Do recruiters prefer applicants with similar skills? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment

In this paper we examine the potential existence of a similar-to-me effect in terms of skills between recruiters and applicants. Using evidence from entry exams to the Spanish Judiciary, where applicants are randomly assigned across evaluation committees, we find that committee members tend to be more demanding at those stages where they are more knowledgeable. As a result, applicants who excel in the same dimensions as recruiters are more likely to be hire

Why do I like people like me?

In many dimensions the ability to assess knowledge depends critically on the observer's own knowledge of that dimension. Building on this feature, this paper offers both theoretical and empirical evidence showing that, in those tasks where multidisciplinary knowledge is required, evaluations exhibit a similar-to-me effect: candidates who excel in the same dimensions as the evaluator tend to be ranked relatively higher. It is also shown that, if races or genders differ in their distribution of ability, group discrimination will arise unless evaluators (i) are well informed about the extent of intergroup differences and (ii) they may condition their assessments on candidates' group belonging

Do On-Line Labor Market Intermediaries Matter? The Impact of AlmaLaurea on the University-to-Work Transition

This paper evaluates the impact of the availability of electronic labor markets on the university-to-work transition. In particular, we analyze the effect of the intermediation activity carried on by the inter-university consortium, AlmaLaurea, on graduates' labor market outcomes. The different timing of universities' enrollment in AlmaLaurea allows us to apply the difference-in-differences method to a repeated cross section data set. If the usual assumption concerning parallel outcomes holds, AlmaLaurea reduces the individual unemployment probability and improves matching quality. Interestingly, we also find that on-line intermediaries foster graduates' geographic mobility.

Does the gender composition of scientific committees matter?

We analyze how a larger presence of female evaluators affects committee decision-making using information on 100,000 applications to associate and full professorships in Italy and Spain. These applications were assessed by 8,000 randomly selected evaluators. A larger number of women in evaluation committees does not increase either the quantity or the quality of female candidates who qualify. Information from individual voting reports suggests that female evaluators are not significantly more favorable toward female candidates. At the same time, male evaluators become less favorable toward female candidates as soon as a female evaluator joins the committee

Why do I like people like me?

In this paper we extend the standard model of statistical discrimination to a multidimensional framework where the accuracy of evaluators depends on how knowledgeable they are in each dimension. The model yields two main implications. First, candidates who excel in the same dimensions as the evaluator tend to be preferred. Second, if two equally productive groups of workers differ in their distribution of ability across dimensions group discrimination will arise unless (i) evaluators are well informed about the extent of these differences and (ii) evaluators can take candidates' group belonging into account in their assessmentsWe acknowledge the financial support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (research grants ECO2008-06395-C05-05, ECO2008-01116 and ECO2008-03468

The psychological gains from COVID-19 vaccination : who benefits the most?

We quantify the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on psychological well-being using information from a large-scale panel survey representative of the UK population. Exploiting exogenous variation in the timing of vaccinations, we find that vaccination increases psychological well-being by 0.12 standard deviation, compensating for around one half of the overall decrease caused by the pandemic. This effect persists for at least two months, and it is associated with a decrease in the perceived likelihood of contracting COVID-19 and higher engagement in social activities. The improvement is 1.5 times larger for mentally distressed individuals, supporting the prioritization of this group in vaccination roll-outs

What you don't know... can't hurt you? A natural field experiment on relative performance feedback in higher education

This paper studies the effect of providing feedback to college students on their position in the grade distribution by using a natural field experiment. This information was updated every six months during a three-year period. We find that greater grades transparency decreases educational performance, as measured by the number of examinations passed and grade point average (GPA). However, self-reported satisfaction, as measured by surveys conducted after feedback is provided but before students take their examinations, increases. We provide a theoretical framework to understand these results, focusing on the role of prior beliefs and using out-of-trial surveys to test the model. In the absence of treatment, a majority of students underestimate their position in the grade distribution, suggesting that the updated information is “good news” for many students. Moreover, the negative effect on performance is driven by those students who underestimate their position in the absence of feedback. Students who overestimate initially their position, if anything, respond positively. The performance effects are short lived—by the time students graduate, they have similar accumulated GPA and graduation rates

Women and power : unpopular, unwilling, or held back? Comment

We use Spain’s Equality Law to test for the existence of agency problems between party leaders and their constituents. The law mandates a 40 percent female quota on electoral lists in towns with populations above 5,000. Using pre- and postquota data by party and municipality, we implement a triple-difference design. We find that female quotas resulted in slightly better electoral results for the parties that were most affected by the quota. Our evidence shows that party leaders were not maximizing electoral results prior to the quota, suggesting the existence of agency problems that hinder female representation in political institutions