Cited by 178Names, Identity, and Discrimination ResearchDigital Economy and Work TransformationEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Hiring Preferences in Online Labor Markets: Evidence of a Female Hiring Bias

Chan, Jason, Wang, Jing·2018·Management Science

Abstract

Online labor marketplaces facilitate the efficient matching of employers and workers across geographical boundaries. The exponential growth of this nascent online phenomenon holds important social and economic implications, as the hiring decisions made on these online platforms implicate the incomes of millions of workers worldwide. Despite this importance, limited effort has been devoted to understanding whether potential hiring biases exist in online labor platforms and how they may affect hiring outcomes. Using a novel proprietary data set from a leading online labor platform, we investigate the impact of gender-based stereotypes on hiring outcomes. After accounting for endogeneity via a holistic set of job and worker controls, a matched sample approach, and a quasi-experimental technique, we find evidence of a positive hiring bias in favor of female workers. An experiment was used to uncover the underlying gender-specific traits that could influence hiring outcomes. We find that the observed hiring bias diminishes as employers gain more hiring experience on the platform. In addition, the female hiring bias appears to stem solely from the consideration of applicants from developing countries, and not those from developed countries. Subanalyses show that women are preferred in feminine-typed occupations while men do not enjoy higher hiring likelihoods in masculine-typed occupations. We also find that female employers are more susceptible to the female hiring bias compared t…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mnsc.2017.2756

Cites

12 of 12 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?

  • Algorithmic systems can inherit biases embedded in previous decisions, and reenact historical patterns of bias, discrimination, and inequalities.

    “For this reason, algorithmic systems can inherit biases embedded in previous decisions, and reenact historical patterns of bias, discrimination, and inequalities (Chan and Wang, 2018; Lepri et al., 2018).”

    From Algorithmic management in a work context (2021) · cites this paper as Chan and Wang, 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chan, J., & Wang, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
Corresponding author
Chan, Jason
Venue
Management Science
Published
2018-07
Volume
64
Issue
7
Pages
2973-2994
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
OpenAlex
W3021515550
Cited by
178
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 5
FWCI
32.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Management Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
digital labour markets, hiring bias, gender stereotypes, developing countries, online labour platforms

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