IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/9khds.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does religious bias shape access to public services? A large-scale audit experiment among street-level bureaucrats

Author

Listed:
  • Pfaff, Steven
  • Crabtree, Charles
  • Kern, Holger L.
  • Holbein, John B.

Abstract

Despite growing descriptive evidence of discrimination against minority religious groups and atheists in the United States, little experimental work exists studying whether individuals face differential barriers to receiving public services depending on their religious affiliation. Here we report results from a large-scale audit study of street-level bureaucrats in the American public school system. We emailed the principals of more than 45,000 public schools and asked for a meeting, randomly assigning the religious affiliation/non-affiliation of the family. To get at potential mechanisms, we also randomly assigned belief intensity. We find evidence of substantial discrimination against Muslims and atheists. These individuals are substantially less likely to receive a response, with discrimination growing when they signal that their beliefs are more intense. Protestants and Catholics face no discrimination unless they signal that their religious beliefs are intense. Our ?findings suggest that minority religious groups and atheists face important barriers to equal representation in the public arena.

Suggested Citation

  • Pfaff, Steven & Crabtree, Charles & Kern, Holger L. & Holbein, John B., 2018. "Does religious bias shape access to public services? A large-scale audit experiment among street-level bureaucrats," SocArXiv 9khds, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:9khds
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/9khds
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5b6f90743e03fb0017d40c3a/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/9khds?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hainmueller, Jens, 2012. "Entropy Balancing for Causal Effects: A Multivariate Reweighting Method to Produce Balanced Samples in Observational Studies," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 25-46, January.
    2. Gaddis, S. Michael, 2015. "Discrimination in the Credential Society: An Audit Study of Race and College Selectivity in the Labor Market," SocArXiv 6qjue, Center for Open Science.
    3. White, Ariel R. & Nathan, Noah L. & Faller, Julie K., 2015. "What Do I Need to Vote? Bureaucratic Discretion and Discrimination by Local Election Officials," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(1), pages 129-142, February.
    4. David Neumark, 2012. "Detecting Discrimination in Audit and Correspondence Studies," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 47(4), pages 1128-1157.
    5. David E. Broockman, 2013. "Black Politicians Are More Intrinsically Motivated to Advance Blacks’ Interests: A Field Experiment Manipulating Political Incentives," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(3), pages 521-536, July.
    6. Soss, Joe, 1999. "Lessons of Welfare: Policy Design, Political Learning, and Political Action," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(2), pages 363-380, June.
    7. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 991-1013, September.
    8. Soss, Joe & Schram, Sanford F., 2007. "A Public Transformed? Welfare Reform as Policy Feedback," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(1), pages 111-127, February.
    9. Wald, Kenneth D. & Wilcox, Clyde, 2006. "Getting Religion: Has Political Science Rediscovered the Faith Factor?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(4), pages 523-529, November.
    10. Costa, Mia, 2017. "How Responsive are Political Elites? A Meta-Analysis of Experiments on Public Officials," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 241-254, December.
    11. Daniel M. Butler & David E. Broockman, 2011. "Do Politicians Racially Discriminate Against Constituents? A Field Experiment on State Legislators," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 463-477, July.
    12. Jonathan Guryan & Kerwin Kofi Charles, 2013. "Taste‐based or Statistical Discrimination: The Economics of Discrimination Returns to its Roots," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123(11), pages 417-432, November.
    13. Johannes Hemker & Anselm Rink, 2017. "Multiple Dimensions of Bureaucratic Discrimination: Evidence from German Welfare Offices," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(4), pages 786-803, October.
    14. Katherine Levine Einstein & David M. Glick, 2017. "Does Race Affect Access to Government Services? An Experiment Exploring Street‐Level Bureaucrats and Access to Public Housing," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(1), pages 100-116, January.
    15. Soltas, Evan J. & Broockman, David, 2017. "Taste-Based Discrimination against Nonwhite Political Candidates: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Research Papers 3499, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Crawfurd, Lee & Ramli, Ukasha, 2020. "Discrimination by Politicians against Religious Minorities: Experimental Evidence from the UK," SocArXiv tc42s, Center for Open Science.
    2. Carol, Sarah & Kuipers, Coco & Koesling, Philipp & Kaspers, Milan, 2021. "Ethnic and Religious Discrimination in the Wedding Venue Business: Evidence from Two Field Experiments in Germany and Austria," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Advance A, pages 1-1.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gaddis, S. Michael, 2018. "An Introduction to Audit Studies in the Social Sciences," SocArXiv e5hfc, Center for Open Science.
    2. Michael Rochlitz & Evgeniya Mitrokhina & Irina Nizovkina, 2020. "Bureaucratic Discrimination in Electoral Authoritarian Regimes: Experimental Evidence from Russia," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2010, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    3. Corrado Giulietti & Mirco Tonin & Michael Vlassopoulos, 2015. "Racial Discrimination in Local Public Services: A Field Experiment in the US," Working Papers 080, "Carlo F. Dondena" Centre for Research on Social Dynamics (DONDENA), Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi.
    4. Button, Patrick & Walker, Brigham, 2020. "Employment discrimination against Indigenous Peoples in the United States: Evidence from a field experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    5. Mikula, Stepan & Montag, Josef, 2023. "Roma and Bureaucrats: A Field Experiment on Ethnic and Socioeconomic Discrimination," IZA Discussion Papers 16218, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Kenneth Lowande & Andrew Proctor, 2020. "Bureaucratic Responsiveness to LGBT Americans," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 664-681, July.
    7. Adman, Per & Larsson Taghizadeh, Jonas, 2020. "Public officials’ treatment of minority clients," Working Paper Series 2020:12, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    8. Morten Størling Hedegaard & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2018. "The Price of Prejudice," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 40-63, January.
    9. Chen, Yiu Por (Vincent) & Zhang, Yuan, 2018. "A decomposition method on employment and wage discrimination and its application in urban China (2002–2013)," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 1-12.
    10. Judd B. Kessler & Corinne Low & Colin D. Sullivan, 2019. "Incentivized Resume Rating: Eliciting Employer Preferences without Deception," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(11), pages 3713-3744, November.
    11. Lopez Barrera, E., 2018. "Hispanics immigrants in the fields: is discrimination a barrier to get non-agricultural jobs?," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276016, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Marina Mileo Gorzig & Deborah Rho, 2022. "The effect of the 2016 United States presidential election on employment discrimination," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(1), pages 45-88, January.
    13. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo, 2016. "Field Experiments on Discrimination," NBER Working Papers 22014, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Baert, Stijn, 2015. "Hiring a Homosexual, Taking a Risk? A Lab Experiment on Employment Discrimination and Risk Aversion," IZA Discussion Papers 9536, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Melo, Vitor & Rocha, Hugo Vaca Pereira & Sigaud, Liam & Warren, Patrick L. & Gaddis, S. Michael, 2024. "Understanding Discrimination in College Admissions: A Field Experiment," SocArXiv 5ctms, Center for Open Science.
    16. Luca Fumarco & Benjamin Harrell & Patrick Button & David Schwegman & E Dils, 2020. "Gender Identity, Race, and Ethnicity-based Discrimination in Access to Mental Health Care: Evidence from an Audit Correspondence Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 28164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Jacqueline Chattopadhyay, 2017. "Is the ACA's Dependent Coverage Provision Generating Positive Feedback Effects Among Young Adults?," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 42-70, March.
    18. Štěpán Mikula & Josef Montag, 2022. "Roma and Bureaucrats: A Field Experiment in the Czech Republic," MUNI ECON Working Papers 2022-01, Masaryk University, revised Feb 2023.
    19. Charles Crabtree & John B. Holbein & J. Quin Monson, 2022. "Patient traits shape health-care stakeholders’ choices on how to best allocate life-saving care," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(2), pages 244-257, February.
    20. Wittels, Annabelle Sophie, 2020. "The effect of politician-constituent conflict on bureaucratic responsiveness under varying information frames," SocArXiv 4x8q2, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:9khds. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.