Masculinity Norms and Occupational Choice

Last registered on April 13, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Masculinity Norms and Occupational Choice
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018161
Initial registration date
April 09, 2026

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
April 13, 2026, 9:28 AM EDT

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

Locations

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

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Martina Uccioli
Affiliation
University of Nottingham
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Rachel Schuh
PI Affiliation
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-04-10
End date
2026-12-31
Keywords
Gender
Additional Keywords
Masculinity, occupational choice
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Over the past five decades, the labor force participation rate of American men has declined significantly--from 80% in the 1970s to just around 68% today--and similar trends are observed across the developed world. During the same period, the fastest-growing occupations have been those traditionally considered “feminine,” such as nursing. Are these two trends connected? Do masculinity norms discourage men from entering the labor force by deterring them from pursuing jobs perceived as feminine? We document that male employment participation declined more following sectoral reallocation in more gender-traditional labor markets, as proxied by occupational segregation by gender. We are then examining whether masculinity norms systematically distort men’s occupational choices away from income-maximization and estimating men’s willingness to pay (in terms of forgone earnings) to avoid occupations seen as feminine. Understanding the role of masculinity norms in shaping men’s labor market decisions is crucial for addressing the ongoing decline in male labor force participation.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Schuh, Rachel and Martina Uccioli. 2026. "Masculinity Norms and Occupational Choice." AEA RCT Registry. April 13. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18161-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The intervention is a debiasing intervention, similar to Bursztyn, Gonzalez, Yanagizawa-Drott (2020), on masculinity norms
Intervention Start Date
2026-05-01
Intervention End Date
2026-08-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Willingness-to-pay to avoid “feminine” (or “masculine”) occupations, both for oneself and for own (imaginary) children.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We will implement a vignette design to elicit individual’s willingness-to-pay to avoid typically feminine occupations (e.g. nursing) or typically masculine occupations (e.g. plumbing) against a neutral benchmark (e.g. hotel manager). We will do it both thinking about own choices and thinking about advice to give to own (real or imaginary) children.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Heterogeneous effects by gender, age, reported norms (answers to the norms questions themselves), income, education, employment status, parental status, age of children, relationship status, current or previous occupation and industry, partner’s occupation and industry.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Individuals will be asked level of agreement with a “masculinity” statement, such as “A man should use violence when necessary”. They will then be asked how many out of 100 individuals like them (e.g. 100 American women) agree with such a statement. The treated individuals will be debiased on the true number.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Computer (automatized in survey experiment)
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
2,000 survey respondents
Sample size: planned number of observations
2,000 survey respondents
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
600 controls (300 asked about norms first and occupational choice second, and 300 the other way around), 1,400 treated (650 debiased on masculinity norm regarding work; 150 debiased on each of the other 5 masculinity norms statements)
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Nottingham School of Economics Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2026-01-30
IRB Approval Number
N/A
Analysis Plan