David Wozniak

The Menstrual Cycle and Performance Feedback Alter Gender Differences in Competitive Choices

We use a within-subjects experiment with math and word tasks to show that relative performance feedback moves high-ability females toward more competitive forms of compensation, moves low-ability men toward less competitive forms, and eliminates gender differences in choices. We also examine females across the menstrual cycle and find that women in the high-hormone phase are more willing to compete than women in the low-hormone phase. There are no significant differences between choices after subjects receive feedback. Thus, biological differences lead to economically significant differences, but the impact of those differences can be lowered through relative performance information.

Characteristics of scheduled bleeding manipulation with combined hormonal contraception in university students

BACKGROUND There is a lack of information concerning the decision factors and sources of information influencing women who purposefully deviate from the prescribed use of their combined hormone contraceptives to exert elective control of their scheduled bleeding. STUDY DESIGN A self-administered email survey of scheduled bleeding practices and beliefs was distributed to 11,900 female students at the University of Oregon. Assessment of survey participant characteristics, scheduled bleeding manipulation features and attitudes and knowledge toward hormonal contraception was analyzed. RESULTS Of 1719 respondents to the survey, 1374 (79.9%) reported using combined hormonal contraception currently or recently. Approximately 17% of these women altered their scheduled bleeding pattern by deviating from package instructions. Of these, 50% indicated they delayed or skipped their scheduled bleeding for convenience or personal choice. Within this group, 47% of women indicated they learned to modify their scheduled bleeding from health care professionals, while 30% indicated such knowledge was obtained from family or friends. Characteristics that decreased the likelihood of this practice included being of Asian race, use of hormonal contraceptive for bleeding cycle regulation, following a regular exercise program, and personal preference for a monthly cycle. CONCLUSIONS The majority of university females who choose to modify their scheduled bleeding cycle with combined hormonal contraceptives do so for convenience rather than to avoid menstrual symptoms, and many learn from nonmedical sources. There is some disparity between the preferences of menstruation frequency and actual scheduled bleeding pattern behaviors, suggesting potential for improvement in patient education.

Gender Differences: The Effects of Free and Costly Feedback on the Willingness to Compete

We study the effect of feedback about relative performance on the choice to compete, and the demand for that feedback, using an experiment where participants can choose between piece rate and tournament compensation for simple addition tasks. The experiment was conducted in a shopping mall with 885 adults with wide demographic variation. We replicate the gender gap in competitive choices in this large and diverse sample. We find that providing free feedback about relative performance does not affect the overall gender gap, but does affect the choices to compete by gender and ability. When feedback is costly, females are less likely to buy it than are men, and the reduction in the competitive choice gender gap for high ability individuals is smaller than when feedback is costless. The gender gap in feedback demand varies with age and confidence.

Ethnic Discrimination in the Lab: Evidence of Statistical and Taste-Based Discrimination

Using a lab experiment that simulates a labor market, we investigate racial discrimination for employee selection. We find discrimination against Blacks persists even when information about candidates’ past performance/abilities is known. The experiment design allows us to observe within-subject variation in discrimination based on different available information about candidates, which helps distinguish between statistical and taste-based discrimination. We find evidence of discrimination by Non-Blacks against Blacks whenever race is salient. Some hiring discrimination against Blacks is statistical, since it is based on distrust of applicants’ self-reported abilities, and is also present in the discrimination of Blacks against their own group. But discrimination by Non-Blacks against Blacks is likely taste-based as it endures when more accurate information about abilities is known and even when such discrimination is costly. We suggest that the institutional and social climate may shape the prevalence of this type of discrimination.

Gender Differences for Public Good Contributions by Competitive versus Group Work Environments

Using a between-subjects design we compare the effect of competitive and cooperative work tasks in the lab on subsequent public good investments. We remove potential reciprocal behavior by having the work tasks occur with separate subjects outside the lab and a one-shot public good experiment with subjects in the lab. We find that individuals in cooperative (group pay) treatments contribute more than individuals in competitions, but these differences are entirely driven by female participants. Women contribute significantly less after competitive tasks and more after group pay tasks while men’s public good contributions are not significantly different. The difference is large for females who contribute 78% more after the group pay treatment compared to competitions. The results suggest that women are more affected by work environments than men and that competitive work environments lead women to contribute less to public goods even outside the workplace.

Choosing a Colleague in the Lab: Evidence of Statistical and Taste-Based Discrimination

Using a lab experiment that simulates a labor market, we investigate racial discrimination for employee selection. We find discrimination against Blacks persists even when information about candidates’ past performance/abilities is known. The experiment design allows us to observe within-subject variation in discrimination based on different available information about candidates, which helps distinguish between statistical and taste-based discrimination. We find evidence of discrimination by Non-Blacks against Blacks whenever race is salient. Some hiring discrimination against Blacks is statistical, since it is based on distrust of applicants’ self-reported abilities, and is also present in the discrimination of Blacks against their own group. But discrimination by Non-Blacks against Blacks is likely taste-based as it endures when more accurate information about abilities is known and even when such discrimination is costly. We suggest that the institutional and social climate may shape the prevalence of this type of discrimination.