The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Establishment-Level Test of the Statistical Discrimination Hypothesis
Abstract
This article explores the basic assumption of statistical discrimination theory, which holds that women and minorities earn lower wages because they, on average, have lower productivity. Employer exploitation of women and minorities and social closure by advantaged employees are advanced as alternative explanations for the lower wages of women and minorities. The authors first demonstrate that there are substantial gender and racial wage penalties net of human capital for a sample of employees. The primary analysis focuses on the sample of private-for-profit establishments in which these individuals are employed. Establishment productivity as well as aggregate salaries and wages and profits are regressed on the sex and race composition of the establishment with other factors that may influence establishment productivity. Findings show that neither the sex nor race compositions of the workplace are associated with productivity. The authors interpret the results to be most consistent with a social closure account of gender and racial earnings inequality.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Farkas, G., & Vicknair, K. (1996) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2096392 · Cited by 121
Cited by
A Welfare State Paradox: State Interventions and Women’s Employment Opportunities in 22 Countries
Mandel, H., & Semyonov, M. (2006) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/499912 · Cited by 647
Hodges, M. J., & Budig, M. J. (2010) · Gender & Society · doi:10.1177/0891243210386729 · Cited by 356
The Global Platform Economy: A New Offshoring Institution Enabling Emerging-Economy Microproviders
Lehdonvirta, V., Kässi, O., Hjorth, I., Barnard, H., & Graham, M. (2019) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206318786781 · Cited by 319
Organizational Approaches to Inequality: Inertia, Relative Power, and Environments
Stainback, K., Tomaskovic-Devey, D., & Skaggs, S. (2010) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120014 · Cited by 293
Self-citationWhy Should Women Get Less? Evidence on the Gender Pay Gap from Multifactorial Survey Experiments
Auspurg, K., Hinz, T., & Sauer, C. (2017) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122416683393 · Cited by 269
Metadata
- Authors
- TOMASKOVIC-DEVEY, D., & SKAGGS, S.
- Venue
- Work and Occupations
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-11
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 422-445
- ISSN
- 0093-9285 (ISSN-L)
- 0730-8884
- 1552-8464
- OpenAlex
- W2148836437
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Establishment-Level Test of the Statistical Discrimination Hypothesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0730888499026004003
- The paper
- TOMASKOVIC-DEVEY, D., & SKAGGS, S. (1999). An Establishment-Level Test of the Statistical Discrimination Hypothesis. Work and Occupations. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888499026004003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.