IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Game of Prejudice – Experiments at the Extensive and Intensive Margin


  • Dasgupta, Utteeyo
  • Mani, Subha
  • Vecci, Joe
  • Želinský, Tomáš


In an unique lab-in-the-field experiment we design a novel labor market environment, the Game of Prejudice, to elicit preferences for discrimination towards the largest minority group in Europe (the Roma) at the intensive margins as well as at the extensive margins. Our unique experiment design allows us to separate taste-based discrimination from statistical discrimination and examine the impacts of raising the costs of discrimination in such situations. We find discrimination to be commonplace at both margins, with stronger incidence at the extensive margin. We also find higher incidence of taste-based discrimination compared to statistical discrimination. Importantly, we find that when the cost of taste-based discrimination is made sufficiently high, such behaviour disappears at the intensive and extensive margins, providing support for labor market policies that make discrimination very costly for the employer.

Suggested Citation

  • Dasgupta, Utteeyo & Mani, Subha & Vecci, Joe & Želinský, Tomáš, 2020. "Game of Prejudice – Experiments at the Extensive and Intensive Margin," GLO Discussion Paper Series 499, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:glodps:499

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Lorenz Goette & David Huffman & Stephan Meier, 2006. "The Impact of Group Membership on Cooperation and Norm Enforcement: Evidence Using Random Assignment to Real Social Groups," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 212-216, May.
    2. Gautam Rao, 2019. "Familiarity Does Not Breed Contempt: Generosity, Discrimination, and Diversity in Delhi Schools," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(3), pages 774-809, March.
    3. Linda Babcock & Maria P. Recalde & Lise Vesterlund, 2017. "Gender Differences in the Allocation of Low-Promotability Tasks: The Role of Backlash," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 131-135, May.
    4. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 991-1013, September.
    5. Chaim Fershtman & Uri Gneezy, 2001. "Discrimination in a Segmented Society: An Experimental Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(1), pages 351-377.
    6. Christopher D. DeSante, 2013. "Working Twice as Hard to Get Half as Far: Race, Work Ethic, and America’s Deserving Poor," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(2), pages 342-356, April.
    7. Tom Lane, 2015. "Discrimination in the laboratory: a meta-analysis," Discussion Papers 2015-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    8. Eckel, Catherine C & Grossman, Philip J, 2001. "Chivalry and Solidarity in Ultimatum Games," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(2), pages 171-188, April.
    9. Slonim, Robert & Guillen, Pablo, 2010. "Gender selection discrimination: Evidence from a Trust game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 385-405, November.
    10. Yan Chen & Sherry Xin Li, 2009. "Group Identity and Social Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 431-457, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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.
    2. Sophie Cetre, 2020. "Essays on the determinants of wage inequality," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/53c4o1e509l, Sciences Po.
    3. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer, 2016. "Trait perceptions influence economic out-group bias: lab and field evidence from Vietnam," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(3), pages 513-534, September.
    4. Tom Lane, 2015. "Discrimination in the laboratory: a meta-analysis," Discussion Papers 2015-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    5. Aksoy, Billur & Chadd, Ian & Koh, Boon Han, 2023. "Sexual identity, gender, and anticipated discrimination in prosocial behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/53c4o1e509lcr61ob4ntirirm is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Katherine B. Coffman & Christine L. Exley & Muriel Niederle, 2021. "The Role of Beliefs in Driving Gender Discrimination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3551-3569, June.
    8. Daskalova, Vessela, 2018. "Discrimination, social identity, and coordination: An experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 238-252.
    9. Schütt, Christoph A. & Pipke, David & Detlefsen, Lena & Grimalda, Gianluca, 2023. "Does ethnic heterogeneity decrease workers’ effort in the presence of income redistribution? An experimental analysis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    10. Jan-Erik Lönnqvist & Heike Hennig-Schmidt & Gari Walkowitz, 2015. "Ethnicity- and Sex-Based Discrimination and the Maintenance of Self-Esteem," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    11. David Masclet & Emmanuel Peterle & Sophie Larribeau, 2012. "The Role of Information in Deterring Discrimination: A New Experimental Evidence of Statistical Discrimination," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 201238, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    12. Stichnoth, Holger & van der Straeten, Karine, 2009. "Ethnic diversity and attitudes towards redistribution: a review of the literature," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-036, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Gerhard Riener & Alexander Schacht, 2011. "Group Identity and Discrimination in Small Markets: Asymmetry of In-Group Favors," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-043, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    14. Benjamin Enke & Ricardo Rodríguez-Padilla & Florian Zimmermann, 2019. "Moral Universalism: Measurement and Heterogeneity," CESifo Working Paper Series 7921, CESifo.
    15. Sun-Ki Chai & Dolgorsuren Dorj & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2018. "Cultural Values and Behavior in Dictator, Ultimatum, and Trust Games: An Experimental Study," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experimental Economics and Culture, volume 20, pages 89-166, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    16. Utteeyo Dasgupta & Subha Mani & Prakarsh Singh, 2016. "Searching for religious discrimination among Anganwadi workers in India: An experimental investigation," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-69, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    17. Rémi Suchon & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "Does upward mobility harm trust?," Post-Print halshs-01659021, HAL.
    18. Adnan, Wifag & Arin, K. Peren & Charness, Gary & Lacomba, Juan A. & Lagos, Francisco, 2022. "Which social categories matter to people: An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 125-145.
    19. Taha Movahedi, 2020. "Group Uncertainty and Social Preferences," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2020-07, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    20. Drouvelis, Michalis & Malaeb, Bilal & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Wahba, Jackline, 2021. "Cooperation in a fragmented society: Experimental evidence on Syrian refugees and natives in Lebanon," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 176-191.
    21. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al‐Nowaihi, 2021. "Identity and Redistribution: Theory and Evidence," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 499-531, April.

    More about this item


    discrimination; extensive margin; intensive margin; lab-in-the field experiment; Slovakia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • D3 - Microeconomics - - Distribution
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:zbw:glodps:499. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (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.