Chapter 17 - New Perspectives on Gender
Introduction
At the time Altonji and Blank completed their influential Handbook chapter in 1999, the two main factors being discussed as sources of the gender gap in earnings were differences in human capital accumulation and discrimination (taste-based or statistical). Patterns of occupational segregation by gender (which have been shown to “explain” much of the gender gap in earnings) were essentially attributed either to discrimination being more pronounced in some occupations than others, or to differences in human capital accumulation pre labor market entry (such as differences in the type of education women receive) or post labor market entry (such as differences in accumulated experience).
While researchers have certainly not abandoned studying these two factors nor given up on their first order relevance, a major development over the last ten years has been the rising popularity of new classes of explanations for gender differences in labor market outcomes.1 First and foremost is the possibility that there are important differences in psychological attributes and preferences between men and women that may make some occupations more attractive to women and others more attractive to men. While Altonji and Blank (1999) already discuss this possibility, they also point to the difficulty in pushing it further without better foundations for the source and nature of these gender differences. Thanks to advances in the psychology and experimental literatures, and a growing influence of these literatures on economics research, we now have a much more concrete sense of the psychological factors that appear to systematically differ between men and women. In particular, we review the evidence regarding gender differences in risk preferences (Section 2.1), in attitudes towards competition (Section 2.2), in the strength of other-regarding preferences (Section 2.3) and in attitudes towards negotiation (Section 2.4). While there is an abundance of laboratory studies regarding each of these psychological factors, there has been to date, as we discuss in Sections 2.5 and 2.6, only a very limited amount of research able to establish the relevance of these factors for labor market outcomes. In this regard, whether this body of psychological research will be more than just a decade-long fad and have a long-lasting impact on how labor economists think about gender differences will crucially depend on further demonstration of its economic significance in real markets. Assuming such economic significance can be established, policymakers will want to better understand the sources of these gender differences in psychological attributes and traits: are evolution and biology dictating that women are more risk averse than men? Or is the gender gap in risk aversion an outcome of child-rearing practices? The review we perform in Section 2.7 suggest at least some environmental influences on top of pure biological foundations, and hence the promise of a broader set of policy tools to try to undo some of the psychological influences that might be the most damaging to women’s labor market success.
Another increasingly discussed explanation for why women and men experience different labor markets is the existence of social norms about what is appropriate for men to do and what is appropriate for women to do. Influential papers by Akerlof and Kranton (2000, 2002, 2005) have helped the import into economics of earlier insights from the social psychology literature regarding an individual’s social identity and how it can influence behaviors and choices in markets. One of the richest applications of the social identity model has been to gender identity and its implications for not only occupational sorting, but also labor force participation and the allocation of work within the household. We review the (gender) identity model in Section 3.1. Unfortunately, it has been difficult to design a credible causal testing of the impact of gender identity norms for women’s labor market choices; we review the evidence that has been produced so far in Section 3.2. Here again, we feel that much more validating empirical work will be needed in the near future for gender identity insights to have a long-lasting impact on how labor economists approach gender issues. The review we perform in Section 3.3 shows that socialization and child-rearing practices have been singled out (in the economics literature at least) as the key drivers of social norms regarding gender roles; in fact, as we discuss in Section 3.4, a nurture explanation for why men and women exhibit different attitudes with respect to risk (or competition, or negotiation, or altruism) might be that such gendered traits are components of one’s gender identity (e.g. being a woman implies displaying more risk-aversion; being a man implies behaving more aggressively).
Section 4 continues on the theme of bringing a more psychological perspective into the labor economics of gender. In that section, we review some recent work on gender differences in well-being. We are particularly motivated by a recent paper by Stevenson and Wolfers (2009) who find that, despite decades of educational gains and an unambiguous enlargement of their set of labor market opportunities, women’s self-reported levels of life satisfaction appear to have declined over time, both in absolute terms and relative to men’s. We discuss various explanations for this finding. More generally, we stress in this section that additional measures of women’s well-being exist beyond those typically used by labor economists (see for example Blau, 1998), and that a creative use of those measures could lead to a richer perspective on women’s progress.
We conclude in Section 5 with additional suggestions for future research.
Section snippets
Risk attitudes
Bonin et al. (2007) empirically demonstrate that individuals that are less willing to take risk tend to sort into occupations with more stable earnings; these occupations, due to compensating wage differentials in environments with risk-averse agents, also tend to pay less on average.2 Hence, risk preferences may be an important determinant of earnings, in addition to the more traditional factors typically included in a Mincerian wage equation.3
Gender identity
Another explanation that has gained in popularity over the last decade for the persistence of a gender gap in labor market outcomes is that this gap is an outcome of prevailing social norms about what is appropriate for men to do and what is appropriate for women to do. Such social norms may induce differential sorting of men and women across occupations; they may also drive women’s decisions to participate in the workforce. While Altonji and Blank (1999) already mention the potential role of
Women’s well-being
Probably the most striking labor market change over the last 30 to 40 years has been the enormous gains women have experienced along several objective outcome dimensions, including their educational achievement, their labor force participation, and their earnings. These revolutionary changes have been witnessed in the US but also in most other economically advanced countries. For example, Goldin et al. (2006) document how, starting in the 1970s, US girls started narrowing the gender gap in high
Conclusion
Compared to ten years ago, labor economists now have a much larger set of potential explanations to draw from when trying to explain gender differences in labor market outcomes. While education, experience and discrimination might have been the primary factors considered in the past to account for, say, the lack of women in investment banking, most labor economists would now also discuss why investment banking jobs might be particularly unattractive to women because of the cut-throat
References (203)
- et al.
Predicting health behaviors with an experimental measure of risk preference
Journal of Health Economics
(2008) Testosterone and human behavior: an evaluation of the challenge hypothesis
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
(2006)- et al.
Plasma testosterone and pathological gambling
Psychiatry Research
(2001) - et al.
An experimental test for gender differences in beneficent behavior
Economics Letters
(1995) - et al.
Cross sectional earnings risk and occupational sorting: the role of risk attitudes
Labour Economics
(2007) - et al.
Social incentives for sex differences in the propensity to initiate negotiation: sometimes it does hurt to ask
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
(2007) - et al.
Variations in risk taking behavior over the menstrual cycle: an improved replication
Evolution and Human Behavior
(2003) - et al.
Gender and free riding in a threshold public goods game: experimental evidence
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization
(1998) - et al.
Seeing is believing: exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
(2004) - et al.
Gender differences in revealed risk taking: evidence from mutual fund investors
Economics Letters
(2002)
Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes toward financial risk
Evolution and Human Behavior
Women war and wages: the impact of female labor supply on the wage structure at mid-century
Journal of Political Economy
Measuring trends in leisure: the allocation of time over five decades
Quarterly Journal of Economics
Identity and schooling: some lessons for the economics of education
Journal of Economic Literature
Identity and the economics of organizations
Journal of Economic Perspectives
Economics and identity
Quarterly Journal of Economics
Race and gender in the labor market
Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in altruism
Quarterly Journal of Economics
The effects of gender interactions in the lab and in the field
Review of Economics and Statistics
Testosterone and financial risk-taking
Evolution and Human Behavior
Gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations
Women Don’t Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide
More power to the pill: the impact of contraceptive freedom on women’s lifecycle labor supply
Quarterly Journal of Economics
Risk aversion and pension investment choices
Boys will be boys: gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment
Quarterly Journal of Economics
The Essential Difference. Men, Women, and the Extreme Male Brain
Powerful women: female leadership and gender bias
Quarterly Journal of Economics
The Economics of Discrimination
Do faculty members serve as role models? The impact of faculty gender on female students
American Economic Review
Gender differences in self-perceptions: convergent evidence from three measures of accuracy and bias
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Gender differences in the accuracy of self-evaluations of performance
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Parental investment theory and sex differences in the evolution of inhibition mechanisms
Psychological Bulletin
The impact of globalization on gender discrimination
Industrial and Labor Relations Review
The division of spoils: rent-sharing and discrimination in a regulated industry
American Economic Review
The rise of female professionals: women’s response to rising skill demand
American Economic Review
Outside offers and the genderpay gap: empirical evidence from the UK academic labor market
Economic Journal
The US gender pay gap in the 1990s: slowing convergence
Industrial and Labor Relations Review
Trends in the well-being of American women, 1970–1995
Journal of Economic Literature
Women’s work and wages
Hours of work and gender identity: does part-time work make the family happier?
Economica
Gender differences in risk aversion and ambiguity aversion
Journal of the European Economic Association
The economics and psychology of personality traits
Journal of Human Resources
Interpersonal styles and labor market outcomes
Journal of Human Resources
Cited by (801)
The positionality of goods and the positional concern's origin
2024, Journal of Behavioral and Experimental EconomicsGender norms and the gender gap in higher education
2024, Labour EconomicsGender differences in wage expectations and negotiation
2024, Labour EconomicsWomen lean back when representing others in competitions
2024, Journal of Behavioral and Experimental EconomicsAttractiveness vs. Partisan stereotypes
2024, Journal of Economic Behavior and OrganizationThe long-run causal effects of single-sex schooling on work-related outcomes in South Korea
2024, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility