Gender differences in safety perception and labor force participation

Last registered on March 18, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Gender differences in safety perception and labor force participation
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015505
Initial registration date
March 05, 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
March 18, 2025, 8:25 AM EDT

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

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2025-01-16
End date
2025-03-10
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This paper examines how safety perceptions influence commuting preferences and labour market outcomes, with a focus on gender differences. Previous research suggests that women’s commuting decisions are shaped by safety concerns, leading them to prioritize safer commutes over higher-wage opportunities, potentially widening the gender wage gap. Using a two-step approach, the study combines a vignette experiment with a representative survey. In the first step, the vignette experiment elicits respondents’ first- and second- order beliefs to investigate gendered social norms around wage and safety trade-offs. Participants are asked to estimate others' recommendations and provide their own for a fictional protagonist choosing between two job options. The vignette varies the protagonist's gender, wage offers, and commuting safety across 12 versions, with each respondent randomly assigned to one condition to analyse the causal impact of the three factors on mobility-related social norms. Hypotheses include the expectation that safer options are recommended more frequently for female protagonists than for male ones and that higher wage levels will increase the likelihood of advising riskier commutes, with a stronger effect observed for men. In the second step, the survey collects socio-demographic data, job preferences, commuting habits, and safety perceptions from a representative sample of young Italian adults aged 19-29. By linking social norms from the vignette experiment to individual preferences, the study examines how safety concerns affect decisions like accepting riskier commutes or prioritizing safer jobs conditions. Findings are expected to demonstrate the role of safety concerns in shaping gendered commuting preferences and labour market inequalities, contributing to a better understanding of the barriers to women’s workforce participation and emphasizing the need to address safety issues for equitable job access.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Mahfouz, Elisa. 2025. "Gender differences in safety perception and labor force participation." AEA RCT Registry. March 18. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15505-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2025-01-22
Intervention End Date
2025-03-09

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
First-order beliefs; Second-order beliefs; Respondents’ preferences for specific job characteristics; Current employment status, including wage and contract type; Stated willingness to commute; Trade-offs between wages and job-related benefits, including safer commuting conditions.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The study examines two sets of outcomes. In the vignette experiment, the primary outcomes are first-order beliefs —respondents’ personal recommendations for the vignette protagonist on choosing between safer and riskier job options— and second-order beliefs, which captures respondents’ perceptions of how others in their reference group would advise the protagonist. These measures aim to reveal the causal impact of the protagonist’s gender, commuting conditions, and wage offer on social norms related to job choices. The survey analysis extends this framework by exploring broader outcomes, including respondents’ preferences for job attributes such as wages, commuting conditions, and contract types. Additionally, safety constraints are analysed, with attention to how respondents balance wages against job-related benefits like safer commuting options. Besides the survey responses, we have the possibility to compare the observable characteristics of our sample to administrative data, in order to address potential endogeneity concerns, and to analyse the impact of social norms on unemployment rate, working conditions gathered by administrative datasets. The outcomes, combined with the vignette experiment, help to clarify how individuals navigate trade-offs between wages and safer working conditions, revealing the role of gendered social norms in shaping these choices.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The intervention consists of a representative survey combined with a vignette experiment to explore the role of gender, wage, and safety concerns in job acceptance decisions involving commuting risks. We plan to collect data from 5,000 Italian individuals, split equally across two waves (2,500 per wave). Each wave will be independently representative based on gender, age groups (19-24 and 25-29 years), education level (high school graduates vs. university graduates), geographic region, and metropolitan vs. non-metropolitan area to ensure consistency in sample composition across both waves. The survey gathers detailed demographic, socio-economic, and commuting information, and includes questions related to personal safety perceptions examining whether these concerns influence job choices. It focuses on participants’ willingness to accept job, given conditions that impact commuting safety, such as remote work options or shifts within daylight hours. Following the survey, participants are subject to a vignette experiment where they are presented with a fictional scenario involving a protagonist who must choose between two job options. Option 1 offers better career advancement prospects but requires commuting within a broad time range (6:00 am to 11:00 pm). Option 2 provides a daylight-only commute with limited career growth potential and a fixed wage.
The experiment varies according to three dimensions. The first dimension is the gender of the protagonist, with some participants seeing a man and others seeing a woman. The second random variation concerns with the commuting environment described in the scenario: one version of the vignette describes a potentially unsafe environment, in which the protagonist has to walk through some areas of the city that are sparsely populated and poorly illuminated, in order to reach the workplace, located in an isolated neighbourhood. In the other version, the workplace is in the city centre and well connected by public transport, making commuting safe and practical. The third dimension involves three wage levels, and respondents are randomly subject to one of the three variations of the potential wage. More precisely, some respondents see both job options offering the same wage, others see a higher wage in the first option compared to the second, and the third version displays the highest wage level in the first option, while the wage in the second remains fixed. Note that age and level of education of the protagonist are in line with participants’ age and education level, in order to make them identify with the protagonist more easily, and also wage offers are consistent with the level of education (€1200/1500/1800 for high school graduate respondents, €1400/1700/2100 for university graduates).
Participants are randomly assigned to one of the 12 vignette versions with equal probability, ensuring balanced exposure across all conditions. Among these versions, the baseline vignette is the one featuring a male protagonist, a safe commuting environment, and the lowest wage level. This neutral baseline condition serves as a reference point for measuring the causal effects of gender, commuting safety, and wage variations on participants’ responses. Respondents are asked to provide two key responses: their estimation of how many people in their reference group would recommend one of the two options (second-order belief) and their own recommendation about the same option (first-order belief). These measures aim to reveal the causal impact of the protagonist’s gender, commuting conditions, and wage offer on social norms related to job choices. Hypotheses include the expectation that safer options are recommended more frequently for female protagonists than for male ones and that higher wage levels will increase the tendency to advise riskier commutes, with a stronger effect observed for men.
Together, the survey and vignette experiment explore how gendered safety concerns, wage incentives, and social norms interact to shape job and commuting preferences, with a focus on the role of safety perception in job-related decision-making.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization is done in office by a survey company.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
5000
Sample size: planned number of observations
5000
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
5000
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
f^2=0.00042
Supporting Documents and Materials

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

Request Information
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Comitato di Bioetica dell’Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna
IRB Approval Date
2024-04-29
IRB Approval Number
0048250 (Prot. 2025/02/13)

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

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

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials