1 / 24

Gender and economic preferences

Gender and economic preferences. Anna Dreber Almenberg Stockholm School of Economics Konjunkturinstitutet 2012-05-02. Background. Many important outcomes differ for men and women Labor market, financial markets Why? Discrimination? Differences in performance? Differences in preferences?.

xander-bray
Download Presentation

Gender and economic preferences

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gender and economic preferences Anna Dreber Almenberg Stockholm School of Economics Konjunkturinstitutet 2012-05-02

  2. Background • Many important outcomes differ for men and women • Labor market, financial markets • Why? • Discrimination? • Differences in performance? • Differences in preferences?

  3. Background • Recent attention: preferenceexplanation • Arethere gender differences in economicpreferences? • If yes: why? • Cultural or biologicalvariables? Interactions? • Weexplorebothquestions • Joint workwithAnne Boschini, Juan-CamiloCárdenas, Emma von Essen, Astri Muren and Eva Ranehill (amongothers)

  4. Focus on 3 types of preferences • Risk preferences • Competitiveness • Social preferences • Outline: • Earlier research • Some new studies • Labor market relevance (risk and competitiveness)

  5. The use of experimental economics • Inspired by psychology, mainly in the lab • Strenghts: • Good for randomization • Revealedpreferences • Isolation ofspecificfactors • Replications • Weaknesses: • Artificial? • Externalvalidity? • Fieldexperiments solution

  6. Risk preferences • Gambles with given probabilitieswithmonetaryoutcomes • Do youprefer X kr withcertainty or a cointosswhereyoucan get 200 or 0 kr? • Wevary the certainamount (e.g. X from 20 to 160): whendoes the individualprefer the certainamountto the gamble? • Different versions • E.g. pairs oflotteries

  7. Risk preferences • Risk averse in the domainofgains • Risk loving in the domainoflosses • Do youprefertogain 90 kr withcertainty or a cointosswhereyoucangain200 or 0 kr? • Do youprefertolose 90 kr withcertainty or a cointosswhereyoucanlose200 or 0 kr? • Large variation between (and within) individuals • Gender differences?

  8. Results risk • Men are more risk taking than women Croson and Gneezy 2009

  9. Exceptions and causes • A fewinterestingexceptions (M=F) • Professionalinvestors • Mixed vs. same sex schools and groups • Colombia vs Sweden • Hormones? Cárdenas, Dreber, von Essen and Ranehill in press

  10. Competitiveness • How do individuals react to different types of incentives? • Self-selection and performance • Do men and women self-select into different payment schemes because of different preferences or beliefs? • Do men and women perform differently depending on the payment scheme?

  11. 2 different measuresofcompetitiveness • Self-selection/choice ofcompetition or piece-rate payment • Ex: You are to solve mazes during 5 min. You can choose 1 out of 2 payment schemes: • 1. $1 for each maze solved • 2. $3 for each maze solved if you solve at least as many mazes as another random person, otherwise $0 • What payment scheme do you prefer: 1 or 2? • Performance under competition vs piece-rate • Firstpaymentscheme 1, then 2. Competitiveness is the performancechange • Gender differences?

  12. Results competitiveness • Men are if anything more competitive: choice • But culture/environment important • Massai vs Khasi • Not always in obvious way… Gneezy and Rustichini 2004, Gneezy et al. 2009, Zhang 2010, Dreber, von Essen and Ranehill 2011, Booth and Nolen 2012

  13. Results competitiveness • Cárdenas et al. in press • 1200 children aged 9-12 in Colombia and Sweden • Global gender gap index 2009: Sweden 4, Colombia 56 • Competitiveness in class room

  14. Experimental setup class room • Math or word search, 2 min each stage • Stage 1: Individual performance, 3p • Stage 2: Forced competition, 6 or 0p • Stage 3: Choice to compete –then performance • No performance feedback • Competition against 1 random child • Points=pens and erasers Performance change

  15. Choice to compete or not • Not uniform results comparing Colombia and Sweden

  16. Choice to compete or not • ~200 children in Stockholm aged 16-18 • Task matters • Confidence/beliefs in performance key p=0.001

  17. Social preferences • Payoffofother person enters my utilityfunction • Weightcan be positive or negative • Dictator game • One person gets an endowmentofmoney and canchoosehowto split it betweenself and other person • Second person doesnothing • Trust game • First person cansendmoneyto second person, money sent is multiplied, second person cansendsomemoney back • Second person’smoney is not multiplied

  18. Results altruism • Women if anything more altruistic • Charity: Gender difference early • Social expectations can be important • Boschini et al. 2011 • ”Inequality aversion” vs ”efficiency” • Dreber, von Essen and Ranehill 2011b

  19. Results trust • Trust: M=F or M>F (some exceptions) • Trustworthiness/reciprocity: M=F or M<F (some exceptions) Croson and Gneezy 2009

  20. Study on representative sample in Sweden • Earlier studies mainly on students/specificgroups • Samplecan be important • Board members • Students and non-students • 1350 individuals in Sweden, sampled fall 2011 • 50% responsefrequency • 1000 phone survey, 350 postal survey • Measuresof risk preferences, competitiveness in two different domains, altruism/generosity, trust

  21. Results • No gender differences: • Altruism/generosity, risk preferences, competitiveness in wordsearch • Gender differences • Men aremoretrusting • Men morecompetitivein math • Especiallyagainstwomen • Disappearswithincomecontrol • Risk puzzle • Almenberg and Dreber 2011 other representative study: men more risk taking

  22. Labor market relevance Risk preferences: • Fewer women in sectors with variable pay instead of fixed wage • Risk measures correlate with employment choice in large German representative study • Less risk taking: more likely to self-select into jobs with more stable wage with lower wage on average • Causality not obvious… Bonin et al. 2007, Dohmen et al. 2011

  23. Labor market relevance Competitiveness: • Attitudes to how important money/work is explains part of gender wage gap • Women sometimes less likely to apply for jobs with competitive payment scheme • Choice ofcompetitionexplains 25% of variation in the choice totake a competitivehighschoolentrance test • Controlling for gradesetc, 7 percentagepoints • Womenperformworsethan men on importantcompetitiveentranceexams, oppositeotherwise Fortin 2008, Manning and Swaffield 2008, Flory et al. 2010, Manning and Saidi 2010, Zhang 2010, Ors et al. 2011

  24. Discussion • Some evidence of gender differences in preferences • More work needed on labor market relevance • Competitiveness particularly important? • Math • More work needed on understanding when there is a gap in preferences • For policy etc

More Related