Looking for a job as a (non-)minority teenager on the German job market. Does previous work experience help to find an apprenticeship? Field experimental evidence on discrimination against (underage) students when looking for a job in Germany

Last registered on March 21, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Looking for a job as a (non-)minority teenager on the German job market. Does previous work experience help to find an apprenticeship? Field experimental evidence on discrimination against (underage) students when looking for a job in Germany
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0012833
Initial registration date
January 12, 2024

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
January 12, 2024, 3:47 PM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
March 21, 2025, 11:33 AM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Siegen University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University of Siegen

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2024-01-21
End date
2025-04-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Numerous studies find discrimination in the hiring process of applicants from ethnic minorities (e.g. Bertrand and Duflo 2017, Carlson and Roth 2006; Kaas and Manger 2011, SVR 2014). Apart from an observational study from Norway (Helland and Støren 2006), little is known about pre-K-12 discrimination against students who apply for an apprenticeship or vocational training when leaving middle school. Although ten-thousands are enrolled in this type of vocational training with cooperation and businesses, it has not yet been researched whether prior work experience, grades or even certificates of prior economic knowledge can mitigate the disadvantages of preference-based discrimination (e.g. racism). We conducted field experiments to examine these research questions with empirical data and complemented this by an employer survey.


Pilot study (Campaign 1): In a randomized, controlled pilot study, starting in November 2022, we sent around 18,900 email inquiries to companies that had reported training positions to local job centers in German cities in three business sectors (public administration, industry and services). The study was designed using a block-randomized treatment approach, manipulating four key applicant characteristics: (1) migration background (German, Turkish, Russian), (2) gender (male, female), (3) academic performance (high GPA, satisfactory GPA after 10 years of school with the completion of the technical college entrance qualification), and (4) prior economic knowledge through the EBC*L certificate .


Main study: Campaign 2 (February until May 2024) expanded our approach with three waves of more than 21,200 email inquiries sent nationwide across the same three sectors. In this campaign, we modified our treatment to 3*2*2*2 = 24 dimensions to include: (1) migration background to German, Israeli, and Arab, (2) gender (male, female), (3) academic performance (high GPA, satisfactory GPA after 10 years of school with the completion of the technical college entrance qualification), and (4) prior economic knowledge through internships.


Between April and June 2024, we fielded a survey with employers, confronted them with our findings and asked about their perceptions why young migrant applicants receive less answers compared to German applicants in open-ended questions (Stancheva 2022). The survey was distributed to a stratified random sample of firms that were treated in the previous campaigns. We collected responses from 772 participants. The survey was designed to address three primary research questions:
1) Whether statistical discrimination mechanisms are reflected in respondents' beliefs about productivity and success rates; (2) whether taste-based mechanisms are evident in concerns about workplace integration; and (3) whether perceptions vary systematically across different ethnic groups in ways that align with observed discrimination patterns in our correspondence studies.
The participants reported significant differences in perceived perseverance across migrant backgrounds and varying levels of cultural distance. Both factors might attribute to estimate opportunity costs of hiring a migrant applicant.



Campaign 3 (February until March 2025): To test the robustness of these findings, we designed and implemented a field experiment in the spring of 2025.
We block-randomized the treatments into (2*2*2*3) 24 dimensions at the level of industries and federal states:
Building on insights from the previous campaigns and survey results, we narrowed the focus to Turkish and German candidates to examine specific mechanisms in greater detail and introduced voluntary extracurricular activities to either signal cultural affinity to Germans or the exact opposite as a new treatment dimension: We employed a 2*2*2*3 = 24 dimensions treatment design:
(1) migration background (German, Turkish), (2) gender (male, female), (3) academic performance (high GPA, satisfactory GPA after 10 years of school with the completion of the technical college entrance qualification), and (4) voluntary extracurricular activities. The fourth dimension consists of either participation in a German Turkish cultural association (signalling affinity to Turkish culture), participation in a school-based natural science club (signalling perseverance), or no volunteering experience (control condition).
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Köhler, Ekkehard and Dilara Wiemann. 2025. "Looking for a job as a (non-)minority teenager on the German job market. Does previous work experience help to find an apprenticeship? Field experimental evidence on discrimination against (underage) students when looking for a job in Germany ." AEA RCT Registry. March 21. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.12833-2.1
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
In a randomized, controlled study, starting in spring of 2024, we sent around 8 k email inquiries in three business sectors (public administration, industry and services) to companies that had reported training positions to local job centers in German cities. We block-randomized the treatments into (5*2*2*2 = 50) dimensions at the level of industries and federal states: First, we varied the migration background (German, Turkish, Russian, Arab and Jewish) of the applicants by choosing German, Turkish or Russian or Israeli or Arab given sounding names. Second, we varied the gender (female vs. male) of the applicants. Third, we varied the expected grade point average (very good vs. satisfactory) after 10 years of school with the completion of the technical college entrance qualification. The fourth treatment dimension varied previous economic knowledge acquired in an internship.
Intervention Start Date
2024-01-21
Intervention End Date
2025-04-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The primary outcome variable is responsiveness of the addressed high schools. Responsiveness is measured as follows. If we observe a non-automated response to our treatment email, we mark it as “1”. If we do not observe a non-automated response, we mark it as “0”.
(i) We expect that the overall responsiveness towards inquirers without immigrant background is higher compared to high school's responsiveness towards inquirers with immigrant background.
(ii) We expect that high schools within districts that have a higher share of immigrants answer more frequently to inquirers with an immigrant background than schools in districts that have a low share of immigrants.
(iii) We expect that schools are more responsive to male compared to female inquirers.
(iv) We expect that schools are more responsive to inquirers with high GPA compared to inquirers with low GPA
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
(i) There is evidence that German elites rather respond to inquiries made by people without immigrant background compared to inquiries made by people with immigrant background.
(ii) We expect this outcome due to pre-tests in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia.
(iii) These expectations are based on the observation from pre-tests in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia. It can also be explained by gender studies.
(iv) This outcome can be driven by rational choice: High-GPA students are preferred by businesses over low-GPA students.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Apart from responsiveness we are interested in the tonality and the text length of the written answers to the students. We expect that the tonality also varies across the treatment dimensions. This will be an additional variable we will use once we have a sufficient number of observations. In addition, we are interested in categorizing the answers between helpful answers, rejections and other categories that exemplify good, bad or even ugly answer types.
(i) We expect that migrant inquires receive non-helpful answers more often compared to non-migration inquires.
(ii) We expect that that migrant inquires receive neutral or even negative answers more often compared to non-migrant inquires.
(iii) We expect that non-migrant inquirers receive shorter answers compared to migrant inquires because respondents are spending more time to write non-helpful or negative answers compared to positive answers.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
All effects are based on rational behavior or cognitive dissonances:
(i) The respondent shows discrimination not by neglect but by choosing a lower effort level.
(ii) The respondent shows discrimination not by neglect but by choosing a lower effort level quality.
(iii) We believe that humans who are intentionally discriminate are aware of this action and justify their behavior by writing longer answers.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
we sent around 8 k email inquiries in three business sectors (public administration, industry and services) to companies that had reported training positions to local job centers in German cities. We block-randomized the treatments into (5*2*2*2 = 50) dimensions at the level of industries and federal states: First, we varied the migration background (German, Turkish, Russian, Arab and Jewish) of the applicants by choosing German, Turkish or Russian or Israeli or Arab given sounding names. Second, we varied the gender (female vs. male) of the applicants. Third, we varied the expected grade point average (very good vs. satisfactory) after 10 years of school with the completion of the technical college entrance qualification. The fourth treatment dimension varied previous economic knowledge acquired in an internship.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization is done in office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
State level and secoral level
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Between 160 clusters with respect to randomization unit (state level). 50 clusters with respect to treatment clusters (three binary dimensions * 5 dimensions for racial background) within randomization unit.
Sample size: planned number of observations
8k obs are expected.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
8k
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Rat für Ethik in der Forschung Universität Siegen
IRB Approval Date
2021-07-27
IRB Approval Number
ER_35/2021