IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/19471.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Endophilia or Exophobia: Beyond Discrimination

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Feld
  • Nicolás Salamanca
  • Daniel S. Hamermesh

Abstract

The immense literature on discrimination treats outcomes as relative: One group suffers compared to another. But does a difference arise because agents discriminate against others--are exophobic--or because they favor their own kind--are endophilic? This difference matters, as the relative importance of the types of discrimination and their inter-relation affect market outcomes. Using a field experiment in which graders at one university were randomly assigned students' exams that did or did not contain the students' names, on average we find favoritism but no discrimination by nationality, and neither favoritism nor discrimination by gender, findings that are robust to a wide variety of potential concerns. We observe heterogeneity in both discrimination and favoritism by nationality and by gender in the distributions of graders' preferences. We show that a changing correlation between endophilia and exophobia can generate perverse changes in observed market discrimination.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Feld & Nicolás Salamanca & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2013. "Endophilia or Exophobia: Beyond Discrimination," NBER Working Papers 19471, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:19471
    Note: LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w19471.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hinnerich, Björn Tyrefors & Höglin, Erik & Johannesson, Magnus, 2011. "Are boys discriminated in Swedish high schools?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 682-690, August.
    2. Christina M. Fong & Erzo F. P. Luttmer, 2009. "What Determines Giving to Hurricane Katrina Victims? Experimental Evidence on Racial Group Loyalty," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 64-87, April.
    3. 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.
    4. Chaim Fershtman & Uri Gneezy & Frank Verboven, 2005. "Discrimination and Nepotism: The Efficiency of the Anonymity Rule," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 371-396, June.
    5. Simon Burgess & Ellen Greaves, 2013. "Test Scores, Subjective Assessment, and Stereotyping of Ethnic Minorities," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(3), pages 535-576.
    6. Ahmed, Ali M., 2007. "Group identity, social distance and intergroup bias," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 324-337, June.
    7. Laura Giuliano & David I. Levine & Jonathan Leonard, 2011. "Racial Bias in the Manager-Employee Relationship: An Analysis of Quits, Dismissals, and Promotions at a Large Retail Firm," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 46(1), pages 26-52.
    8. Manuel F. Bagues & Berta Esteve-Volart, 2010. "Can Gender Parity Break the Glass Ceiling? Evidence from a Repeated Randomized Experiment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 77(4), pages 1301-1328.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Wiji Arulampalam & Alison L. Booth & Mark L. Bryan, 2007. "Is There a Glass Ceiling over Europe? Exploring the Gender Pay Gap across the Wage Distribution," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 60(2), pages 163-186, January.
    13. Matthew S. Goldberg, 1982. "Discrimination, Nepotism, and Long-Run Wage Differentials," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 97(2), pages 307-319.
    14. Kerwin Kofi Charles & Jonathan Guryan, 2008. "Prejudice and Wages: An Empirical Assessment of Becker's The Economics of Discrimination," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 773-809, October.
    15. Jason Abrevaya & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2012. "Charity and Favoritism in the Field: Are Female Economists Nicer (To Each Other)?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 202-207, February.
    16. David Neumark, 1988. "Employers' Discriminatory Behavior and the Estimation of Wage Discrimination," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 23(3), pages 279-295.
    17. Lavy, Victor, 2008. "Do gender stereotypes reduce girls' or boys' human capital outcomes? Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(10-11), pages 2083-2105, October.
    18. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    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. Salamanca Nicolas & Feld Jan, 2017. "A Short Note on Discrimination and Favoritism in the Labor Market," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-10, January.
    2. repec:eee:gamebe:v:107:y:2018:i:c:p:238-252 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Feld, Jan & Sauermann, Jan & de Grip, Andries, 2017. "Estimating the relationship between skill and overconfidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 18-24.
    4. Bryson, Alex & Chevalier, Arnaud, 2015. "Is there a taste for racial discrimination amongst employers?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 51-63.
    5. Bart H.H. Golsteyn & Arjan Non & Ulf Zölitz, 2017. "The impact of peer personality on academic achievement," ECON - Working Papers 269, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. Jan Feld & Ulf Zölitz, 2017. "Understanding Peer Effects: On the Nature, Estimation, and Channels of Peer Effects," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(2), pages 387-428.
    7. 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.
    8. repec:eee:ecoedu:v:60:y:2017:i:c:p:86-96 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Bjorn Tyrefors Hinnerich & Erik Höglin & Magnus Johannesson, 2015. "Discrimination against students with foreign backgrounds: evidence from grading in Swedish public high schools," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(6), pages 660-676, December.
    10. Vessela Daskalova, 2016. "Discrimination, Social Identity, and Coordination: An Experiment," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1555, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    11. Feld, J.F. & Zölitz, U.N., 2016. "Understanding peer effects : on the nature, estimation and channels of peer effects," ROA Research Memorandum 001, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    12. Chiara Ravetti & Mare Sarr & Tim Swanson & Daniel Munene, 2017. "Discrimination and favouritism among workers: union membership and ethnic identity," CIES Research Paper series 57-2017, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    13. repec:eee:jeborg:v:141:y:2017:i:c:p:29-42 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General
    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • J71 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Hiring and Firing

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:19471. 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.