An Ordered Probit Model for Estimating Racial Discrimination through Fair Housing Audits. CANOPY ROYCHOUDHURY and ALLEN C. GOODMAN - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 10
About This Presentation
Title:

An Ordered Probit Model for Estimating Racial Discrimination through Fair Housing Audits. CANOPY ROYCHOUDHURY and ALLEN C. GOODMAN

Description:

Title: An Ordered Probit Model for Estimating Racial Discrimination through Fair Housing Audits. Author: pkinstl Last modified by: ugl-24hour – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:29
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 11
Provided by: pkin8
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: An Ordered Probit Model for Estimating Racial Discrimination through Fair Housing Audits. CANOPY ROYCHOUDHURY and ALLEN C. GOODMAN


1
An Ordered Probit Model for Estimating Racial
Discrimination through Fair Housing
Audits.CANOPY ROYCHOUDHURY and ALLEN C. GOODMAN
  • Wayne State University
  • 1993
  • Presented by Mahetem Gessese

2
  • Introduction
  • Two persons (auditors) with matched
    characteristics such as age, sex, and income
  • Equally eligible for the housing unitDirect
    methods of measuring of discrimination
  • Except one is black and one is white.
  • The paper examines the severity of differential
    treatment
  • The audit was done in metropolitan Detroit.

3
  • Auditing technique, average and marginal level of
    discrimination
  • John Yinger (1986)
  • Tai a bRi eai
  • Where a, is the audit i, the individual auditor,
    T is the treatment variable, R is binary variable
    for minority status and e, is the random error.
  • Yinger argues that the OLS estimator b for beta
    is unbiased
  • However the standard error of b is biased
  • He recommends a paired difference- of-means test
    that would remove the bias from the standard
    error of b
  • Blacks in Boston were informed 30 fewer units

4
  • The model
  • Dj a0 aj Wj sumBij sumvikCiCk gYt
    eij
  • i1,2,.k
  • j1,1..10
  • Y Bx e

5
(No Transcript)
6
Existing theories of Discrimination1) The agent
prejudice 2) The customer prejudice 3) The
perceived preference4) The rip-off hypothesis
7
Data569 observations317 collected randomly252
complaints-driven
8
Regression results
  • Dj a0 aj Wj sumBij sumvikCiCk gYt
    eij
  • plim(? j) ? j 1(r2/r2w)/(1- ?j)

9
Conclusion
10
Conclusion
  • Widespread discriminatory 1980 1990
  • Marginal discrimination higher than average
    discrimination
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com