Gender Discrimination College Graduates

1
Gender Discrimination College Graduates Labor
Market

• Presenter Ge Yuhao

2
Structure

• Motivation
• Literature
• Experiment Design
• Empirical Results
• Conclusions

3
Motivation

• Three kinds of gender discrimination
• Employment opportunity
• Wage or salary
• Industry (or occupation) distribution
• This paper focuses on employment opportunity in
  the labor market of college graduates.
• Much attention in news papers and TV programs.
• Few empirical research from scholars.

4
Literature

• Gustafsson Li (2000). Discrimination accounts
  for 52.49 in the raw gender wage gap in 1988,
  and rises to 63.20 in 1995.
• Kuhn and Shen (2013). Explicit gender
  discrimination is much more often on positions
  requiring low levels of skill.
• Bertrand and Mullainathan(2004). Fake resumes by
  managing names.

5
Experiment Design

• Construct the resume template (Please see the
  attachment).
• Choose the experiment sample and implement the
  training.
• Every participant is asked to make a resume
  according to his\her true information, but the
  name is an exception.
• Every participant is asked to make a fake resume
  by changing gender, height and weight.

6
Experiment Design

• The participants put these two resumes on the job
  websites.
• Set the deadline to collect the information of
  the number of the offer.
• At last, 95 participants, 190 observations.
• Suggestions are welcomed.

7
Discrimination Coefficient

• Discrimination Coefficient
• Y the number of the offer.

8
Table 1
Sample male_offer female_offer difference Discrimination Coefficient
Total 2.947 2.074 0.874 0.421
(0.261) (0.178) (0.213)
party_no 2.865 2.132 0.733 0.344
(0.384) (0.253) (0.314)
party_yes 3.047 2.000 1.047 0.523
(0.347) (0.250) (0.275)
hukou_rural 2.400 3.000 -0.600 -0.200
(0.812) (1.000) (1.732)
hukou_urban 2.939 2.012 0.927 0.461
(0.284) (0.187) (0.226)
undergraduates 3.043 2.186 0.858 0.392
(0.303) (0.215) (0.256)
graduates 2.692 1.760 0.932 0.530
(0.520) (0.312) (0.381)
GPA_bad 2.433 1.833 0.600 0.327
(0.444) (0.353) (0.331)
GPA_normal 2.788 2.000 0.788 0.394
(0.331) (0.261) (0.322)
GPA_good 3.594 2.375 1.219 0.513
(0.550) (0.317) (0.442)
English_bad 2.433 1.833 0.600 0.327
(0.444) (0.353) (0.331)
English_normal 2.788 2.000 0.788 0.394
(0.331) (0.261) (0.322)
English_good 3.594 2.375 1.219 0.513
(0.550) (0.317) (0.442)
shetuan_no 2.357 1.714 0.643 0.375
(0.746) (0.370) (0.635)
shetuan_yes 3.049 2.136 0.914 0.428
(0.278) (0.199) (0.226)
practice_no 2.308 1.370 0.937 0.684
(0.446) (0.330) (0.376)
practice_yes 3.188 2.353 0.835 0.355
(0.315) (0.204) (0.259)

9

• Total sample
• On average, male applicants get 40 higher offers
  than female.
• High degree of discrimination.

10
By different subsamples

• Almost all the difference is positive and
  significant. Discrimination again by sample!
• Party member. party_no ltparty_yes
• Edu_level. Undergraduateltgraduate
• GPA. GPA_badltGPA_normalltGPA_good
• English. EN_badltEN_normalltEN_good

11
What is the wrong with the world?

• Female applicants face more serious
  discrimination when they seems more successful.
• Why?

12
Possible Explanation

• Statistical discrimination theory
• The employers assume the relation of true
  productivity (TP) and observable human capital
  score (S, such as edu_level, GPA, english) is
  that
• is the mean of for the group where the
  applicant belong to.

13
Possible Explanation

• The employers assume
• Then

14
Possible Explanation

• The employer still want to recruit the applicants
  with high productivity.
• Female applicants are discriminated because there
  is information asymmetry and they can not
  persuade the employers that they have high
  productivity.

15
Practice

• Back to Table 2.
• practice_nogt practice_yes
• Practice serves as a signal to solve the problem
  of information asymmetry
• Practice could alleviate the negative effect of
  discrimination for female college graduates.

16
Conclusions

• First, there is serious discrimination against
  female applicants in labor market of college
  graduates, and the degree of discrimination rises
  as applicants human capital level increase.
• Second, practice could alleviate the negative
  effect of discrimination.
• Third, the reason of discrimination in labor
  market of college graduates may be the
  information asymmetry.