Do Large Employers Treat Racial Minorities More Fairly? An Analysis of Canadian Field Experiment Data
Open accessAbstract
Analysis of amended data from a large-scale Canadian employment audit study (Oreopoulos 2011) shows substantial organization size differences in discrimination against skilled applicants with Asian (Chinese, Indian, or Pakistani) names in the decision to call for an interview. In organizations with more than 500 employees, Asian-named applicants are 20 percent less likely to receive a callback; in smaller organizations, the disadvantage is nearly 40 percent. Large organizations may discriminate less frequently because of more resources in recruitment and training, more human resources development, and greater experience with diversity. Anonymized résumé review may allow organizations to test hiring procedures for discrimination fairly inexpensively.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Discrimination in Oreopoulos (2011) was especially likely to occur in smaller compared to larger organizations.
“Additional analysis of these data indicates that this discrimination was especially likely to occur in smaller compared to larger organizations”
From Prejudice and Discrimination Toward Immigrants (2021) · cites this paper as Banerjee et al. 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 46 · Cited by 113
- Authors
- Banerjee, R., Reitz, J. G., & Oreopoulos, P.
- Affiliations
- Toronto Metropolitan University (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Venue
- Canadian Public Policy
- Published
- 2018-03
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-12
- ISSN
- 0317-0861 (ISSN-L)
- 1911-9917
- OpenAlex
- W2794416703
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 40.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Canadian Public Policy (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
- Keywords
- racial discrimination in hiring, Asian immigrants, organizational size, employment discrimination, recruitment process, large employers
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
