Participation in voluntary competitions and gender discrimination

Last registered on December 20, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Participation in voluntary competitions and gender discrimination
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0006845
Initial registration date
December 07, 2020

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 07, 2020, 10:51 AM EST

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

Last updated
December 20, 2021, 4:52 AM EST

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

Locations

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Stavanger

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
WU Vienna University of Economics and Business
PI Affiliation
WU Vienna University of Economics and Business

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2020-12-07
End date
2023-12-30
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
In light of the persistence of gender gaps in labor market outcomes, policy measures have been implemented to encourage women to enter highly competitive, male-stereotypical and well-paid jobs. However, there is reason to believe that women experience backlash from entering such male domains and from ``acting male''. In this research project we investigate whether neutral spectators put women at a disadvantage in a male-stereotypical domain when income inequalities arise and competition is voluntary.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Haeckl, Simone, Jakob Möller and Anita Zednik. 2021. "Participation in voluntary competitions and gender discrimination." AEA RCT Registry. December 20. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.6845-1.3000000000000003
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2020-12-07
Intervention End Date
2021-01-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
proportion of redistributors transferring 0 of the winner payoff to the loser of the competition
standardized amount of the winner's payoff redistributed to the loser (“transfer”)



Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We define “transfer” as the actual amount transferred to the loser (0 <= transfer <=6). The standardized outcome variable is defined as transfer/sigma_(male loser). The outcome variables are directly elicited through the experiment.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We use a spectator game to identify gender discrimination in redistribution after a voluntary decision to compete.
Experimental Design Details
We align our design closely to Cappelen et al. (2019), henceforth CFT. We study whether women are put at a disadvantage when competition is voluntary and the task is male-stereotypical.

Similar to CFT, we will also conduct a worker experiment and a spectator experiment, but we will run the spectator experiment first and the worker experiment second. This is mainly for logistic reasons.

We ask the impartial spectators to redistribute between two workers who have both voluntarily entered competition in a male stereotypical task. We vary the gender of the more/less productive worker, in a mixed-gender setting. The more productive worker is assigned 6 Pounds, the less productive worker 0 Pounds, and the spectators can decide to redistribute any amount to the loser if they like.

Since we expect gender to be a moderator variable, we collect samples large enough to be able to estimate separate effects for female and male spectators. Thus we have two treatments (male loser/female winner and female loser/male winner), and run those two treatments for both male and female spectators.

After the redistribution stage, spectators participate in a short survey covering:
Open text - reasons for their redistribution choice,
Beliefs about performance in the current experiment (incentivized),
Beliefs about performance of men and women in a similar experiment / stereotypical thinking
Questions on social norms about competitive behavior and gender (incentivized; adapted from \citealp{krupka2013identifying}),
Beliefs about effort of workers
Beliefs about social norms about losing and gender and
Demographics (age, gender, education, income, political affiliation, etc.).


Workers in the worker experiment, which will be conducted shortly after the redistributor experiment, have to answer trivia questions on sports and games adapted from Bordalo et a.. (2019). After completing the 20 multiple-choice questions, workers can decide whether they want to be paid a (low) piece-wise rate of 5 pence per correctly solved question, or be randomly matched into pairs and compete for payment. If workers decide to compete they are randomly matched in pairs and the worker who solved fewer questions correctly receives 0 Pounds while the worker who solved more questions correctly receives 6 Pounds. However, they are told that a third party will have the opportunity to redistribute these initially assigned earnings between the two workers in a pair.
Randomization Method
Randomization is done by a computer.
Randomization Unit
individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
2400 spectators
Sample size: planned number of observations
2400 (1600 men and 800 women)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
1200
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Our main hypothesis concerns the comparison between the share of non-distributors between treatments. Based on a power calculation in G-Power, we are able to detect an effect of 0.11 standard deviations using a two-sided Fisher's exact test with a sample of 2400 subjects at a power of 80% and an alpha of 5%. Only considering male spectators we can detect an effect of 0.14 standard deviations using a two-sided Fisher's exact test with a sample of 1600 subjects at a power of 80% and an alpha of 5%. Only considering female spectators we can detect an effect of 0.20 standard deviations using a two-sided Fisher's exact test with a sample of 800 subjects at a power of 80% and an alpha of 5%.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Competence Center for Experimental Economics - Vienna University of Economics and BUsiness
IRB Approval Date
2020-12-07
IRB Approval Number
WU-HSRP-2020-013
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information

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