Suchergebnisse
Filter
Format
Medientyp
Sprache
Weitere Sprachen
Jahre
731 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
SSRN
Working paper
Hiring Discrimination: An Overview of (Almost) All Correspondence Experiments Since 2005
In: IZA Discussion Paper No. 10738
SSRN
Do schools discriminate against homosexual parents? Evidence from a randomized correspondence experiment
In: Economics of education review, Band 53, S. 133-142
ISSN: 0272-7757
The State of Hiring Discrimination: A Meta-Analysis of (Almost) All Recent Correspondence Experiments
In: IZA Discussion Paper No. 14966
SSRN
SSRN
Do Low-Wage Employers Discriminate against Applicants with Long Commutes?: Evidence from a Correspondence Experiment
In: The journal of human resources, Band 55, Heft 3, S. 864-901
ISSN: 1548-8004
When Do Private Actors Engage in Censorship? Evidence From a Correspondence Experiment with Russian Private Media Firms
In: British journal of political science, Band 52, Heft 4, S. 1790-1809
ISSN: 1469-2112
AbstractIn authoritarian regimes, repression encourages private actors to censor not only themselves, but also other private actors—a behavior we call "regime-induced private censorship." We present the results of a correspondence experiment conducted in Russia that investigates the censorship behavior of private media firms. We find that such firms censor third-party advertisements that include anti-regime language, calls for political or non-political collective action, or both. Our results demonstrate the significance of other types of censorship besides state censorship in an important authoritarian regime and contribute to the rapidly growing literature on authoritarian information control.
Do public officials exhibit social class biases when they handle casework? Evidence from multiple correspondence experiments
In: PLOS ONE
Are public officials more responsive to requests from affluent or poor constituents? A growing body of evidence suggests that lawmakers are more responsive to the rich when they craft policy. However, some scholars theorize that officials also exhibit a corresponding bias in favor of the poor when they handle casework, essentially giving policy to the rich and services to the poor. In this paper, we test this casework prediction using four experiments in which confederates sent simple requests to state or local officials. In each, our confederates' reported social classes were randomly assigned and signaled with a brief introductory statement mentioning the sender's occupation or economic situation. Across our samples, we find precisely-estimated null effects of social class biases: the officials we studied were equally likely to respond regardless of the constituent's class. These findings raise doubts about whether casework is really a class-biased process.
Do Street‐Level Bureaucrats Discriminate Based on Religion? A Large‐Scale Correspondence Experiment among American Public School Principals
In: Public administration review: PAR, Band 81, Heft 2, S. 244-259
ISSN: 1540-6210
Abstract
Although public administration scholars have long studied discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity, class, and gender, little to no research exists on whether street‐level bureaucrats provide differential services based on the religious identity of their constituents. This article reports the results from a large‐scale correspondence study of street‐level bureaucrats in the American public school system. The authors emailed the principals of a large sample of public schools and asked for a meeting, randomly assigning the religious (non)affiliation of the family. To get at potential causal mechanisms, religious belief intensity was also randomly assigned. The findings show evidence of substantial discrimination against Muslims and atheists on a par with, and sometimes larger than, the racial discrimination found in previous studies. These individuals are substantially less likely to receive a response, with discrimination growing when they signal that their beliefs are more intense. Protestants and Catholics face no discrimination unless they signal that their religious beliefs are intense.
SSRN
Should we conduct correspondence study field experiments with political elites?
In: International political science review: the journal of the International Political Science Association (IPSA) = Revue internationale de science politique, Band 44, Heft 4, S. 459-470
ISSN: 1460-373X
Correspondence study field experiments with political elites are a recent addition to legislative studies research, in which unsolicited emails are sent to elites to gauge their responsiveness. In this article, we discuss their ethical implications. We advance from the viewpoint that correspondence study field experiments involve trade-offs between costs and benefits that need to be carefully weighted. We elaborate this argument with two contributions in mind. First, we synthesize ethical considerations in published work to explore what the specific trade-offs are and how they can be mitigated by experimental design. We conclude that correspondence study field experiments with political elites are worth pursuing given their potential to further good governance. But they also involve distinct trade-offs that are particularly challenging. Second, we draw from our own considerations while designing a comparative correspondence study field experiment and stress challenges resulting from cross-national designs. In sum, we aim to facilitate further reasoned discussion on an important methodological issue.
Should we conduct correspondence study field experiments with political elites?
Correspondence study field experiments with political elites are a recent addition to legislative studies research, in which unsolicited emails are sent to elites to gauge their responsiveness. In this article, we discuss their ethical implications. We advance from the viewpoint that correspondence study field experiments involve trade-offs between costs and benefits that need to be carefully weighted. We elaborate this argument with two contributions in mind. First, we synthesize ethical considerations in published work to explore what the specific trade-offs are and how they can be mitigated by experimental design. We conclude that correspondence study field experiments with political elites are worth pursuing given their potential to further good governance. But they also involve distinct trade-offs that are particularly challenging. Second, we draw from our own considerations while designing a comparative correspondence study field experiment and stress challenges resulting from cross-national designs. In sum, we aim to facilitate further reasoned discussion on an important methodological issue.
BASE
Correspondence Bias
SSRN
Working paper
Testing for Ethnic Discrimination in Outpatient Health Care Evidence from a Field Experiment in Germany
In: JHLTHEC-D-22-00145
SSRN
Using Bayesian Correspondence Criteria to Compare Results From a Randomized Experiment and a Quasi-Experiment Allowing Self-Selection
In: Evaluation review: a journal of applied social research, Band 42, Heft 2, S. 248-280
ISSN: 1552-3926
Background: Randomized experiments yield unbiased estimates of treatment effect, but such experiments are not always feasible. So researchers have searched for conditions under which randomized and nonrandomized experiments can yield the same answer. This search requires well-justified and informative correspondence criteria, that is, criteria by which we can judge if the results from an appropriately adjusted nonrandomized experiment well-approximate results from randomized experiments. Past criteria have relied exclusively on frequentist statistics, using criteria such as whether results agree in sign or statistical significance or whether results differ significantly from each other. Objectives: In this article, we show how Bayesian correspondence criteria offer more varied, nuanced, and informative answers than those from frequentist approaches. Research design: We describe the conceptual bases of Bayesian correspondence criteria and then illustrate many possibilities using an example that compares results from a randomized experiment to results from a parallel nonequivalent comparison group experiment in which participants could choose their condition. Results: Results suggest that, in this case, the quasi-experiment reasonably approximated the randomized experiment. Conclusions: We conclude with a discussion of the advantages (computation of relevant quantities, interpretation, and estimation of quantities of interest for policy), disadvantages, and limitations of Bayesian correspondence criteria. We believe that in most circumstances, the advantages of Bayesian approaches far outweigh the disadvantages.