IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20240002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Social desirability bias in attitudes towards sexism and DEI policies in the workplace

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Boring

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

  • Josse Delfgaauw

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

Abstract

Do workers speak their mind about sexism and about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies in the workplace? We measure social desirability bias regarding sexism and DEI policies using a list experiment survey among workers from five male-dominated industries in France and in the US. In both countries and, remarkably, among both men and women, we document substantial social desirability bias. Managers exhibit a larger bias than non-managerial employees. This difference between voiced and real attitudes may make organizations overestimate support for DEI policies in their workforce, rendering such policies less effective.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Boring & Josse Delfgaauw, 2024. "Social desirability bias in attitudes towards sexism and DEI policies in the workplace," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 24-002/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20240002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/24002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sule Alan & Gozde Corekcioglu & Matthias Sutter, 2023. "Improving Workplace Climate in Large Corporations: A Clustered Randomized Intervention," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(1), pages 151-203.
    2. Aksoy, Billur & Carpenter, Christopher S. & Sansone, Dario, 2022. "Understanding Labor Market Discrimination against Transgender People: Evidence from a Double List Experiment and a Survey," IZA Discussion Papers 15542, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Olle Folke & Johanna Rickne, 2022. "Sexual Harassment and Gender Inequality in the Labor Market [High Wage Workers and High Wage Firms]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 137(4), pages 2163-2212.
    4. Simon Gachter & Ernst Fehr, 2000. "Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 980-994, September.
    5. Azmat, Ghazala & Boring, Anne, 2020. "Gender Diversity in Firms," IZA Policy Papers 168, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Bursztyn, Leonardo & Cappelen, Alexander & Tungodden, Bertil & Voena, Alessandra & Yanagizawa-Drott, David, 2023. "How Are Gender Norms Perceived?," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 5/2023, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    7. Katherine B. Coffman & Lucas C. Coffman & Keith M. Marzilli Ericson, 2017. "The Size of the LGBT Population and the Magnitude of Antigay Sentiment Are Substantially Underestimated," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(10), pages 3168-3186, October.
    8. Abi Adams-Prassl & Kristiina Huttunen & Emily Nix & Ning Zhang, 2022. "Violence Against Women at Work," Opportunity and Inclusive Growth Institute Working Papers 064, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    9. Jean Tirole & Roland Bénabou, 2006. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1652-1678, December.
    10. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2022. "How to Run Surveys: A Guide to Creating Your Own Identifying Variation and Revealing the Invisible," NBER Working Papers 30527, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Erik Plug & Dinand Webbink & Nick Martin, 2014. "Sexual Orientation, Prejudice, and Segregation," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 123-159.
    12. Stephen Morris, 2001. "Political Correctness," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(2), pages 231-265, April.
    13. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    14. Muriel Niederle & Carmit Segal & Lise Vesterlund, 2013. "How Costly Is Diversity? Affirmative Action in Light of Gender Differences in Competitiveness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 1-16, May.
    15. Blair, Graeme & Imai, Kosuke, 2012. "Statistical Analysis of List Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 47-77, January.
    16. Alexander L. Janus, 2010. "The Influence of Social Desirability Pressures on Expressed Immigration Attitudes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(4), pages 928-946, December.
    17. James Allen IV & Arlete Mahumane & James Riddell IV & Tanya Rosenblat & Dean Yang & Hang Yu, 2021. "Correcting Perceived Social Distancing Norms to Combat COVID-19," NBER Working Papers 28651, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Joni Hersch, 2011. "Compensating Differentials for Sexual Harassment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 630-634, May.
    19. Suzanne H. Bijkerk & Silvia Dominguez-Martinez & Jurjen Kamphorst & Otto H. Swank, 2021. "Labor Market Quotas When Promotions Are Signals," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(2), pages 437-460.
    20. Jiayuan Li & Wim Van den Noortgate, 2022. "A Meta-analysis of the Relative Effectiveness of the Item Count Technique Compared to Direct Questioning," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 760-799, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Abi Adams-Prassl & Kristiina Huttunen & Emily Nix & Ning Zhang, 2022. "Violence Against Women at Work," Opportunity and Inclusive Growth Institute Working Papers 064, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    2. Gutierrez, Emilio & Rubli, Adrian, 2024. "LGBT+ persons and homophobia prevalence across job sectors: Survey evidence from Mexico," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    3. Ahmad, Syedah & Lensink, Robert & Mueller, Annika, 2023. "Religion, social desirability bias and financial inclusion: Evidence from a list experiment on Islamic (micro-)finance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    4. Angerer, Silvia & Glätzle-Rützler, Daniela & Lergetporer, Philipp & Rittmannsberger, Thomas, 2024. "Beliefs about social norms and gender-based polarization of COVID-19 vaccination readiness," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    5. Daniel Jones & Sera Linardi, 2014. "Wallflowers: Experimental Evidence of an Aversion to Standing Out," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(7), pages 1757-1771, July.
    6. Sansone, Dario, 2019. "Pink work: Same-sex marriage, employment and discrimination," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    7. Aksoy, Billur & Chadd, Ian & Koh, Boon Han, 2023. "Sexual identity, gender, and anticipated discrimination in prosocial behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    8. Anya Savikhin & Roman Sheremeta, 2010. "Visibility of Contributions and Cost of Information: An Experiment on Public Goods," Working Papers 10-22, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    9. Attallah, May & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2022. "Non-monetary incentives for sustainable biomass harvest: An experimental approach," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    10. Barmettler, Franziska & Fehr, Ernst & Zehnder, Christian, 2012. "Big experimenter is watching you! Anonymity and prosocial behavior in the laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 17-34.
    11. Khadjavi, Menusch & Lange, Andreas & Nicklisch, Andreas, 2014. "The Social Value of Transparency and Accountability: Experimental Evidence from Asymmetric Public Good Games," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100512, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Agnès Festré & Pierre Garrouste, 2009. "The economic analysis of social norms: A reappraisal of Hayek’s legacy," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 22(3), pages 259-279, September.
    13. Florian Diekert & Tillmann Eymess & Joseph Luomba & Israel Waichman, 2022. "The Creation of Social Norms under Weak Institutions," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(6), pages 1127-1160.
    14. Ivan Soraperra & Anton Suvorov & Jeroen Van de Ven & Marie Claire Villeval, 2019. "Doing Bad to Look Good: Negative Consequences of Image Concerns on Prosocial Behavior," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 70(6), pages 945-966.
    15. Fluet, Claude & Galbiati, Rpbertp, 2016. "Lois et normes : les enseignements de l'économie comportementale," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 92(1-2), pages 191-215, Mars-Juin.
    16. Columbus, Simon & Feld, Lars P. & Kasper, Matthias & Rablen, Matthew D., 2023. "Behavioural Responses to Unfair Institutions: Experimental Evidence on Rule Compliance, Norm Polarisation, and Trust," IZA Discussion Papers 16346, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Karlan, Dean & McConnell, Margaret A., 2014. "Hey look at me: The effect of giving circles on giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 402-412.
    18. Karakostas, Alexandros & Kocher, Martin G. & Matzat, Dominik & Rau, Holger A. & Riewe, Gerhard, 2023. "The team allocator game: Allocation power in public goods games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 73-87.
    19. Leonardo Bursztyn & Ingar K. Haaland & Aakaash Rao & Christopher P. Roth, 2020. "Disguising Prejudice: Popular Rationales as Excuses for Intolerant Expression," NBER Working Papers 27288, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Fernández-Duque, Mauricio, 2022. "The probability of pluralistic ignorance," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sexism; Diversity; Social desirability bias; List experiment survey;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J71 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Hiring and Firing
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • M5 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics

    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:tin:wpaper:20240002. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    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.