Recent Publications

Bohnet, Iris, Max H Bazerman, and Alexandra van Geen. “When Performance Trumps Gender Bias: Joint Versus Separate Evaluation”. (2015). Web. Publisher's VersionAbstract
 We examine a new intervention to overcome gender biases in hiring, promotion, and job assignments: an “evaluation nudge,” in which people are evaluated jointly rather than separately regarding their future performance. Evaluators are more likely to focus on individual performance in joint than in separate evaluation and on group stereotypes in separate than in joint evaluation, making joint evaluation the money-maximizing evaluation procedure. Our findings are compatible with a behavioral model of information processing and with the System 1/System 2 distinction in behavioral decision research where people have two distinct modes of thinking that are activated under certain conditions. Available on the Gender Action Portal: [[{"fid":"287291","view_mode":"default","type":"media","attributes":{"height":"100","width":"188","class":"media-element file-default"}}]]  
Unkovic, Cait, Maya Sen, and Kevin M Quinn. “Does Encouragement Matter in Improving Gender Imbalances in Technical Fields? Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial”. Hks Faculty Research Working Paper Series (2015). Web. Publisher's VersionAbstract
Education policy research looking at gender imbalances in technical fields often relies on observational data or small N experimental studies. Taking a different approach, we present the results of one of the first and largest randomized controlled trials on the topic. Using the 2014 Political Methodology Annual Meeting as our context, half of a pool of 3,945 political science graduate students were randomly assigned to receive two personalized emails encouraging them to apply to the conference (n = 1,976), while the other half received nothing (n = 1,969). We find a robust, positive effect associated with this simple intervention and suggestive evidence that women respond more strongly than men. However, we find that women's conference acceptance rates are higher within the control group than in the treated group. This is not the case for men. The reason appears to be that female applicants in the treated group solicited supporting letters at lower rates. The contributions from this research are twofold. First, our findings are among the first large-scale randomized controlled interventions in higher education. Second, and less optimistically, our findings suggest that such "low dose" interventions may promote diversity in STEM fields, but that they have the potential to expose underlying disparities when used alone or in a non-targeted way.
Clayton, Amanda. “Women's Political Engagement Under Quota-Mandated Female Representation Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiement”. Comparative Political Studies 48.3 (2015): 333-369. Web. Publisher's VersionAbstract
Do affirmative action measures for women in politics change the way constituents view and interact with their female representatives? A subnational randomized policy experiment in Lesotho with single-member districts reserved for female community councilors provides causal evidence to this question. Using survey data, I find that having a quota-mandated female representative either has no effect on or actuallyreduces several dimensions of women’s self-reported engagement with local politics. In addition, implications from the policy experiment suggest that the quota effect is not accounted for by differences in qualifications or competence between the different groups of councilors, but rather stems from citizens’ negative reactions to the quota’s design.

Gender Action Portal

New Research on the Gender Action Portal

Copy and paste this code to your website.

Upcoming Events

Copy and paste this code to your website.

Podcasting WAPPP Seminars

Copy and paste this code to your website.