CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 207Names, Identity, and Discrimination ResearchSocial and Intergroup PsychologyRacial and Ethnic Identity Research

Bayesian bigot? Statistical discrimination, stereotypes, and employer decision making

Open access
Pager, Devah, Karafin, Diana·2009·The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
DOI 10.1177/0002716208324628PMC PMC2914345
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Much of the debate over the underlying causes of discrimination centers on the rationality of employer decision making. Economic models of statistical discrimination emphasize the cognitive utility of group estimates as a means of dealing with the problems of uncertainty. Sociological and social-psychological models, by contrast, question the accuracy of group-level attributions. Although mean differences may exist between groups on productivity-related characteristics, these differences are often inflated in their application, leading to much larger differences in individual evaluations than would be warranted by actual group-level trait distributions. In this study, the authors examine the nature of employer attitudes about black and white workers and the extent to which these views are calibrated against their direct experiences with workers from each group. They use data from fifty-five in-depth interviews with hiring managers to explore employers' group-level attributions and their direct observations to develop a model of attitude formation and employer learning.

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 · 10.1177/0002716208324628

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • Bayesian models are prone to spurious relationship and amplification of socially held stereotypes.

    “However, despite the association of Bayes with rational predictions, Bayesian models are prone to spurious relationship and amplification of socially held stereotypes.24”

    From Algorithmic injustice: A relational ethics approach (2021) · cites this paper as [24]

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

Related

Authors
Pager, D., & Karafin, D.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Pager, Devah
Venue
The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2009-01
Volume
621
Issue
1
Pages
70-93
ISSN
  • 0002-7162 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3349
DOI
10.1177/0002716208324628
PMC
PMC2914345
OpenAlex
W2090842295
Cited by
207
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 11
FWCI
19.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24HD047879, K01HD053694)
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 › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
Keywords
statistical discrimination, stereotypes, employer decision-making, hiring managers, racial discrimination, employer learning, attitude formation

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