Working Equity
Can Agentic Black Women Get Ahead? An Experiment Revisited
Coco Xinyue Liu, Ariel Blair & Elizabeth Tenney
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
In 2012, Livingston et al. found that Black women were buffered against gender backlash; whether Black women were dominant or supportive toward an employee did not affect people's perceptions of them as leaders in an organization. Conversely, White women incurred a status penalty for being dominant. Twelve years later, no direct replication has been published, and related research reached different conclusions: that Black women experience the most gender backlash for being dominant (as politicians) or that race does not affect gender backlash (for expressing anger). Given the seemingly contradictory results and limitations of previous research, the relationship between race and gender backlash warrants reexamination. In this registered report, we conducted a high-powered direct replication and extension of Livingston et al. with adult participants online (N = 1,996). We found that both Black and White women (as well as men) suffered a status penalty for displaying dominance, suggesting a failure to replicate Livingston et al.'s findings. We discuss implications for theories of intersectional gender backlash.
Behind Closed Doors: The Uncommunal Feminine Stereotype
Ashley Martin & Francis Flynn
Organization Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Theories of gender inequality in the workplace rely heavily on stereotypes that describe women as more communal (e.g., warm and kind) and less agentic (e.g., assertive and forceful) than men. In this paper, we highlight the existence of an uncommunal feminine stereotype wherein women are also believed to be more conniving and devious than men, pursuing their personal goals at the expense of others. To explain how this uncommunal stereotype can coexist with its communal counterpart, we posit that women are believed to behave more communally in public and more uncommunally in private. This public-private distinction can reconcile conflicting stereotypes of women's communality and better account for aspects of inequality. In particular, the uncommunal stereotype provides an alternative attribution for women's success when it occurs, explains the greater vigilance to and sanctioning of women's unethical behavior, and strengthens backlash theory by better explaining why successful women are distrusted. In these ways and others, accounting for the uncommunal feminine stereotype can enhance gender theory.
The institutional dynamics of inequality for women inventors who break with conventional thinking
Tara Sowrirajan, Ryan Whalen & Brian Uzzi
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 21 April 2026
Abstract:
Though women comprise a growing share of the scientific workforce, the gender innovation gap in patenting between men and women inventors persists, potentially limiting innovation output and equity. We study millions of scientific and technological innovations and find that the innovation gap faced by women is not universal. No gap exists for highly conventional innovations, which combine ideas in familiar ways. Rather, it exists when women inventors attempt to patent unconventional inventions, which combine ideas in surprising ways and drive scientific advancements. Our data suggest that rather than deliberate bias, a confluence of institutional practices lower women inventor's chances of patenting unconventional innovations. We find that women examiners relative to men have less of the on-the-job experience needed to appraise unconventional innovations. Additionally, women examiners are overassigned to women applicants, reducing their odds of successfully patenting unconventional inventions. Lastly, traditional explanations weakly account for this innovation gap because men examiners grant comparably more unconventional innovations to women inventors than do women examiners. These institutional barriers reveal new factors that slow innovation, but at the same time can be more directly addressed than deeply rooted gender norms.
Statistical Discrimination and Labor Force Participation
Joseph Pickens
Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper explores the role of productivity-based statistical discrimination (PBSD) in black-white employment-related outcome gaps using a structural model. Given a worker's race and a noisy signal of their productivity, employers rely on race-specific averages to inform their expectations. Such discrimination results in worse employment prospects for black workers. I discipline the model using 1997 NLSY data on less-educated young prime-aged white and black males and a novel calibration strategy. My results suggest PBSD plays at most a limited role in non-participation, unemployment, and hiring gaps, while productivity differences are likely much more important.
Do positive externalities affect risk taking? Experimental evidence on gender and group membership
Carina Cavalcanti & Andreas Leibbrandt
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, May 2026
Abstract:
Many positive externalities are created by risk-taking. We investigate whether risk-taking is affected by the presence of positive externalities. In our experiments, we study choices between investments in technologies that differ according to their level of risk and the extent to which they generate positive externalities for others. In general, we find that positive externalities have little to no impact on risk-taking. However, we observe that when individuals are in groups, they are more inclined to increase investments in technologies that generate large positive externalities. Moreover, we find that women are generally less willing to take risks than men, both in the absence and presence of positive externalities. Thus, women generate fewer positive externalities when externalities increase with risk, but more when they decrease with risk. These findings provide a comprehensive view on the malleability of risk-taking in the presence of positive externalities.
Welfare Access and Inactivity Gaps: Revisiting the Racial Divergence in Unemployment Rates
Gonzalo Dona & Rene Zamarripa
Southern Economic Journal, April 2026, Pages 878-896
Abstract:
This paper examines the divergence in unemployment rates between Black and White men in the United States that emerged after 1930. We argue that labor force participation can serve as a proxy for studying unemployment trends among men aged 25 to 54, helping to address limitations in historical data. Using U.S. Census data, we revisit conventional explanations, such as the Great Migration and the Great Depression, and show that these events do not appear to, by themselves, fully account for the growing racial gap in inactivity and unemployment rates. Instead, we present empirical evidence suggesting that welfare incentives, particularly those associated with the New Deal relief programs, may offer an additional perspective on the observed patterns. By encouraging welfare migration, relief programs may have contributed to the long-term racial divergence in unemployment rates.
With a Little Help from My (Girl) Friends: Field Evidence on Gender Homophily and Women's Training Outcomes in Remote Environments
Julia Melin, Tiantian Yang & Sofoklis Goulas
Organization Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Do women benefit more from gender-homophilous (all-women) or gender-heterophilous (mixed-gender) groups in remote training? Existing theories offer no clear answer, as remote training environments disrupt the social architecture that enables peer effects -- weakening not only the collaborative structures that encourage cross-gender exchange but also the interpersonal cues that foster same-gender bonding. We argue that remote training environments reveal a key mechanism through which all-women peer groups confer distinctive benefits: identity-based trust. In all-women peer groups, shared gender identity can help participants transcend the relational barriers of remote interaction, fostering trust-based ties that facilitate mutual support. We test this argument in an 18-month randomized field experiment on a leading online career training platform, which randomly assigned over 2,700 unemployed women to all-women or mixed-gender virtual peer groups. We find that women in all-women groups were significantly more likely to complete their training on time, earn professional certification within a year, and secure in-field employment. Analyses of text communication data reveal three key patterns underlying identity-based trust in all-women groups: (1) multiple shared identities (i.e., marriage, motherhood, career), (2) affective expression, and (3) reciprocal exchanges of support. By contrast, interaction in mixed-gender groups was inhibited, preventing supportive dynamics -- even among women -- from forming. This study provides the first causal evidence on how peer gender composition shapes women's career outcomes in remote training and illuminates the microgroup mechanisms through which gender-homophilous groups foster success even in digitally mediated environments.
Bad News and Policy Views: Expectations, Disappointment, and Opposition to Affirmative Action
Louis-Pierre Lepage, Heather Sarsons & Michael Thaler
NBER Working Paper, April 2026
Abstract:
There is widespread opposition to affirmative action policies. We study whether personal disappointments shape preferences for such policies. Specifically, we test whether individuals' college admissions outcomes, relative to their expectations, influence their attitudes toward affirmative action policies. Using a retrospective survey among recent White and Asian college applicants, we find that disappointed individuals -- those who were admitted to fewer schools than anticipated -- are relatively more likely to believe that affirmative action played an important role in their admissions outcomes, have the lowest support for affirmative action policies, and are more willing to donate to an anti-affirmative action organization. They also hold more negative views about the academic qualifications of under-represented minorities. To isolate the causal effect of "bad news" from selection, we conduct a complementary survey experiment with parents of future college applicants. We randomize whether parents receive information about their child's admissions prospects. Providing bad news to overconfident parents causes them to increase opposition to affirmative action and donate to an anti-affirmative action organization. Results suggest that some individuals attribute bad news to external factors, specifically policies that benefit out-groups.