Abstract:
Surveys
of U.S. employers suggest that numerous firms seek information about
job applicants online. However, little is known about how this
information gathering influences employers’ hiring behavior. We present
results from two complementary randomized experiments (a field
experiment and an online experiment) on the impact of online information
on U.S. firms’ hiring behavior. We manipulate candidates’ personal
information that is protected under either federal laws or some state
laws, and may be risky for employers to enquire about during interviews,
but which may be inferred from applicants' online social media
profiles. In the field experiment, we test responses of over 4,000 U.S.
employers to a Muslim candidate relative to a Christian candidate, and
to a gay candidate relative to a straight candidate. We supplement the
field experiment with a randomized, survey-based online experiment with
over 1,000 subjects (including subjects with previous human resources
experience) testing the effects of the manipulated online information on
hypothetical hiring decisions and perceptions of employability. The
results of the field experiment suggest that a minority of U.S. firms
likely searched online for the candidates’ information. Hence, the
overall effect of the experimental manipulations on interview
invitations is small and not statistically significant. However, in the
field experiment, we find evidence of discrimination linked to political
party affiliation. Specifically, following the Gallup Organization’s
segmentation of U.S. states by political ideology, we use results from
the 2012 presidential election and find evidence of discrimination
against the Muslim candidate compared to the Christian candidate among
employers in more Romney-leaning states and counties. These results are
robust to controlling for firm characteristics, state fixed effects, and
a host of county-level variables. We find no evidence of discrimination
against the gay candidate relative to the straight candidate. Results
from the online experiment are consistent with those from the field
experiment: we find more evidence of bias among subjects more likely to
self-report more political conservative party affiliation. The online
experiment’s results are also robust to controlling for demographic
variables. Results from both experiments should be interpreted
carefully. Because politically conservative states and counties in our
field experiment, and more conservative party affiliation in our online
experiment, are not randomly assigned, the result that discrimination
is greater in more politically conservative areas and among more
politically conservative online subjects should be interpreted as
correlational, not causal.
Source: Acquisti, Alessandro and Fong, Christina M., An Experiment in Hiring
Discrimination Via Online Social Networks (November 20, 2013).
Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2031979
Download pdf publication:
An Experiment in Hiring Discrimination Via Online Social Networks