The "Big Two" in Hiring Discrimination: Evidence From a Cross-National Field Experiment.

We tested whether signaling warmth and competence ("Big Two") in job applications increases hiring chances. Drawing on a field experimental data from five European countries, we analyzed the responses of employers (N = 13,162) to applications from fictitious candidates of different origin: native candidates and candidates of European, Asian, or Middle-Eastern/African descent. We found that competence signals slightly increased invitation rates, while warmth signals had no effect. We also found ethnic discrimination, a female premium, and differences in callbacks depending on job characteristics. Importantly, however, providing stereotype signals did not reduce the level of ethnic discrimination or the female premium. Likewise, we found little evidence for interactions between stereotype signals and job demands. While speaking against the importance of "Big Two" signals in application documents, our results highlight the importance of group membership and hopefully stimulate further research on the role of in particular ethnic stereotypes for discrimination in hiring.

London Calls? Discrimination of European Job Seekers in the Aftermath of the Brexit Referendum.

The central question in this article is whether there was greater discrimination against European applicants in the labor market in those English regions where public opinion was more strongly in favor of Brexit. Using a field experiment conducted immediately after the Brexit Referendum, we provide causal evidence that applicants with EU backgrounds faced discrimination when applying for jobs in England. On average, applicants from EU12 countries and applicants from Eastern European member states were both less likely to receive a callback from employers than were white British applicants. Furthermore, in British regions where support for Brexit was stronger, employers were more likely to discriminate against EU12 applicants. This finding, though, is driven by the more favorable treatment reserved to EU12 applicants applying for jobs in the Greater London area. Eastern Europeans, on the other hand, did not benefit from this 'London advantage'. Administrative and legal uncertainties over the settlement status of EU nationals cannot explain these findings, as European applicants, both EU12 and Eastern Europeans, faced the same legislative framework in all British regions, including London. Rather, London appears to exhibit a cultural milieu of 'selective cosmopolitanism'. These findings add to the still limited literature on the relationship between public opinion on immigrants (here proxied by the referendum vote) and the levels of ethnic discrimination recorded in field experiments.

Racial discrimination in Britain, 1969-2017: a meta-analysis of field experiments on racial discrimination in the British labour market.

Field experiments represent the gold standard for determining whether discrimination occurs. Britain has a long and distinguished history of field experiments of racial discrimination in the labour market, with pioneering studies dating back to 1967 and 1969. This article reviews all the published reports of these and subsequent British field experiments of racial discrimination in the labour market, including new results from a 2016/17 field experiment. The article finds enduring contours of racial discrimination in Britain. Firstly, there is an enduring pattern of modest discrimination against white minorities of European heritage in contrast to much greater risks of discrimination faced by the main non-white groups, suggesting a strong racial component to discrimination. Secondly, while there is some uncertainty about the magnitude of the risks facing applicants with Chinese and Indian names, the black Caribbean, black African and Pakistani groups all face substantial and very similar risks of discrimination. Thirdly, there is no significant diminution in risks of discrimination over time either for Caribbeans or for South Asians as a whole. These results are broadly in line with those from the ethnic penalties literature, suggesting that discrimination is likely to be a major factor explaining the disproportionately and enduringly high unemployment rates of ethnic minorities.

Employers' social contacts and their hiring behavior in a factorial survey.

We investigate whether referrals from employers' business and professional contacts matter in the hiring process. Additionally, we examine whether the effect of referrals varies depending on: (1) the signaling role of education during the hiring process, and (2) applicants' level of education. Based on a combination of a factorial survey and an experimental design with a sample of English employers, we measure the effect of referrals on employers' hiring assessments. We find only weak evidence that referred applicants are considered more trainable than otherwise identical applicants that do not have a tie with the employer. More detailed analyses show that referrals do matter for employers who consider education a noisy signal, in line with the argument that informal recruitment can represent a strategy for employers to compensate for poor signaling. Referrals are especially beneficial for highly educated applicants, probably because employers need some guarantee against possible wage or turnover costs.