THE EFFECTS OF TARGETED MESSAGES TO FIRMS ABOUT DISCRIMINATION IN HIRING

Last registered on December 05, 2025

View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title

THE EFFECTS OF TARGETED MESSAGES TO FIRMS ABOUT DISCRIMINATION IN HIRING

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0013948

Initial registration date

December 02, 2025

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

December 05, 2025, 9:31 AM EST

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

Locations

Country

France

Region

Primary Investigator

Name

Morgane Laouenan

Affiliation

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Joyce SULTAN

PI Affiliation

IPP

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Nicolas Jacquemet

PI Affiliation

Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne (CES), Paris School of Economics (PSE), Institut des Politiques Publiques

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Roland RATHELOT

PI Affiliation

ENSAE, IP Paris, and CREST

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Thomas BREDA

PI Affiliation

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique & Institut des Politiques Publiques

Contact Investigator

PI Name

Mirna SAFI

PI Affiliation

Sciences Po, CRIS and LIEPP

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

On going

Start date

2024-07-01

End date

2025-12-30

Keywords

Labor

Additional Keywords

discrimination

JEL code(s)

J71, J78

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

While discrimination in hiring, particularly the one that is related to origin, is still a concern, the ways to put an end to it remain under-studied. To fill this gap, this project aims to test targeted interventions likely to reduce firms' discriminatory practices at a minimal cost. We propose to evaluate targeted information campaigns aimed at companies, combined with effective measurement of their discriminatory practices. Discrimination in hiring is measured in large companies using “testing" methods, i.e., by comparing the callback rates after sending fictitious CVs with comparable content but different names suggesting different origins. At the end of the first testing phase, we will constitute two groups of firms. In the first group, firms are informed that their recruitments will be monitored ("we're watching you"). The second group of firms does not receive any message. Drawing on the ongoing “testing,” we then examine how discrimination evolves in the short and medium term in each group of firms.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

BREDA, Thomas et al. 2025. "THE EFFECTS OF TARGETED MESSAGES TO FIRMS ABOUT DISCRIMINATION IN HIRING ." AEA RCT Registry. December 05. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.13948-1.0

Sponsors & Partners

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

Request Information

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

We approach our research question using a correspondence study coupled with the implementation of interventions: targeted information campaigns aimed at the companies in our study.

Intervention (Hidden)

The intervention consists of sending targeted information letters to establishments assigned to the treatment group. These letters will be sent both to the firm’s headquarters and to its establishments for which applications have been sent in the first round. The purpose of this communication is to inform the firm that its recruitment practices are being monitored as part of an ongoing study. No letter will be sent to firms in the control group.

Intervention Start Date

2025-02-01

Intervention End Date

2025-03-01

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Ex-ante vs ex-post evaluation of [1] Whether the application received a callback, i.e., dummy variable equal to one if the application received a callback and zero otherwise, [2] Whether the application received an invitation for a job interview, i.e., dummy variable equal to one if the application received an invitation and zero otherwise

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

A callback is defined as a positive, personalized phone or e-mail contact by a potential employer. This is usually a request for an interview, but employers also contact applicants asking for additional documents/information or a callback by the applicant.

An invitation is a personalized phone or e-mail contact in which the potential employer expresses interest in conducting an interview.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

The experiment/impact assessment of these targeted interventions is based on an ex-ante and ex-post correspondence study design involving a matched-pair design (by sending matched pairs of fictitious applications). We randomly assign firms into (1) a treatment group that will receive a targeted information letter and (2) a control group that will not.

Experimental Design Details

(a) Ex-ante measurement of discrimination: before sending the letters, we will test the discriminatory behaviors of firms by measuring their hiring practices using a correspondence test design.
(b) We will randomly divide the firms into two groups: firms in a treatment group that will receive a letter and a control group that will not.
(c) Ex-post measurement of discrimination: After receiving the letter, we will test the firms' hiring behavior again, using the same correspondence test design.
(d) Statistical Analysis: we will first conduct a balanced analysis to verify that the randomization went as planned and that the characteristics have the same distribution in each of the two groups. The main analysis will then be the estimation of a linear model in which the outcome variable is respectively regressed on the indicators of groups. The outcome variable tested is Call-back/invitation rates following an application: the proportion of applications belonging to the minority who have received an invitation to an interview (calculated from the correspondence testing data described above). We will also estimate models including establishment fixed effects as well as indicators for "treatment", post (ex-post correspondence testing), and their interaction (treatment × post). Finally, we will also attempt to compute firm-level measures of discrimination, in order to obtain complementary firm-specific indicators of discriminatory behavior.

Randomization Method

Randomization is done in the office by a computer

Randomization Unit

Randomization is taking place to create the CVs with which we apply ex-ante and ex-post to each job offer and to assign the CVs to the job advertisements posted by the establishments. We aim to test the same establishments ex-ante and ex-post.

For the assignment of targeted information campaigns, we will split the group of firms into two groups : control and treatment groups.
We will randomize at the firm level by stratifying on their size (number of employees) and their sector (food, clothes, hardware, leisure). All establishments belonging to treated firms will be treated while all establishments belonging to non-treated (control) firms will not be treated.

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

100 firms in total, 8 establishments per firm

Sample size: planned number of observations

800 establishments in total

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

- 50 firms (400 establishments) assigned to the treatment group
- 50 firms (400 establishments) assigned to the control group

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

Our power calculations are based on a power of 80% and a significance level of 5%. Our previous work suggests callback rates of the order of 30% for majority applicants, and of the order of 20% for minority applicants. So, with 50 firms treated (400 establishments), the effect of an intervention will be detectable if it increases the percentage of positive responses from 20% to 26%. Thus, we decided to set the size of both control and treatment groups to 50 firms, leading to a total of 800 establishments.

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB