Beliefs about Gender

Pedro  Bordalo; Katherine Baldiga Coffman; Nicola  Gennaioli; Andrei   Shleifer

Article | American Economic Review | March 2019

Beliefs about Gender

by Pedro Bordalo, Katherine Baldiga Coffman, Nicola Gennaioli and Andrei Shleifer

Abstract

We conduct laboratory experiments that explore how gender stereotypes shape beliefs about ability of oneself and others in different categories of knowledge. The data reveal two patterns. First, men’s and women’s beliefs about both oneself and others exceed observed ability on average, particularly in difficult tasks. Second, overestimation of ability by both men and women varies across categories. To understand these patterns, we develop a model that separates gender stereotypes from misestimation of ability related to the difficulty of the task. We find that stereotypes contribute to gender gaps in self-confidence, assessments of others, and behavior in a cooperative game.

Keywords: Performance Evaluation; Perspective; Prejudice and Bias; Gender;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

Bordalo, Pedro, Katherine Baldiga Coffman, Nicola Gennaioli, and Andrei Shleifer. "Beliefs about Gender." American Economic Review 109, no. 3 (March 2019): 739–773.

This teaching plan serves as a supplement to the cases “Chief: Role for Carolyn Childers,” “Chief: Role for Lindsay Kaplan,” and “Scaling at Chief.”

Using historical data on post-war financial crises around the world, we show that crises are substantially predictable. The combination of rapid credit and asset price growth over the prior three years, whether in the nonfinancial business or the household sector, is associated with about a 40% probability of entering a financial crisis within the next three years. This compares with a roughly 7% probability in normal times, when neither credit nor asset price growth has been elevated. Our evidence cuts against the view that financial crises are unpredictable “bolts from the sky” and points toward the Kindleberger-Minsky view that crises are the byproduct of predictable, boom-bust credit cycles. The predictability we document favors macro-financial policies that “lean against the wind” of credit market booms.

Multiple-choice exams play a critical role in university admissions across the world. A key question is whether imposing penalties for wrong answers on these exams deters guessing from women more than men, disadvantaging female test-takers. We consider data from a large-scale, high-stakes policy change that removed penalties for wrong answers on the national college entry exam in Chile. The policy change reduced a large gender gap in questions skipped. It also narrowed gender gaps in performance, primarily among high-performing test-takers. Importantly, the gains are largely concentrated in domains characterized by historical female underrepresentation, including math, social science, and chemistry.

Faculty & Research

Beliefs about Gender

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors