CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 134Gender, Labor, and Family DynamicsGender and Feminist StudiesExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

Reshaping Adolescents' Gender Attitudes: Evidence from a School-Based Experiment in India

Open access
Dhar, Diva, Jain, Tarun, Jayachandran, Seema·2018·National Bureau of Economic Research
DOI 10.3386/w25331
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Societal norms about gender roles contribute to the economic disadvantages facing women in many developing countries.This paper evaluates a school-based intervention in India that engaged adolescents in classroom discussions about gender equality for two and a half years with the goal of eroding their support for restrictive gender norms.Using a randomized controlled trial, we find that the program made attitudes 0.18 standard deviations more supportive of gender equality, or, equivalently, converted 16% of participants' regressive views.In addition, selfreported behavior became more aligned with progressive gender norms, particularly among boys.The effects observed in the short run were still present two years after the program had ended.

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 · 10.3386/w25331

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • Dhar et al. [2018] evaluate the effects of a school-based gender equality training program in India on adolescents' gender attitudes, and they do not find evidence of social desirability bias.

    “Dhar et al. [2018] evaluate the e¤ects of a school-based gender equality training program in India on adolescents' gender attitudes. To test for social desirability bias, they use an index of social desirability based on Crowne and Marlowe 1960). They do not …nd evidence of such respondent behavior.”

    From Women's Empowerment in Action: Evidence from a Randomized Control Trial in Africa (2020) · cites this paper as Dhar et al. [2018]

    The Abstract describes the school-based intervention in India and its effects on adolescents’ gender attitudes. Section 4.2.2 says the authors used a Marlowe-Crowne-based score and found no evidence that social desirability inflated the treatment effect relative to the control group. But it also reports evidence of upward shading of responses in the sample overall, so the unqualified statement that they found no social desirability bias overstates the finding. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Afridi, F., T. Dinkelman, and K. Mahajan (2018). Why are fewer married women working in rural India? A decomposition analysis over two decades. Journal of Population Economics 31, 783-818.
  2. Alesina, A., P. Giuliano, and N. Nunn (2013). On the origins of gender roles: Women and the plough. Quarterly Journal of Economics 128 (2), 469-530.
  3. Arkes, H. and P. Tetlock (2004). Attributions of implicit prejudice, or "Would Jesse Jackson 'fail' the Implicit Association Test?". Psychological Inquiry 15 (4), 257-278.
  4. Ashraf, N., N. Bau, C. Low, and K. McGinn (2020). Negotiating a better future: How interpersonal skills facilitate inter-generational investment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 135 (2), 1095- 1151.
  5. Beaman, L., R. Chattopadhyay, E. Duflo, R. Pande, and P. Topalova (2009). Powerful women: Does exposure reduce bias? Quarterly Journal of Economics 124 (4), 1497-1540.
  6. Becker, G. and C. Mulligan (1997). The endogenous determination of time preference. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 (3), 729-758.
  7. Belloni, A., V. Chernozhukov, and C. Hansen (2014). Inference on treatment effects after selection among high-dimensional controls. Review of Economic Studies 81 (2), 608-650.
  8. Bernhardt, A., E. Field, R. Pande, N. Rigol, S. Schaner, and C. Troyer-Moore (2018). Male social status and women's work. AEA Papers and Proceedings 108, 363-67.
  9. Bertrand, M., J. Pan, and E. Kamenica (2015). Gender identity and relative income within house- holds. Quarterly Journal of Economics 130 (2), 571-614.
  10. Bowles, S. (1998). Endogenous preferences: The cultural consequences of markets and other eco- nomic institutions. Journal of Economic Literature 36 (1), 75-111.
  11. Calvi, R. (2020). Why are older women missing in India? The age profile of bargaining power and poverty. Journal of Political Economy 128 (7), 2453-2501.
  12. Cantoni, D., Y. Chen, D. Yang, N. Yuchtman, and Y. Zhang (2017). Curriculum and ideology. Journal of Political Economy 125 (2), 338-392.
  13. Carlana, M. (2019). Implicit stereotypes: Evidence from teachers' gender bias. Quarterly Journal of Economics 134 (3), 1163-1224.
  14. Carrell, S., M. Hoekstra, and J. West (2019). The impact of college diversity on behavior toward minorities. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 11 (4), 159-82.
  15. DellaVigna, S. and M. Gentzkow (2010). Persuasion: Empirical evidence. Annual Review of Economics 2 (1), 643-669.
  16. Dhar, D., T. Jain, and S. Jayachandran (2018). The intergenerational transmission of gender attitudes: Evidence from India. Journal of Development Studies 15 (12), 2572-2592.
  17. Donovan, R. and S. Leivers (1993). Using paid advertising to modify racial stereotype beliefs. Public Opinion Quarterly 57 (2), 205-218.
  18. Duflo, E. (2012). Women empowerment and economic development. Journal of Economic Litera- ture 50 (4), 1051-1079.
  19. Fernandez, R., A. Fogli, and C. Olivetti (2004). Mothers and sons: Preference formation and female labor force dynamics. Quarterly Journal of Economics 119 (4), 1249-1299.
  20. Field, E., S. Jayachandran, and R. Pande (2010). Do traditional institutions constrain female entrepreneurship? A field experiment on business training in India. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 100 (2), 125-9.
  21. Healy, A. and N. Malhotra (2013). Childhood socialization and political attitudes: Evidence from a natural experiment. Journal of Politics 75 (4), 1023-1037.
  22. Hopkins, D., J. Sides, and J. Citrin (2019). The muted consequences of correct information about immigration. Journal of Politics 81 (1), 315-320.
  23. Jayachandran, S. (2015). The root causes of gender inequality in developing countries. Annual Review of Economics 7, 63-88.
  24. Jayachandran, S. (2017). Fertility decline and missing women. American Economic Journal: Ap- plied Economics 9 (1), 118-139.
  25. Jensen, R. and E. Oster (2009). The power of TV: Cable television and women's status in India. Quarterly Journal of Economics 124 (3), 1057-1094.
  26. Klasen, S. and J. Pieters (2015). What explains the stagnation of female labor force participation in urban India? World Bank Economic Review 29 (3), 449-478.
  27. La Ferrara, E., A. Chong, and S. Duryea (2012). Soap operas and fertility: Evidence from Brazil. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 4 (4), 1-31.
  28. Lee, D. (2009). Training, wages, and sample selection: Estimating sharp bounds on treatment effects. Review of Economic Studies 76 (3), 1071-1102.
  29. Moss-Racusin, C., E. Pietri, E. Hennes, J. Dovidio, V. Brescoll, G. Roussos, and J. Handelsman (2018). Reducing STEM gender bias with VIDS (video interventions for diversity in STEM). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 24 (2), 236.
  30. Paluck, E. (2009). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: A field experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96 (3), 574-87.
  31. Porter, C. and D. Serra (2019). Gender differences in the choice of major: The importance of female role models. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 12 (3), 226-254.
  32. Pulerwitz, J., L. Hughes, M. Mehta, A. Kidanu, F. Verani, and S. Tewolde (2015). Changing gender norms and reducing intimate partner violence: Results from a quasi-experimental intervention study with young men in Ethiopia. American Journal of Public Health 105 (1), 132-137.
  33. Rao, G. (2019). Familiarity does not breed contempt: Generosity, discrimination, and diversity in Delhi schools. American Economic Review 109 (3), 774-809.
  34. Reynolds, W. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology 38 (1), 119-125.
  35. Sen, A. (1990). More than 100 million women are missing. The New York Review of Books 37 (20).
  36. Tankard, M. and E. Paluck (2016). Norm perception as a vehicle for social change. Social Issues and Policy Review 10 (1), 181-211.
  37. Washington, E. (2008). Female socialization: How daughters affect their legislator fathers' voting on women's issues. American Economic Review 98 (1), 311-332.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dhar, D., Jain, T., & Jayachandran, S.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Dhar, Diva
ORCID
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Publisher
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
2018-12
DOI
10.3386/w25331
OpenAlex
W2903601831
Cited by
134
References
6
Citations by year
2025: 16 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
  • Northwestern University
  • International Growth Centre
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
gender attitudes, gender norms, gender equality, adolescents, school-based intervention, gender socialization, long-term effects, women's economic disadvantage, India

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