CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Names, Identity, and Discrimination ResearchGender Diversity and InequalitySocial and Intergroup Psychology

On the trajectory of discrimination: A meta-analysis and forecasting survey capturing 44 years of field experiments on gender and hiring decisions

Open access
Schaerer, Michael, du Plessis, Christilene, Nguyen, My Hoang Bao, van Aert, Robbie C.M., Tiokhin, Leo, Lakens, Daniël, Giulia Clemente, Elena, Pfeiffer, Thomas +4 more·2023·Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104280
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A preregistered meta-analysis, including 244 effect sizes from 85 field audits and 361,645 individual job applications, tested for gender bias in hiring practices in female-stereotypical and gender-balanced as well as male-stereotypical jobs from 1976 to 2020. A “red team” of independent experts was recruited to increase the rigor and robustness of our meta-analytic approach. A forecasting survey further examined whether laypeople (n = 499 nationally representative adults) and scientists (n = 312) could predict the results. Forecasters correctly anticipated reductions in discrimination against female candidates over time. However, both scientists and laypeople overestimated the continuation of bias against female candidates. Instead, selection bias in favor of male over female candidates was eliminated and, if anything, slightly reversed in sign starting in 2009 for mixed-gender and male-stereotypical jobs in our sample. Forecasters further failed to anticipate that discrimination against male candidates for stereotypically female jobs would remain stable across the decades.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104280

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Following prior literature, rates of 0 were changed to 0.5 to avoid dropping cases, reduce bias in the estimator, and prevent division by zero.

    “Following an approach used in prior literature (Schaerer et al. 2023), we changed rates of 0 to 0.5 to avoid dropping cases; this methodological choice also reduces bias in the estimator and prevents division by zero.”

    From Getting a Foot in the Door: A Meta-Analysis of U.S. Audit Studies of Gender Bias in Hiring (2025) · cites this paper as Schaerer et al. 2023

    Section 3.1.4 (Statistical analyses; page not supplied) says the authors added 0.5 to every cell of a 2×2 frequency table before calculating log odds ratios. It explicitly gives reducing estimator bias and avoiding division by zero as reasons. It does not say they changed zero rates to 0.5 or that the adjustment was made to avoid dropping cases. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schaerer, M., du Plessis, C., Nguyen, M. H. B., van Aert, R. C. M., Tiokhin, L., Lakens, D., Giulia Clemente, E., Pfeiffer, T., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., Clark, C. J., & Luis Uhlmann, E.
Affiliations
  • Singapore Management University (SG)
  • Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
  • Massey University (NZ)
  • Stockholm School of Economics (SE)
Corresponding author
Schaerer, Michael
ORCID
Venue
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-11
Volume
179
Pages
104280
ISSN
0749-5978 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104280
OpenAlex
W4388565334
Cited by
87
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Multilingual Matters (Channel View Publications) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repositori digital de la UPF (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
  • Massey Research Online (Massey University) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Deposito Adademico Digital Universidad De Navarra (University of Navarra) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Veřejné služby Informačního systému (Masarykiana Brunensis Universitas) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PEARL (University of Plymouth) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • St Andrews Research Repository (St Andrews Research Repository) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
  • UNI ScholarWorks (University of Northern Iowa) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • IE Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • CBS Research Portal (Copenhagen Business School) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Funders
  • Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  • Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation
  • Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius Foundation
  • Government of Singapore Ministry of Education
  • Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
gender discrimination in hiring, gender bias, job applications, field experiments, gender stereotypes, hiring decisions, forecast bias, overconfidence

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