Cited by 82Names, Identity, and Discrimination ResearchSocial and Intergroup PsychologyUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies

How Race and Unemployment Shape Labor Market Opportunities: Additive, Amplified, or Muted Effects?

Pedulla, David S·2018·Social Forces

Abstract

The manner in which social categories combine to produce inequality lies at the heart of scholarship on social stratification. To date, scholars have largely pointed to two primary ways that negatively stereotyped categories may aggregate: 1) additive effects, whereby one category has similar consequences across the other category, and 2) amplified congruence, whereby a secondary category exacerbates the negative effects of the first category. This article develops an alternative potential aggregation pattern—muted congruence—which posits that when individuals evaluate others that occupy multiple social positions about which stereotypes are highly congruent, such as being black and being unemployed, the additional category membership will have limited influence over the ultimate evaluation. Using evidence from a field experiment, where fictitious applications were submitted to real job openings, I examine which aggregation pattern most accurately reflects how race and unemployment shape actual hiring decisions. In line with predictions from the “muted congruence” perspective, the findings indicate that racial discrimination is prominent, but that there are limited additional negative effects of unemployment for African American workers. I conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for understanding the aggregation of social categories in the production of inequality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/sf/soy002

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Pedulla (2018) did not find evidence of additive effects of race and unemployment in the US.

    “In a US study, Pedulla (2018), by contrast, does not find evidence of additive effects of race and unemployment.”
  • Pedulla (2018) documents substantial discrimination against African Americans, but the penalties of unemployment are weaker for Black applicants than for equally qualified White applicants.

    “This field experiment documents substantial discrimination against African Americans, but the results show that the penalties of unemployment are weaker for Black applicants than for equally qualified White applicants.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pedulla, D. S.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Pedulla, David S
Venue
Social Forces
Published
2018-03-15
Volume
96
Issue
4
Pages
1477-1506
ISSN
  • 0037-7732 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-7605
OpenAlex
W2793938728
Cited by
82
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4
FWCI
14.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Forces (publishedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (5 R24 HD042849, 1203135)
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1H79AE000100‐1)
  • Princeton University
  • University of Chicago
  • Horowitz Foundation for Social Policy
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24HD042849)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Keywords
racial discrimination, unemployment, job applications, hiring decisions, African American workers, additive effects, stereotypes, labor market inequality, social stratification

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