2004," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1283-1292, September.
    8. Alan E. Dillingham & Marianne A. Ferber & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1994. "Gender Discrimination by Gender: Voting in a Professional Society," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 47(4), pages 622-633, July.
    9. Iannaccone, Laurence R, 1992. "Sacrifice and Stigma: Reducing Free-Riding in Cults, Communes, and Other Collectives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(2), pages 271-291, April.
    10. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    11. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    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. D. Checchi & S. Cicognani & N. Kulic, 2015. "Gender quotas or girls’ networks? Towards an understanding of recruitment in the research profession in Italy," Working Papers wp1047, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    2. Hammermann, Andrea & Mohnen, Alwine & Nieken, Petra, 2012. "Whom to Choose as a Team Mate? A Lab Experiment about In-Group Favouritism," IZA Discussion Papers 6286, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    3. Jan Feld & Nicolás Salamanca & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2016. "Endophilia or Exophobia: Beyond Discrimination," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 126(594), pages 1503-1527, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Dempsey, Judith A. & Plantinga, Andrew J., 2013. "How well do urban growth boundaries contain development? Results for Oregon using a difference-in-difference estimator," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 996-1007.
    6. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo, 2016. "Field Experiments on Discrimination," NBER Working Papers 22014, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Hamermesh, Daniel S., 2015. "Age, Cohort and Co-Authorship," IZA Discussion Papers 8828, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    8. Bransch, Felix & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2017. "Male Gatekeepers Gender Bias in the Publishing Process?," IZA Discussion Papers 11089, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    9. repec:spr:jlabre:v:38:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s12122-017-9254-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Pritchard, Annette & Morgan, Nigel, 2017. "Tourism’s lost leaders: Analysing gender and performance," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 34-47.
    11. Natalia Zinovyeva & Manuel F. Bagues, 2010. "Does gender matter for academic promotion? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment," Working Papers 2010-15, FEDEA.
    12. Mengel, Friederike & Sauermann, Jan & Zölitz, Ulf, 2017. "Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations," IZA Discussion Papers 11000, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    13. Hengel, E., 2017. "Publishing while Female. Are women held to higher standards? Evidence from peer review," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1753, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • 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:nbr:nberwo:15972. 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: () or (Joanne Lustig). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.

    If CitEc recognized a 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.

    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.