Back to History Current Version

Underrepresented Groups, Job Search, and Fear of Failure

Last registered on October 15, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Underrepresented Groups, Job Search, and Fear of Failure
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015394
Initial registration date
February 15, 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
February 20, 2025, 5:13 AM EST

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

Last updated
October 15, 2026, 8:23 PM 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

Name
Alexandra Opanasets
Affiliation
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Michelle Jiang
PI Affiliation
University of Massachusetts Boston
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-05-01
End date
2027-05-01
Keywords
Behavior, Gender, Labor
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
When workers from underrepresented groups opt out of “higher risk, higher reward” jobs, income gaps arise. Workers may rationally avoid applying to jobs where they’d be disproportionately punished for failure, and employer bias informs how employers interpret negative productivity signals from workers of different identities. Socialized group differences in traits such as risk aversion or other-regarding preferences also influence job choice. Our proposed research aims to answer: Do workers from underrepresented groups take disproportionate action to avoid failure on the job? If so, what proportion of any resultant gaps in job choice are due to anticipated discrimination versus socialized differences in behavioral traits? We propose running an experiment in which we randomly vary the potential consequences for failure on the job, and observe how this affects job choices for workers from different demographic groups.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Jiang, Michelle and Alexandra Opanasets. 2026. "Underrepresented Groups, Job Search, and Fear of Failure." AEA RCT Registry. October 15. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15394-2.3
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2026-05-01
Intervention End Date
2026-06-01

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Our primary outcome of interest is whether an individual worker chooses to remain in a 'simple' job or to transition to a 'harder' job (binary choice).

We will perform pooled as well as separate analyses by ethnicity and gender -- we do not expect treatment effects to look the same when comparing men to women as when comparing URM to non-URM, and there may also be heterogeneity within those groups e.g. white versus Asian, Black versus Hispanic.

We will also look at treatment effects stratified by skill level, as our initial pilot and prior work suggests that treatment effects will be heterogeneous based on skill.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
- Employer's hiring decisions (which workers get retained and which get fired), and especially whether demographics are predictive of employer choices.
- Whether retained workers choose to complete and perform well in the second round of their assigned task.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Our treatment changes the descriptions of the jobs workers are considering, thus changing the stakes and consequences of failure. We have two cross-randomized dimensions of treatment:

1) Demographic Reveal: Under Demographic Reveal, the worker’s demographic information (gender and race) is revealed to employer subjects along with their score and their Prolific work history. Under No Demographic Reveal, only the worker’s anonymized quantitative attributes are revealed.
2) Separation Risk: Under Separation Risk, the worker might get “fired” (i.e. not be invited back to complete the second round of puzzles). Under No Separation Risk, the worker will always be invited back to complete the second round and their performance will be used to train employers in a “practice round” of evaluation.

Our final design consists of four treatment cells. Treatment will be stratified by gender (Men and Women) and race (URM versus non-URM). URM in our context means a reported ethnicity of "Black" or "Other" (as opposed to "White" or "Asian") on the platform where we're recruiting. Note: "Other" predominantly includes those who identify exclusively as Hispanic, Latino, American Indian, or Alaska Native.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization done by computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
4800 'worker' participants
Sample size: planned number of observations
4800 job choices (one per 'worker' participants)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
1200 participants in each treatment arm; four total treatment arms.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials

Documents

Document Name
Research Questions and Hypotheses
Document Type
other
Document Description
File
Research Questions and Hypotheses

MD5: f367d17b99c9f6c62263ac3dd20e218b

SHA1: 8fe37b6ae0ed1463f908d9f1d3a91f93f4f6b70a

Uploaded At: December 15, 2025

IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Massachusetts Boston
IRB Approval Date
2025-10-14
IRB Approval Number
4023
Analysis Plan