Measuring Employment Discrimination through Controlled Experiments
Abstract
Race/ethnic discrimination in hiring can be measured under controlled conditions using matched pairs of minority and nonminority research assistants posing as applicants for the same job. In 149 in-person job applications in the Washington, D.C., labor market, African American applicants were treated less favorably than equally qualified nonminorities more than one-fifth of the time. Employer behavior during these interactions suggest that, within continued public and private efforts against discrimination, particular attention should be accorded to the cognitive underpinnings of bias.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In-person audit studies of employment remain rare, with only a handful conducted over the past 20 years.
“In part due to taxing logistical requirements, the use of in-person audit studies of employment remains rare, with only a handful of such studies conducted over the past 20 years (Bendick, Jackson, and Reinoso 1994; Bendick et al. 1991; Cross et al. 1990; Pager 2003; Turner, Fix, and Struyk 1991).”
From Discrimination in a Low-Wage Labor Market: A Field Experiment (2009) · cites this paper as Bendick, Jackson, and Reinoso 1994
The magnitude of the race effect found here corresponds closely to those found in previous audit studies directly measuring racial discrimination.
“The magnitude of the race effect found here corresponds closely to those found in previous audit studies directly measuring racial discrimination.”
From The Mark of a Criminal Record (2003) · cites this paper as Bendick et al. 1994
Bendick et al. (1994) find that blacks were 24 percentage points less likely to receive a job offer relative to their white counterparts.
“Bendick et al. (1994), for example, find that blacks were 24 percentage points less likely to receive a job offer relative to their white counterparts, a finding very close to the 20 percentage point difference (between white and black nonoffenders) found here.”
From The Mark of a Criminal Record (2003) · cites this paper as Bendick et al. 1994
Previous audit studies conducted in Washington, D.C., Chicago, and Denver confirmed the basic magnitude of the effects reported here.
“With respect to the main effect of race, previous audit studies have been conducted in Washington, D.C., Chicago, and Denver, confirming the basic magnitude of the effects reported here (Bendick et al. 1994; Turner et al. 1991; Culp and Dunson 1986).”
From The Mark of a Criminal Record (2003) · cites this paper as Bendick et al. 1994
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 16 · Cited by 173
- Authors
- Bendick, M., Jackson, C. W., & Reinoso, V. A.
- Venue
- The Review of Black Political Economy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1994-06
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25-48
- ISSN
- 0034-6446 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-4814
- OpenAlex
- W2017013274
- Cited by
- 173
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 10.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Review of Black Political Economy (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Keywords
- employment discrimination, racial discrimination in hiring, employer bias, cognitive biases, labor market discrimination
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
